The Silver Lining of Trump beating Hillary

[Jolly_Penguin]

Have you all seen whats going on with Bernie's bill for single payer? Suddenly he's got a number of other legislators on board. This may just be the turning of the tide that could eventually actually get this taken seriously and be talked about on a mainstream level (and in the debates) and eventually bring the USA decent affordable healthcare.

I don't believe for a second that we would be seeing this had Hillary won the election. This is the silver lining. We'll see more like this, with Berniecrats taking over the Democratic party, all because Hillary failed so miserably. I see a silver lining starting to form here.

I've been saying since Hillary lost that Trumps win could turn out to be a good thing for America, as it shakes up the political landscape and creates an opening on the left. I am more confident now that this may happen.

 

[Ford]

Have you all seen whats going on with Bernie's bill for single payer? Suddenly he's got a number of other legislators on board.

This is actually a new thing for Bernie, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

He's spent his entire time on the Hill tilting at windmills. His push for single payer comes at a time when the GOP Congress (and they're in charge) couldn't agree on how to start a fire if you gave them a box of matches and a gallon of gasoline.

This is a non-starter.

 

[Tigers!]

The silver lining for Trump beating Hilary will always be that we don't have to endure President Hilary.

 

[LordKiran]

The silver lining of Pres Trump is that it will likely trigger an elitist backlash when he leaves office.

I predict a string of new policies that demand a candidate be qualified before they even run for a given office will either follow his exit or come just before it. So hopefully he will be the last....

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Have you all seen whats going on with Bernie's bill for single payer? Suddenly he's got a number of other legislators on board.

This is actually a new thing for Bernie, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

He's spent his entire time on the Hill tilting at windmills. His push for single payer comes at a time when the GOP Congress (and they're in charge) couldn't agree on how to start a fire if you gave them a box of matches and a gallon of gasoline.

This is a non-starter.

No, this is a starter. It just isn't the ender. If all Bernie accomplishes while Trump is in office is a reshaping of the Democratic party, so when the Democrats win next time around we see some actual meaningful change brought in, that is a big win.

 

[Derec]

The silver lining for Trump beating Hilary will always be that we don't have to endure President Hilary.

Also, no Bill chasing interns around the White House.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Also, no Bill chasing interns around the White House.

Oh, Please. If it was Hillary's White House, Bill's intern would be a 270 lb former Marine who just wanted to be taken seriously as a transvestite.

 

[Elixir]

The silver lining of Pres Trump is that it will likely trigger an elitist backlash when he leaves office.

I predict a string of new policies that demand a candidate be qualified before they even run for a given office will either follow his exit or come just before it. So hopefully he will be the last....

I would also expect (hope for) legislation to make a President more culpable for illegal/unethical behavior.

 

[Keith&Co.]

I predict a string of new policies that demand a candidate be qualified before they even run for a given office will either follow his exit or come just before it.

I don't know if we can really write legislation that demands that. How to determine what 'qualified' means, in an objective way? Especially if the voters really want an outsider to come drain the swamp?
Maybe force every candidate to take a Political Science exam? Stuff you'd expect a B student in a high school class to know? And not as a pass/fail screening test, but just publish the results and let the voters decide if they want someone who can't define 'checks and balances' in the White House.

I would expect legislation that demands candidates publish their tax returns. Maybe not all candidates, but at least everyone still standing after the primaries.

Probably tighter controls over how much the president can spend on vacations in a given quarter.

A non-partisan physical, results published, which includes all current medications and dosages, x-rays for anything shoved-up-ass, and a full-body-search for the 666 tattoo...

Oh! And Congress will probably spend time writing down that the president cannot pardon himself.

 

[LordKiran]

I predict a string of new policies that demand a candidate be qualified before they even run for a given office will either follow his exit or come just before it.

I don't know if we can really write legislation that demands that. How to determine what 'qualified' means, in an objective way? Especially if the voters really want an outsider to come drain the swamp?
Maybe force every candidate to take a Political Science exam? Stuff you'd expect a B student in a high school class to know? And not as a pass/fail screening test, but just publish the results and let the voters decide if they want someone who can't define 'checks and balances' in the White House.

I would expect legislation that demands candidates publish their tax returns. Maybe not all candidates, but at least everyone still standing after the primaries.

Probably tighter controls over how much the president can spend on vacations in a given quarter.

A non-partisan physical, results published, which includes all current medications and dosages, x-rays for anything shoved-up-ass, and a full-body-search for the 666 tattoo...

Oh! And Congress will probably spend time writing down that the president cannot pardon himself.

Something akin to the cursus honorum would suffice. Something to make sure you just know the basics of statesmanship before you're even allowed to run the country. Because I don't think the people's right to pick an outsider should come before the stability and wellbeing of the country, which is immediately at risk when you allow dumb yokels to run the government. For a look at this in practice, take a glance at the tea party states and how well they've been doing over the last decade.

I don't expect perfection or even success. I do expect a basic sense of competency from the people we even allow to run for higher offices.

 

[skepticalbip]

I predict a string of new policies that demand a candidate be qualified before they even run for a given office .

There are already such rules, different for different offices and localities. Generally they are age and citizenship/residency requirements. I hope the hell that we never see a specific ideological position required to run.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Mark my words: Bernie Sanders is your Tommy Douglas.

 

[LordKiran]

I predict a string of new policies that demand a candidate be qualified before they even run for a given office .

There are already such rules, different for different offices and localities. Generally they are age and citizenship/residency requirements. I hope the hell that we never see a specific ideological position required to run.

Age and citizenship do not determine competency, making them useless qualifiers for that purpose.

 

[skepticalbip]

There are already such rules, different for different offices and localities. Generally they are age and citizenship/residency requirements. I hope the hell that we never see a specific ideological position required to run.

Age and citizenship do not determine competency, making them useless qualifiers for that purpose.

The problem is in selecting those who would legally define "competence". How many of one end of the political spectrum would be happy if "competence" were legally defined and established by those at the other end of the political spectrum?

It would be much better to have an informed electorate. Unfortunately, our school system seems to be failing us because it is damned difficult to find voters today that have any clue about something as basic as the constitutional separation of powers.

 

[Artemus]

Also, no Bill chasing interns around the White House.

Oh, Please. If it was Hillary's White House, Bill's intern would be a 270 lb former Marine who just wanted to be taken seriously as a transvestite.

Who Bill would chase around.

 

[Elixir]

Unfortunately, our school system seems to be failing us .

The blame for which lies squarely on one end of the political spectrum. Rethuglicans would like nothing more than to deprive the unwashed masses of any education at all.
DeVos in charge of DoE is a travesty.

 

[LordKiran]

Age and citizenship do not determine competency, making them useless qualifiers for that purpose.

The problem is in selecting those who would legally define "competence". How many of one end of the political spectrum would be happy if "competence" were legally defined and established by those at the other end of the political spectrum?

It would be much better to have an informed electorate. Unfortunately, our school system seems to be failing us because it is damned difficult to find voters today that have any clue about something as basic as the constitutional separation of powers.

I define competence as possessing a basic working knowledge of our political institutions and how they relate to each other.

I define competence as having the basic qualities of diplomacy, such that one is able to communicate clearly and effectively with others, both in terms of speaking and understanding.

I define competence as having a basic sense of professionalism for the job, so that petty disputes and emotional hangups do not impede one's ability to perform their job.

I define competence as having (At least some of) the qualities that make for a good leader, qualities like:

-Accountability: The ability to take on responsibility for one's actions
-Empathy: The ability to see things from the perspective of others
-Humility: The ability to take criticism and differ to others who are more experienced or knowledgeable in a given field
-Bravery: The ability to make tough decisions of which no option may be preferable.
-Temperance/Patience: The ability to keep one's composure so as to remain a sound and level-headed mind.
-Honesty: The ability to deal with people fairly, and to say what you mean and to mean what you say.

You can argue the importance of individual traits, the flip side benefits to their opposites ect. But the important point here is that DJT does not seem to possess a single characteristic that makes for a good leader...Well, except for one perhaps: Confidence, which on its own isn't particularly helpful in the capacity of leadership by any stripe...

 

[Elixir]

The problem is in selecting those who would legally define "competence". How many of one end of the political spectrum would be happy if "competence" were legally defined and established by those at the other end of the political spectrum?

It would be much better to have an informed electorate. Unfortunately, our school system seems to be failing us because it is damned difficult to find voters today that have any clue about something as basic as the constitutional separation of powers.

I define competence as possessing a basic working knowledge of our political institutions and how they relate to each other.

I define competence as having the basic qualities of diplomacy, such that one is able to communicate clearly and effectively with others, both in terms of speaking and understanding.

I define competence as having a basic sense of professionalism for the job, so that petty disputes and emotional hangups do not impede one's ability to perform their job.

I define competence as having (At least some of) the qualities that make for a good leader, qualities like:

Ok, but what if "someone else" defines competence as the ability to grab female strangers by the pussy and get away with it?

 

[LordKiran]

I define competence as possessing a basic working knowledge of our political institutions and how they relate to each other.

I define competence as having the basic qualities of diplomacy, such that one is able to communicate clearly and effectively with others, both in terms of speaking and understanding.

I define competence as having a basic sense of professionalism for the job, so that petty disputes and emotional hangups do not impede one's ability to perform their job.

I define competence as having (At least some of) the qualities that make for a good leader, qualities like:

Ok, but what if "someone else" defines competence as the ability to grab female strangers by the pussy and get away with it?

Competence for a creepy sex wierdo perhaps, but not for a statesman. The ability to grap a woman by her sexual organs doesn't have anything to do with the job of being a statesman or civil servant in any capacity. In other words, that person is both wrong and moronic. The things I have listed may be subjective to a certain degree, but I feel confident in saying that they are all universally appreciated traits in a political leader(Actually fuck that, in ANY LEADER) in one form or another.

 

[Elixir]

In other words, that person is both wrong and moronic.

... and President.