The Trump presidency

The American elite? It wasn't long ago that the challenge to the elite was the Teapot Party. Who were its founders? Two of the richest and most reclusive men in the country. They have now been replaced as favourites by the self-advertising billionaire multi-bankrupt of the people. Go figure.

DT has, does and always will, put DT first. He is not a successful business man - he inherited millions and has been bankrupt 6(?) times. He will do fine now because he has the power to fix all kinds of deals

So if people don't protest, roses, how much worse do you think he'll get?

Both the US and the UK governments have had challenges in court. Theresa May accepted the result and went to parliament. Trump called the judge a so-called judge and is challenging it all the time.
I admit Theresa May challenged once, but after the supreme court gave its verdict, she gave in.

Also in the Guardian.

www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/04/donald-trump-travel-ban-constitutional-crisis

rose The underlying reason for the vote is the same. Trump and Farage, Le Pen and certainly like Steve Bannon understand that and are capitalising on it

I'm not convinced they are roses. I agree they are different, but not 'entirely' so imo. For many people, it's similar issues, feeling excluded , ignored and undermined.

Brexit and voting for Trump as President cannot be lumped together as one, they are entirely different things.

Also in the Guardian, Rinouchka.

www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/05/trump-regrets-twitter-voters-election-ashamed

I don't see Nick Cohen as "unhinged" - what do you mean Bags?
I do see that many people voted Brexit/Trump because they felt ignored, dismissed and undermined by the 'political class'. It does worry me though, that the Trump/Farage view that complex problems can be solved by simple solutions seems to be taking a greater profile than it deserves.
I'm using Trump/Farage/Brexit to simplify complex discussions

It doesn't matter that Trump is part of the 'elite' what matters is what he is saying and doing which appeals to many people in the US.Clinton did not appeal in the same way.
The fact that he isn't a politician but in business, far from being a negative, was a positive for him, as success is very admired there.Then there is the fact that his speech isn't diplomatic but often coarse as well as plain spoken.The can-do attitude in spades, the willingness to put the US first, and the everyman approach to life is bound to please.
I don't go along with any OTT protests about his Presidency ( yet) I think he needs this year to settle into the job, simply because he isn't used to a political life.Things could get better as time goes along ( yes, they could get worse too,) but it will be a waiting game until then.

It makes me laugh when the likes of Trump and Farage talk of "elites" as if they aren't part of it.

Jalima I agree absolutely with your 18.15 post

Despite jibes about the "lefty" nature of the Guardian, it does invite the opinions of a variety of people. In the case of the article you posted thatbags, it might be worth bearing in mind that John Daniel DAvidson is a writer for The Federalist, from which website you recently posted an opinion piece by Ben Domenech. This site is commonly known as one that has a right wing agenda which purports to be anti-establishment but which is described by Media Matters as an "outlet for "often rabid" anti-LGBT commentary".

That being the case, it is hardly surprising that the writer chooses to present the Trump victory as one for "the little people" against the "elite".

My friend and her husband and family emigrated to the US over 30 years ago and they are now American citizens. After being made redundant several years ago, he now works in a fairly mundane job in a New York store and she is a special needs assistant. They are in their late 60's/early 70's and are still working because they have to. I would hardly describe them as part of the "elite" and she has expressed her distress at the Trump phenomenon.

Hillary Clinton got 48.2% of the vote. Were all those people part of the "elite" or is it just that some poorer people believed that Donald Trump was not?

He talks about his commitment to putting America first and yet in November 2016 CNN reported that he has 144 companies (hotels, golf clubs, real estate projects, etc.) in 25 countries, including Asia, Europe, Africa and South America. There may be many more but he wouldn't release his tax returns.

*TrishiaF And if some of his wealth does rub off on them through jobs, be it just a few more dimes and dollars it will be more than many of them have now.

It depends how far his madness takes them petra watch Steve Bannon that's where the danger emanates

I haven't read that Cohen article, ww. Yet. My remark was about other stuff of Cohen's.

If Trump gets people working all his madness will be forgotten.

From thatbags link from the Guardian:
'America is deeply divided, but it’s not divided between fascists and Democrats. It’s more accurate to say that America is divided between the elites and everybody else, and Trump’s election was a rejection of the elites.'
I don't completely agree with the last bit. As Trump represents part of the élite, those who voted for him hoped some of his wealth could rub off on them.
I could be wrong though.
I've got involved in a similar discussion on another forum ( WW2, macho men dominated) and am glad to have some reinforcing ideas from you ladies here

If, just suppose Geert Widers wins in Holland and Marine le Pen wins in France will it make some people start to think and maybe understand ( a little)

jalima anyone if you sat and thought about it could see that especially since the crash but probably since the Thatcher individualist revolution, and her overseeing the destruction of the old industries (without as many posters on GN will testify), replacing the jobs there was bound to be an eventual backlash.

All political parties have been shortsighted and have taken millions of those who have not benefited from the knowledge economy for granted. UKIP and the far right are like wolves at the door.

In retrospect, Clinton was the wrong candidate for this particular moment. Trump is seen by so many as the fresh, untainted, shoot-from-the-hip speaker with no previous record of political activity, except as a benefactor.

Also in retrospect, one of the most telling moments of the debates was when Hillary enumerated all her past experience and DT retorted something along the lines of " and what have you achieved after 30 years in government".

We now are able to understand why Trump won. But still to be seen is for how long those who voted for him will remain on his side. The tweets referred to by durhamjen above may just represent a small number of disillusioned voters, but their very existence is of interest nonetheless.

We have to wait this out a bit and see...

The thing is whitewave you say you could see it coming - so why didn't the politicians?
A bit like the financial crash (this is all going to end in tears said DH) - so why did the powers-that-be not see it?

Or perhaps they were behaving like the Three Wise Monkeys each time.

I am sure some of the Clinton stories were myths which mysteriously appeared on the internet during the campaign but spread around the world. Then again - who knows what has been covered up by any of them?

However, what he has done, very cleverly, is home in on people's fears whether they have any foundation or not. And, although some people may wish they had voted differently, many will still see him as the hero saving America.

In what way would you say that article is unhinged bags?

I think that many people are making the assumption that because people like myself are appalled and worried about the Trump phenomena are ignorant and shutting their eyes and ears to the reason for Brexit and Trump and the rise of the far right, but nothing could be further from the truth in my case. I am absolutely aware of the issues involved and have been expecting this type of rebellion to happen for years. It was inevitable.

Nick Cohen is an excellent writer and I used to look out for his articles. Lately he has struck me as being slightly unhinged on occasion.