Where is/can Donald Trump take US (sic)?

[SirRumpole]

That Socialist Obama made some derogatory remarks about Australia but I guess that is OK in your eyes.

The only negative thing I heard Obama say about Australia is that our government is letting the Barrier Reef die.

That is quite true. I do not see that as being a negative against the country as a whole.

 

[noco]

The only negative thing I heard Obama say about Australia is that our government is letting the Barrier Reef die.

That is quite true. I do not see that as being a negative against the country as a whole.

More lies and propaganda by the Socialist Obama.

You know as well as I do, the Australian Government is in top gear looking after the Great Barrier Reef....Climate change is a natural phenomena and nothing to do with farms or coal......So stop talking BS....Most of the bleaching has occurred north of Cooktown where there is no mining or farming.

 

[McLovin]

If Streep is going to use an industry stage to take a cheap shot at Trump, she shouldn't complain if what goes around, comes around.

Celebrity grandstanding is a pain the arse. I don't want to listen to Meryl Streep opine on politics anymore than I wanted to listen to Charlton Heston opine about guns. But really, should the guy who is about to become the most powerful man on Earth give two f**ks what Meryl Streep thinks, let alone be Tweeting like a high schooler who got rejected by a girl he asked to prom? The majority of America didn't vote for him. People will disagree with him.

There's something to be said about acting presidential.

 

[MrBurns]

Celebrity grandstanding is a pain the arse, but really, should the guy who is about to become the most powerful man on Earth give two f**ks what Meryl Streep thinks, let alone be Tweeting like a high schooler who got rejected by a girl he asked to prom? If he's going to try and have the last word with everyone who criticises him over the next four years, it's going to be a very long four years.

There's something to be said about acting presidential.

I've sold my shares and am building a bunker. People have been saying that he'll be ok but it's almost a certainty he will have a negative affect all round.

 

[luutzu]

Celebrity grandstanding is a pain the arse. I don't want to listen to Meryl Streep opine on politics anymore than I wanted to listen to Charlton Heston opine about guns. But really, should the guy who is about to become the most powerful man on Earth give two f**ks what Meryl Streep thinks, let alone be Tweeting like a high schooler who got rejected by a girl he asked to prom? The majority of America didn't vote for him. People will disagree with him.

There's something to be said about acting presidential.

I'm willing to bet that Trump will be Impeached or forced to resign within his first term.

He's way too greedy and corrupt, with way too little smarts, to get through this. Unless he just sit back and let others run the show, but then his kids wouldn't like that.

 

[noirua]

Donald Trump will go for some protectionism to make sure states like Wisconsin will back him second time round on increasing jobs and bringing back industry. Particularly coal and cars as the main starters.

A big tax break will arrive very quickly for individuals. Following this will be lower taxes on company profits. Tariffs on certain imports will be heavy and those companies building car plants abroad, particularly Mexico, will feel the force of the Trump fist with import duties markedly raised and increased taxes. China and other Asian countries will see massive import duties added to as high as 25% or more.

The wall to cut off Mexicans will be a tall more flimsy affair. At the same time forces protecting the wall will be raised in numbers to several times the present level.

Obama care will be wound down gradually to that acceptable to the Senate and Congress. Being careful to make sure war veterans and severely sick and disabled get much more help in both health and jobs.

In fact, most agreements with Russia and other countries will be purely on a business footing. Japan and other countries relying on American forces to back them will see heavy bills presented to them.

Other than this it will be seen that the problems raised by a Trump administration have been overblown.
Much will carry on as before and the UK's exit from the EU will be a big opportunity for Trump to throw his weight around whilst having a big beaming smile like a cheshire cat.

 

[Tisme]

Sound familiar?

http://distractify.com/trending/201...2&tse_id=INF_61a5bd70d75611e6a03c354c456e1db2

 

[luutzu]

Sound familiar?

http://distractify.com/trending/201...2&tse_id=INF_61a5bd70d75611e6a03c354c456e1db2

I heard some guy was quoting some Soviet guy (not really) jokingly asking some Western journalist how is it that the West managed to manipulate its masses so easily and without resorting to the Gulag and dark cells.

Pretty amazing how most Americans, it seem, does not like "socialised medicine" and believe its Congress when they tell them that it's so bad, all of Congress have to use it all these years.


Back to Trump... seems that Congress does not want Trump to even think about getting on good terms with Russia. My Dad was saying that Trump might not be such an idiot in that he's trying to play nice with Putin so that China can be left alone a bit as the US try to whack it.

But with the US Congress and all its intelligence and media saying that Trump won because of Russia's hacking; Russia hacks and spy on poor innocent American political establishment; and today, that Putin got a load of compromising info on Trump... yea, try and make nice with Russia now Donald.

Upsetting China is not so bad; trying to maybe play nice with Russia, not so good.

Seems American planners have been so dominant for so long that they think taking on the world all at once is no biggie.

 

[DB008]

CNN call him a Russian spy and that he also has a piss fetish - with no credible evidence....

Ouch, backfired hard. CNN is a joke

​

 

[McLovin]

CNN call him a Russian spy and that he also has a piss fetish - with no credible evidence....

Ouch, backfired hard. CNN is a joke

​

You know that CNN didn't report on the contents on the dossier specifically because they could not verify it? All they said was the document alleged that Russia had compromising personal and financial knowledge of Trump. That seems pretty newsworthy to me, and according to their sources the information was credible. Why shouldn't they run the story?

Buzzfeed were the ones who leaked the full document.

From Tuesday...

At this point, CNN is not reporting on details of the memos, as it has not independently corroborated the specific allegations. But, in preparing this story, CNN has spoken to multiple high ranking intelligence, administration, congressional and law enforcement officials, as well as foreign officials and others in the private sector with direct knowledge of the memos.

Some of the memos were circulating as far back as last summer. What has changed since then is that US intelligence agencies have now checked out the former British intelligence operative and his vast network throughout Europe and find him and his sources to be credible enough to include some of the information in the presentations to the President and President-elect a few days ago.

 

[DB008]

My bad.

So CNN is fake news
Buzzfeed is garbage

Got it

 

[SirRumpole]

I've sold my shares and am building a bunker. People have been saying that he'll be ok but it's almost a certainty he will have a negative affect all round.

I think the most apparent effect will be a massive increase in the wealth of the Trump family.

Kickbacks for government contracts awarded, special deals for Trump interests in foreign countries, that sort of thing.

I think it's highly likely he will overstep somewhere and be impeached. So he then just resigns and goes to live in the Bahamas.

 

[McLovin]

My bad.

So CNN is fake news
Buzzfeed is garbage

Got it

What was fake about what they reported?

 

[DB008]

You know that CNN didn't report on the contents on the dossier specifically because they could not verify it? All they said was the document alleged that Russia had compromising personal and financial knowledge of Trump. That seems pretty newsworthy to me, and according to their sources the information was credible. Why shouldn't they run the story?

Buzzfeed were the ones who leaked the full document.

From Tuesday...

From Zero Hedge -

In a fascinating retort by the left-leaning NYT to the story of the day, namely the CNN-BuzzFeed narrative based on an unverified 35-page memo allegedly prepared by a UK intelligence officer, even "the paper of record" takes the two media outlets to town, and in an article titled "BuzzFeed Posts Unverified Claims on Trump, Stirring Debate" essentially accuses them of doing what CNN has accused so much of the 'alternative media' in doing when distributing "fake news."


Here are the key excerpts:
The reports by CNN and Buzzfeed sent other news organizations, including The New York Times and The Washington Post, scrambling to publish their own articles, some of which included generalized descriptions of the unverified allegations about Mr. Trump. By late Tuesday, though, only BuzzFeed had published the full document.


BuzzFeed’s decision, besides its immediate political ramifications for a president-elect who is to be inaugurated in 10 days, was sure to accelerate a roiling debate about the role and credibility of the traditional media in today’s frenetic, polarized information age.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-01-11/nyt-suggests-cnn-buzzfeed-peddled-fake-news
​

CNN also called Brietbart “the most prominent platform” for the Nazi salute and for “the white supremacists in this country.”

CNN has also been reporting attacks by 'Trump supporters', but somehow the retractions when proven false never get the same coverage.

 

[McLovin]

From Zero Hedge -

In a fascinating retort by the left-leaning NYT to the story of the day, namely the CNN-BuzzFeed narrative based on an unverified 35-page memo allegedly prepared by a UK intelligence officer, even "the paper of record" takes the two media outlets to town, and in an article titled "BuzzFeed Posts Unverified Claims on Trump, Stirring Debate" essentially accuses them of doing what CNN has accused so much of the 'alternative media' in doing when distributing "fake news."


Here are the key excerpts:
The reports by CNN and Buzzfeed sent other news organizations, including The New York Times and The Washington Post, scrambling to publish their own articles, some of which included generalized descriptions of the unverified allegations about Mr. Trump. By late Tuesday, though, only BuzzFeed had published the full document.


BuzzFeed’s decision, besides its immediate political ramifications for a president-elect who is to be inaugurated in 10 days, was sure to accelerate a roiling debate about the role and credibility of the traditional media in today’s frenetic, polarized information age.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-01-11/nyt-suggests-cnn-buzzfeed-peddled-fake-news​

​

I think Tyler Durden may need to brush up on his comprehension skills. The NYT is criticising Buzzfeed for publishing the full document and praising CNN for not. The second paragraph makes it pretty apparent what the NYT has an issue with.

But CNN declined to include the specific allegations contained in the dossier — such as collusion between Mr. Trump’s team and Russian operatives — saying that its journalists could not independently verify them.

Roughly an hour later, BuzzFeed, in a break from typical journalistic practice, posted the document that fully detailed the unverified allegations to which CNN had alluded.

​

CNN also called Brietbart “the most prominent platform” for the Nazi salute and for “the white supremacists in this country.”

Expressing an opinion is not fake news. It's not even news unless your opinion matters. Did CNN make those remarks in an editorial (do they even have them???) or was it a contributor in an op-ed? The media in Australia seems to spend half their time slinging insults at each other.

CNN has also been reporting attacks by 'Trump supporters', but somehow the retractions when proven false never get the same coverage.

Do retractions in the media ever get as much coverage?

I'm not saying CNN doesn't sensationalise news (personally I think they're pretty awful as a news company. It's McNews until a plane crashes, then it's round the clock plane crash news) or have a left leaning bias. As long as news companies have humans running them and working in them they will have biases. But it's a big leap to go from that to churning out fake news.

 

[noco]

I think the most apparent effect will be a massive increase in the wealth of the Trump family.

Kickbacks for government contracts awarded, special deals for Trump interests in foreign countries, that sort of thing.

I think it's highly likely he will overstep somewhere and be impeached. So he then just resigns and goes to live in the Bahamas.

Just wishful thinking on your party Rumpy.....You only think in a negative way.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

I don't know if any of you have ever worked in the USA. I did many years ago. During the Vietnam War. America is a land of vast wealth and great opportunity. It will flourish under Trump who will take away all the regulations and treaties that are holding it back, provide jobs and lower prices .

In the USA, every poor guy hopes to be rich one day, not get an increase in his or her benefit cheque. The Hollywood clique are a mad pack of posers and degenerates who will stay. They would swallow crap to keep their mansions.

If I were young again I'd go to the States, I still have a Union Card and Social Security Number which I've kept for old times sake.

Bag the elites such as the Clintons and Hollywood, but don't bag the USA, in my opinion the greatest country in the world after Australia. Then Australia probably deserves a thread of it's own.

gg

 

[SirRumpole]

I don't know if any of you have ever worked in the USA. I did many years ago. During the Vietnam War. America is a land of vast wealth and great opportunity. It will flourish under Trump who will take away all the regulations and treaties that are holding it back, provide jobs and lower prices .

And what will be the cost of this ? Less regulations mean more exploitation both of employees and consumers.

I'm not sure if any country has found the happy medium. Maybe Australia, NZ and Canada are reasonably close. Every country has it's own particular demographics that mean direct comparison is pretty meaningless.

What with the gun crazies and snake oil salesmen that are sure to arise under Trump, I think I'll stay here for a while. You are right in one thing though, this is the best country in the world.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

I partially agree. People who have not lived in the USA don't understand that the vast majority there want to work and make a quid, even become rich. The fact there has never been a safety cage as we have here makes it such an exiting place for those who want to work. They have been badly let down during the Bush and Obama years by useless foreign wars, crooked bankers who were never brought to task and an attempt to provide a UK social security and health system. You watch. The USA will boom under Trump. He's starting with big Pharma and boy are they worried. Something like $87bn wiped off their value on Wall St. just this week.

gg

 

[Smurf1976]

I've sold my shares and am building a bunker. People have been saying that he'll be ok but it's almost a certainty he will have a negative affect all round.

How I see it:

Trump has created high expectations through his various promises. Markets have gone almost straight up so this would seem to be priced in.

High expectations, in anything, are rarely met in practice and it's even rarer that they are exceeded. That goes for practically anything and in this case brings about a downside risk. Meets expectations = already priced in. Doesn't meet expectations = there's the downside risk.

I think it's also fair to say at this point that he doesn't seem as though he's going to be a conservative, "steer the ship steadily" type of President. He's far more radical than that so some "shocks" seem almost a given. There's more downside risk in the markets whenever those shocks come up.

From an Australian market perspective there doesn't seem much chance that we're going to gain from this point. Trump does what he says he'll do = already priced in and we don't stand to gain much anyway. Doesn't do what he says he will = US markets drop and we go down with them as usual. Sparks whatever panic / crisis = we'll go down with that as well. Given the apparent nature of the man it seems only a matter of time until there's some sort of crisis of confidence.

So I'm moderately bearish at this point regarding the short term. Longer term we'll have to wait and see whether reality matches the rhetoric but I'll note that of all occupations, politicians are known for breaking promises more than just about anyone else. Most plumbers will put your taps in as per their quote. Usually the band you bought tickets to see will actually perform. Most flights do depart and arrive somewhere close to on time. Etc. Politicians have a worse track record than just about anything.

I also see too many extremes at the moment. Just read an article on small business confidence in the US. It's a bullish themed article but the chart shows it's at the second highest level of the past 30 years and not far below the highest. How much better can things possibly get from this point? Plenty more examples of things at extremes if you look around.

Sell all my shares? No. But I've used the Trump rally as a trigger for reviewing the portfolio and an opportunity to sell into strength where appropriate. I'd do that anyway, but this rally has been both a trigger and an apparent opportunity in that regard. I'm still holding plenty of stocks though, just cut a few.