Battle Royal

[Workingman]

Another good thing is seeing the newsreaders almost choking on having to bring us the news that Trump won; and as it is 24hr news they are going to have to do it over and over and over.

The BBC is especially downhearted. For weeks it has run multiple articles on its World website lauding Clinton and bashing Trump. Today it has just the one: Trump beats Clinton the the White House. Bless.

[Workingman]

It has turned into a 'Full House': Presidency; Senate and House of Representatives; all Republican.

Does this signal a real paradigm shift in the way the West or free world will vote in the future? Is it the key domino to fall?

Clinton had the CV. Former First Lady, Senator and Sec of State, she held all the cards. Yet that most patriotic of peoples voted for the outsider, the novice, the unknown quantity. They went anti-establishment in the biggest way possible, given the US voting system. Clinton was not 'just' beaten, she was demolished and took the Democrats with her.

[TheOstrich]

They went anti-establishment in the biggest way possible .....

No wonder Junker and Tusk are in panic mode - and Marine Le Pen is today quite a happy bunny .....

[Workingman]

Ah, yes, the French and German elections next year must be a bit of a worry....

The analysts are hand-wringing so hard they are cutting off the flow of blood to their fingers. First it was Brexit, now it is Trump's Brexit+++, and with the French and German things a few home truths are coming out.

The politicians are to blame, obviously, for not representing the people who elected them. They created inequality, went with big business and the banks and forgot those at the bottom, and blah, blah, blah.

But then the attention turns to the media. The media drove the agendas and was selective in the things it covered and those it left out. The wrong horse was backed again, just like Brexit. The electorate was treated with contempt, not listened to and, at the same time, told how to vote.

It (the electorate) did not like that one bit and so rebelled - the barstewards.

[Suff]

And some of the disappointed Democrats are behaving about as well as some of the Remain campaigners behaved after the Brexit vote.

I must admit, were I Trump, I'd ensure my vice president was nominated, pdq and I'd be very Very careful between now and the end of Jan 17.... Accidents can happen you know.

[cromwell]

The media drove the agendas and was selective in the things it covered and those it left out.

Yes, in spades. And you can apply this across a range of subjects, too. The bias of the BBC has been laid absolutely bare over the last year. The looks on the faces of these people on Brexit night was priceless, and ditto for the Presidential election.

They are a propaganda service for a certain point of view. Their claims of balance are risible. Reviewing the campaign last night the BBC launched a ten minute attack on Trump followed by two lines "he wasn't a candidate backed by big business and he connected with his supporters". Five seconds, some "balance".

[Suff]

As the analysis rolls on, we find that 53% of white women voted for him and that is what swung the vote.

So the press and the media tried to sink him with Women and failed.... It was assumed that ALL women would be more inclined to vote for Clinton so she targeted her message at the minorities. She succeeded with over 90% of minority women voting for her.

But, did her team forget? If you ignore the "Majority", things might just go badly wrong.

The Socialist press and politicians have been banging on about the minorities for so long, currying the minority vote for so long, that they have forgotten that if you offend the majority you are going to lose.

Realisation has come about 3 months to late.

[Workingman]

It also turns out that Clinton did not get the Hispanic women's vote, the Native American women's vote or the degree qualified women's vote.

She was simply not liked or trusted.

She became the Democrat's Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband rolled into one.

[TheOstrich]

They are a propaganda service for a certain point of view. Their claims of balance are risible.

Couldn't agree more with Cromwell's assessment above.

Last night, BBC Points West trailed an interview with Archbishop Welby (who is in the area, doing a round of visitations to country parishes) in which, they said, he was critical of Trump's victory.

Guess what - we watched the bulletin throughout for that segment .... and it wasn't shown. The Times today reported Welby's reaction to the election result, and it was middle of the bat, no leanings either way.

If I hadn't picked that up from The Times, I'd still be thinking the CofE had railed against Trump.

And now the BBC are wailing about the end of the Special Relationship - purely based on the fact that Trump didn't phone Theresa May first in the long list of calls to foreign leaders he chose to make!

[Suff]

And now the BBC are wailing about the end of the Special Relationship - purely based on the fact that Trump didn't phone Theresa May first in the long list of calls to foreign leaders he chose to make!

Relationships. Things you have to work at. The UK government was openly in favour of Clinton and not very favourable to Trump. Why would the UK, under those circumstances, expect to be top of the call list?

That will change based upon how we work with the US in the future. Trump is more disposed to work with the UK than with the rest of the EU. However, we also have to work with him.

Of course the BBC who's politics is radically away from Trumpism, would do almost anything to sour that relationship.

I don't listen to them.