US: what now?

I guess it is time to buy shares in the construction industry? Simplistic ideas for simplistic people.

It is the same the world over. The chattering classes of metropolitan intellectuals and politicians have ruled the west for so long, they have forgotten who pays the bills. Just look at Hello magazine or OK, with lots of photos of glamourous people we have never heard of being feted at exhibitions or parties. But who pays for it? The answer is the small guy who pays his fees to the pension company (but they fail him), money to the tax man (but government wastes it). The investment banker earns millions, but our economy was destroyed by them. Yet his wife buys only designer products we can't afford.

The small guy is angry and finally a candidate came along who talks like them and they vote for him. UKIP anyone? SNP? It's no different. Yes it worries me, but in some respects the chance to reset politics is not given often and should be grabbed eagerly. He may not be a success, but it could spark interesting and useful change...

I largely agree with Espada on this. The politicians of the world have always played their own game, but over the last 20 years it had got ridiculous. They really had got to the point of do what you want as long as you have a spin doctor by your side. This is all a reaction and is an opportunity to reset.

Though the reset bit doesn't seem to be taking hold in the UK.

However, there is also the point that Trump is only an embarrassing buffoon and probably won't be as bad as everybody fears. Hillary Clinton is, in my opinion, very dangerous and would absolutely have got people killed.

The US has chosen the least shit candidate, albeit for quite the wrong reasons.

>> I think her age and apparent fragility counted against her.

No I don't think it was that. A very large number of American citizens absolutely hate her. Despise her. Which makes one wonder why she became the democratic candidate. Her chance of winning seemed to improve when she was up against trump.

Imagine how the voting would have been different if it was Trump vs. Michelle Obama.... Maybe that's who will be standing against him in 4 years time.

We as a country, having voted ourselves into the financial shit and a constitutional crisis, are in no position to berate the yanks as a country of stupid redneck idiots.

It is however a really bad time to cast ourselves adrift from the EU, and in any way expect or want to tag ourselves to trump's coattails.

I can't see HM queen ever having him at the palace

Democracy at work.
Without nailing my colours to the mast on either Brexit or Trump, just an observation which applies to both...

You knew the rules (or should have). It happened, accept the fact. No amount of moaning, rioting, marching or scribbling editorials will change the result.
IF there's a lesson to be learned, next time avail yourself with more facts, and weight up the arguments, before making your cross. 
That's the problem isn't it - popular culture, and social media, have had a massive influence on voting behaviour.
Voting is serious stuff, people. Your future can be determined by where you pencil in your X. But Joe Public has become so blase about it because they get to vote every day for Big Brother or the X-Factor... so their IMPORTANT votes are often just throwaway decisions

It's been the year for constitutional long shots so how about one more? Trump isn't confirmed as president until the electoral college votes next month. Most of these electors are governed by no more than convention and party loyalty as to who they vote for; they would be within their rights to vote for another candidate, or for no candidate at all. It will be a last chance for those Republicans who refused to support Trump at the convention or in the election to make their point.

Yes, it seems unlikely, but this has been a very unlikely election - and Clinton does look like winning the overall popular vote.