Winners and Losers of the 2016 US election

NYCKY

Moderator
Joined
Apr 17, 2010
Messages
13,429
With the dust settling a week after the US Presidential election it is worth assessing who are the winners and who lost out. Whether the American people are winners or losers remains to be seen and time will tell. Here are some in no particular order.

Winners: Donald Trump – Obviously

Trumps early backers like former Speaker Newt Gingrich, Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions and former Mayor Newt Gingrich, no confirmed roles for these yet but they are likely to have their pick of plum appointments.

RNC Chairman Reince Priebus, now has the powerful post of Chief of Staff and Kelly Ann Conway has been offered a job in the Trump administration.

Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell – got to keep his gig as majority leader and his gamble about holding off on a Scalia Supreme Court replacement paid off.

Michele Obama – probably a winner. She was adept at criticizing Trump without naming him and there is some fervor among fans for her to run for office in her own right.

Speaker Paul Ryan - Despite his at best tepid support of Trump, he is very likely to be re-elected Speaker with a caucus happy to see a GOP President, much more amenable to their agenda.

The NRA – the organization backed Trump early and vociferously and will be looking for some reward for this support.

Others include, those behind the keystone pipeline, infrastructure backers and Trumps own family.



Losers: Hillary Clinton – Obviously but the whole Clinton family. The brand is weakened, likely irredeemably.

The Clinton Foundation – Given all the negative publicity and the lack of any political access for donors, it remains to be seen how it fares going forward.

The main stream media – The failed to pick up on the changed mood across the country and failed to report in any objective sense. The newsrooms need to up their game and introducing some diversity of opinion would go a long way here.

The pollsters – They have been getting things wrong a lot lately. They will need to sharpen their pencils and refine their methodologies. Nate Silver got it spectacularly wrong but he is opining that he was closer than others.

Barrack Obama – He invested a lot of time and energy in a Hillary victory and the survival of much of his agenda is now in doubt.

The # never trumpers - Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse, SC Senator Lindsay Graham (hard to keep track of how many candidates he backed after he dropped out himself), Mitt Romney et al

The Bush family (although 2016 is the first year that a GOP ticket has one since 1928 without either a Bush or a Nixon on the ticket). Even cousin Billy Bush lost his job as a result of the Access Hollywood pussygate recording.

NY Senator Chuck Schumer – with days to go to polling, he could probably scent victory and an ascent to Senate majority leader. The irony is, that Schumer may well have been undone by his own protégé, Anthony Weiner, who took Schumers congressional seat in 1998 when Schumer was first elected to the Senate.

Money and TV ads – Clinton spend far more and had a supposedly superior ground game but still lost. Citizens United which she wanted to have repealed, gave her a huge advantage to no avail.

Chris Christie – Despite quickly signing on to the Trump campaign after abandoning his own Presidential bid is unlikely to have a senior role in the Trump administration. The recent Bridgegate convictions seriously dented his chances. However, he has a good rapport with Trump, who really wanted him for VP so he may yet get something.

Others include, Illegal immigrants and celebrities that threatened to move to Canada



Who are the other winners/losers? Climate? Russia? The EU? Japan? Irish FDI?
 
Last edited:


Truth.ie

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 5, 2008
Messages
27,354
Independent media sources (infowars and Rebel media etc)and internet won again.

Here's a hint for the future.
If you want to know who's winning read the comments sections,not just the articles.
 

TakeitAll

Well-known member
Joined
May 23, 2014
Messages
1,478
With the dust settling a week after the US Presidential election it is worth assessing who are the winners and who lost out. Whether the American people are winners or losers remains to be seen and time will tell. Here are some in no particular order.

Winners: Donald Trump – Obviously

Trumps early backers like former Speaker Newt Gingrich, Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions and former Mayor Newt Gingrich, no confirmed roles for these yet but they are likely to have their pick of plum appointments.

RNC Chairman Reince Priebus, now has the powerful post of Chief of Staff and Kelly Ann Conway has been offered a job in the Trump administration.

Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell – got to keep his gig as majority leader and his gamble about holding off on a Scalia Supreme Court replacement paid off.

Michele Obama – probably a winner. She was adept at criticizing Trump without naming him and there is some fervor among fans for her to run for office in her own right.

Speaker Paul Ryan - Despite his at best tepid support of Trump, he is very likely to be re-elected Speaker with a caucus happy to see a GOP President, much more amenable to their agenda.

The NRA – the organization backed Trump early and vociferously and will be looking for some reward for this support.

Others include, those behind the keystone pipeline, infrastructure backers and Trumps own family.



Losers: Hillary Clinton – Obviously but the whole Clinton family. The brand is weakened, likely irredeemably.

The Clinton Foundation – Given all the negative publicity and the lack of any political access for donors, it remains to be seen how it fares going forward.

The main stream media – The failed to pick up on the changed mood across the country and failed to report in any objective sense. The newsrooms need to up their game and introducing some diversity of opinion would go a long way here.

The pollsters – They have been getting things wrong a lot lately. They will need to sharpen their pencils and refine their methodologies. Nate Silver got it spectacularly wrong but he is opining that he was closer than others.

Barrack Obama – He invested a lot of time and energy in a Hillary victory and the survival of much of his agenda is now in doubt.

The # never trumpers - Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse, SC Senator Lindsay Graham (hard to keep track of how many candidates he backed after he dropped out himself), Mitt Romney et al

The Bush family (although 2016 is the first year that a GOP ticket has one since 1928 without either a Bush or a Nixon on the ticket). Even cousin Billy Bush lost his job as a result of the Access Hollywood pussygate recording.

NY Senator Chuck Schumer – with days to go to polling, he could probably scent victory and an ascent to Senate majority leader. The irony is, that Schumer may well have been undone by his own protégé, Anthony Weiner, who took Schumers congressional seat in 1998 when Schumer was first elected to the Senate.

Money and TV ads – Clinton spend far more and had a supposedly superior ground game but still lost. Citizens United which she wanted to have repealed, gave her a huge advantage to no avail.

Chris Christie – Despite quickly signing on to the Trump campaign after abandoning his own Presidential bid is unlikely to have a senior role in the Trump administration. The recent Bridgegate convictions seriously dented his chances. However, he has a good rapport with Trump, who really wanted him for VP so he may yet get something.

Others include, Illegal immigrants and celebrities that threatened to move to Canada



Who are the other winners/losers? Climate? Russia? The EU? Japan? Irish FDI?
I'd have Michelle Obama in the loser section or maybe an annoying section if there is one along with all the musicians and actors who sold out to promote Hillary Clinton.
 

cyberianpan

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 18, 2006
Messages
16,347
Website
www.google.com
Putin, Gracie Superspy and the Moditariat deserve a top billing dishonorable mention

Sarkozy/Le Pen/Farage etc ditto

cyp
 

O'Sullivan Bere

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2005
Messages
15,238
NYCKY in original, mine in bold.

With the dust settling a week after the US Presidential election it is worth assessing who are the winners and who lost out. Whether the American people are winners or losers remains to be seen and time will tell. Here are some in no particular order.

Winners: Donald Trump – Obviously
Yes...but very possibly no. He won against expectations, and smartly spotted and preyed upon both parties' credibility weaknesses with white rural and Rust Belt voters. In that sense, a good lesson was sent by his victory regarding giving their economic and legitimate cultural interests their due respect. That was being ignored and sacrificed by the bigwigs of both parties for quite awhile.

*That said, his appeals to racism within those demographics was toxic and will haunt him. His personal failings will also leave him disliked by many that opposed him already. Picking Steve Bannon as part of his circle simply highlights that going forward.
*He lost the popular vote pretty convincingly, which damages his 'legitimacy' as it harmed Dubya when defeating Gore without it.
*Further, he made endless pie-in-the-sky promises to 'white working class America' that will be hard to keep, which will likely result in backlash when he betrays and fails to deliver upon them.
*He seems unprepared for the realities of office by this week's hot messes regarding the transition. Curable, but not a good opening sign.
*His own business and personal baggage will be under intense scrutiny during his tenure, which can drag him down. That's especially so with his conflicts of interest with his business with his family.


Trumps early backers like former Speaker Newt Gingrich, Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions and former Mayor [Guiliani], no confirmed roles for these yet but they are likely to have their pick of plum appointments.
Yes, and very possibly no. They are all very controversial and flawed. Gingrich and Giuliani have huge personal lifestyle and professional baggage. Sessions is a noted racist, going back to him being denied a judicial post by Congress on that ground.
Sessions, Now Up For AG, Once Rejected From Judgeship For Racist Remarks
Given Trump's antics and baggage, and with them and Bannon, etc, it portends to be a toxic mess.


RNC Chairman Reince Priebus, now has the powerful post of Chief of Staff and Kelly Ann Conway has been offered a job in the Trump administration.
Yes, provided the above situations and overall performances don't drag them down with complicity.

Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell – got to keep his gig as majority leader and his gamble about holding off on a Scalia Supreme Court replacement paid off.
Yes, provided the above situations and overall performances don't drag them down with complicity. Further, the level of being a winner will depend on how much he influences Trump rather than vice versa. He also sacrificed lots of Senate traditions for the sake of partisanship with his treatment of Merrick Garland for the SCOTUS and the filibuster abuses, and that is a long term loss to overall governance, and also invites payback when the Democrats are in charge someday or via minority party sabotaging.

Michele Obama – probably a winner. She was adept at criticizing Trump without naming him and there is some fervor among fans for her to run for office in her own right.
Yes. I don't think she will enter formal politics as some wish her to do given her statements, but she'll make out from her experiences. If she does change her mind, then she benefits from her record.
 
Last edited:

O'Sullivan Bere

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2005
Messages
15,238
NYCKY in original, mine in bold.

Speaker Paul Ryan - Despite his at best tepid support of Trump, he is very likely to be re-elected Speaker with a caucus happy to see a GOP President, much more amenable to their agenda.
Yes, provided the above situations and overall performances don't drag them down with complicity. Further, the level of being a winner will depend on how much he influences Trump rather than vice versa.

The NRA – the organization backed Trump early and vociferously and will be looking for some reward for this support.
Yes with one caveat. If it always gets associated with one party, then its fortunes depend on it. It needs more cross party appeal on the basics stuff it supports. It's dug a hole on that by opposing even common sense reforms. The question is whether or not it's really just a gun rights advocacy group, and it doesn't appear to be so and more of an amoral arms manufacturer lobbyist and GOP culture warrior group seeking influence and benefits within the GOP.

Others include, those behind the keystone pipeline, infrastructure backers and Trumps own family.
*On KP, yes.

*On infrastructure, that remains to be seen. Infrastructure means funding it, and many promises have been inconsistent with things like reducing government size, taxes, budgets, etc.

*As for the Trump family, it gets a huge conflict of interest laden access to the Presidency for shaping business interests. That said, Trump haters won't patronise their products. Conflicts of interests could also lead to legal problems, etc.
 
Last edited:

kerdasi amaq

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 24, 2009
Messages
4,683
Could the Pope be designated as loser?

The unchristian wallbuilder candidate won.
 

flavirostris

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 21, 2007
Messages
24,570
Biggest losers - the media. Totally exposed as biased, complacent and ultimately clueless.

Fewer people trust them now than ever.
 

ne0ica

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
8,140
Winners: The alt right.

Losers: Canada, Mexico, European Union, UK.
 

ne0ica

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
8,140
Could the Pope be designated as loser?

The unchristian wallbuilder candidate won.
His Holiness could be described as making himself irrelevant. A majority of Catholics voted for Trump.
 

O'Sullivan Bere

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2005
Messages
15,238
NYCKY in original, mine in bold.

Losers[/U]:
Hillary Clinton – Obviously but the whole Clinton family. The brand is weakened, likely irredeemably.
As for losing this election, obviously.
Overall, no. The Clintons have had remarkable careers over the decades. That includes her, including several firsts. Once the partisanship regarding them dies down over time including objective reviews, they will be regarded very positively except in one regard: losing out with rural voters that should be pro-Democrat when they should have turned back to addressing them once Bill won back some Democratic power from the Reagan/Bush 41 years with the 'New Democrat' strategy of the 90s. They got too cosy with the Beltway and lobbyist lifestyle from their AK roots.


The Clinton Foundation – Given all the negative publicity and the lack of any political access for donors, it remains to be seen how it fares going forward.
Disagree. If anything, the foundation will run better with the Clintons now out of official political life. The attacks on it were mostly BS smears suitable for low brow partisanship against them given their place in Democratic politics that just ended. It's done outstanding work around the world. It's important to recall that HRC's approval rate skyrocketed once she left as Secretary of State, and only fell again once she ran for POTUS. That will return to her again so long as she remains a private citizen.

The main stream media – The failed to pick up on the changed mood across the country and failed to report in any objective sense. The newsrooms need to up their game and introducing some diversity of opinion would go a long way here.
Yes, but not for all the reasons you said. It's worse. If anything thanks to technology and hyperpartisanship in the public, partisan propaganda and wingnut Internet sh!t got the gain at the expense of reporting actual news.
I agree that they didn't place enough focus on the legitimate grievances of the 'white middle America' whilst rightly calling out the ugly aspects of it. Social and geographic bubbles attributed to that.


The pollsters – They have been getting things wrong a lot lately. They will need to sharpen their pencils and refine their methodologies. Nate Silver got it spectacularly wrong but he is opining that he was closer than others.Agreed.

Barack Obama – He invested a lot of time and energy in a Hillary victory and the survival of much of his agenda is now in doubt.
Yes and no. He will retire as a popular POTUS with a key first in US politics and with accomplishments that can't be entirely undone. He is on track to go down as the modern JFK and Reagan of the Democrats as time passes.

That said, I don't agree that he put proper effort into HRC's election bid. He came in strong in the end when sensing trouble just as he did in the 2010 tea party wave when it was too late. He needed to be out defending and arguing and expanding the party at all times. He didn't moderate to help Blue Dogs that got wiped out. He didn't go out for the down tickets in 2012 sufficiently enough. He didn't seek to expand the party's reach in the Rust Belt and rural areas, all of which went the opposite direction throughout his presidency. He got caught up in his Beltway and Coastal white collar bubbles and his own Presidency. In that sense, he lost big time as to down ballot growth, and now he will see setbacks in what he did as POTUS.


The never trumpers - Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse, SC Senator Lindsay Graham (hard to keep track of how many candidates he backed after he dropped out himself), Mitt Romney et al
Yes, initially. But they'll be around for all the own goals the Trumpians will likely commit. Time will tell.

The Bush family (although 2016 is the first year that a GOP ticket has one since 1928 without either a Bush or a Nixon on the ticket). Even cousin Billy Bush lost his job as a result of the Access Hollywood pussygate recording.Yes, insofar as legacy governance is concerned. Beyond that, they'll do fine just like the Kennedys and Clintons will. It's pretty hard to complain given their wealth and extensive history in office, including two recent Presidencies and another in the 1800s with their blood connection to Franklin Pierce, although Pierce was a terrible one term President and not one they'll likely highlight too often.
 
Last edited:

O'Sullivan Bere

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2005
Messages
15,238
NYCKY in original, mine in bold.

Senator Chuck Schumer – with days to go to polling, he could probably scent victory and an ascent to Senate majority leader. The irony is, that Schumer may well have been undone by his own protégé, Anthony Weiner, who took Schumers congressional seat in 1998 when Schumer was first elected to the Senate.Yes on those points. He's also the image of a 'city white collar Democrat', and the party needs to get back to its country and blue collar roots too.

Money and TV ads – Clinton spend far more and had a supposedly superior ground game but still lost. Citizens United which she wanted to have repealed, gave her a huge advantage to no avail.Yes, as to buying power with ads. No, as to how money influences politicians with the cameras off. That's always a huge problem, and will show itself again in the Trump Presidency.

Chris Christie – Despite quickly signing on to the Trump campaign after abandoning his own Presidential bid is unlikely to have a senior role in the Trump administration. The recent Bridgegate convictions seriously dented his chances. However, he has a good rapport with Trump, who really wanted him for VP so he may yet get something.
Yes, and worse that you said. Reports are that Trump personally turned against Christie for leaving his subordinates swing for Bridgegate when it seems clear he knew and let them be the patsies for him.

Christie's now legally radioactive and may be indicted at some point. Trump and those around him want no part of that going into office, so he's likely out on his arse. Trump's crew are even already cleaning out Christie loyalists from his new administration.


Others include, Illegal immigrants and celebrities that threatened to move to Canada
*Not really on celebs. They'll make out by being what they are with their fan base, including on politics. They win either way whether their preferred politicians win or lose, all in how they market themselves upon it.

*Illegal immigrants? Yes, directly as to them. As to the public, that depends. Farms need picklng, people like lower costs, etc. Legalising the millions of useful undocumented also fills needed labour, tax payers, entrepreneurs, military personnel, etc. DREAMers will be a special loss given the US paid to educate and raise them into ready-made Americans. The public is very short sighted, often bigoted, hypocritical and exploitive on this subject and bear responsibility for inviting pandering upon it.
 
Last edited:

JCR

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
6,241
Biggest losers - the media. Totally exposed as biased, complacent and ultimately clueless.

Fewer people trust them now than ever.
The irony being of course that they will believe some ad or waffle on facebook/youtube or various google apps as being "the alternative" to the "the establishment" and therefore more credible.

The U.S. media did however reflect the view of more of the U.S. electorate, so what does that say about the people? That they don't have a clue either? Well I never.
 

O'Sullivan Bere

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2005
Messages
15,238
NYCKY in original, mine in bolded.

Who are the other winners/losers? Climate? Russia? The EU? Japan? Irish FDI?
*Climate, big loser.

*Russia, big winner. It influenced the US election and likely got someone who will be tolerant of what they do and also realigning the US to being more apt to work with the Kremlin. They also have business investments with Trump and helped him get elected through skulduggery, so he's compromised insofar as Russian influences.

*The EU? Loser, especially because Trump is pro-Kremlin and anti-EU right down to approving Brexit and Nigel Farage, cynical about NATO, etc.

*Ireland? Likely a loser so if he get some of his tax promises enacted, which will reduce investments in Ireland. Weakening the EU will also hurt Ireland.

Other losers? Add Nancy Pelosi to your list with Shumer and other 'white collar educated Coastal' Democrat politicians and operators as a loser in this election. If the Dems were smart, they need to refocus on their blue collar roots and should talk to people like Jim Webb that they brushed off as the 'Democrats of old'. The Jim Webbs have been walking away first in the South, then Appalachia, and now the Rust Belt, and it cost them this election this time.

They can do that consistent with the values that Coastal liberals also espouse more easily than lazy bubble thinkers would presume. The Democrats are right to call out and reject white racism in the Trumpian world, but not as to legitimate grievances on the economy and respect for legitimate blue collar cultures.

Other winners? The top 1%. Blue collar Trumpians are in for a rude surprise, but it's their own fault this time after ample warning at their expense from Reaganomics and Dubyanomics.
 
Last edited:

Truth.ie

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 5, 2008
Messages
27,354
The irony being of course that they will believe some ad or waffle on facebook/youtube or various google apps as being "the alternative" to the "the establishment" and therefore more credible.

The U.S. media did however reflect the view of more of the U.S. electorate, so what does that say about the people? That they don't have a clue either? Well I never.
The U.S media threw the kitchen sink at Trump and lost.
You cant underestimate the significance of this seismic shift in social revolution.
 

Seanie Lemass

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 26, 2010
Messages
19,788
The irony being of course that they will believe some ad or waffle on facebook/youtube or various google apps as being "the alternative" to the "the establishment" and therefore more credible.

The U.S. media did however reflect the view of more of the U.S. electorate, so what does that say about the people? That they don't have a clue either? Well I never.

The NYT was disgrace. I notice now they are trying to cover their losses. Not good idea to be so blatantly against the WH, especially when it is home town President :)

Was over there in run up and every day the paper was wall to wall rants against Trump. Not that many people read it any more....


Then again it is the paper that employed Stalinist scum Duranty and pretended that the Holocaust was not happening. If they were racing tipsters, they'd have been sacked years ago!
 
Last edited:

NYCKY

Moderator
Joined
Apr 17, 2010
Messages
13,429
Evan Bayh, former Indiana Senator was another big loser here. When he entered the race for his old seat, he shook up the race and immediately moved it to a Lean Dem.

Bayh despite his storied history in the state lost the race, he was a former Governor and Senator and had made Gores, Kerrys and Obamas shortlist for VP.

Bayh proves the old adage that all political careers end in failure.
 

gerhard dengler

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 3, 2011
Messages
46,739
I'd argue that in time the Republican Party could be viewed as losers too.

Few if any Republican grandees backed Trump.
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,782
Winners: Julian Assange and wikileaks

Losers: Big Data

(See what I did there.... ) :D
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top