Continuing battle with media, Trump avoids news conferences

My best guess is President Elect Trump's knowledge deficit about world events, names, places, etc. is apparent to him on some level so he avoids situations that involve a question and answer format that would put him on the spot and possibly embarrass him.

CrazyJoe, that's right. Trump can't handle actual dialog with the press. He prefers the provocation of unidirectional tweets, and the demagoguery of his mass rallies. There is almost no substance behind his egotistical showmanship.

Two points. 1) Trump will have press conferences. He is not yet the president and once he is he will conform to standards more than he is now. 2) I kinda like hearing it straight from the horse's mouth rather than having a message filtered through a spokesperson which is then reinterpreted by a press that has proven to be less than objective.

that's right. Trump can't handle actual dialog with the press.

I don't blame him, the MSM haven't given him a fair shake since 1) they don't like them, his policies and they just don't like conservatives to begin with. 2) they distort and have historically fabricated a lot of disinformation. That Trump is skeptical and overly cautious, he should be and that's a big reason why he uses Twitter so much.

He prefers the provocation of unidirectional tweets, and the demagoguery of his mass rallies. There is almost no substance behind his egotistical showmanship.

And good on him for doing so, why should he allow the dishonest media to make stuff up.

bass4funk: "I don't blame him"

Of course you don't, despite calling him a lunatic -- if it's not The National Review, you don't think it's fair or newsworthy.

"they distort and have historically fabricated a lot of disinformation."

Hahahaha! As opposed to Faux 'News' and The National Review -- your sources? Please!

"And good on him for doing so, why should he allow the dishonest media to make stuff up."

He's a coward, and a poor leader, and that's all there is to it. The man cannot be trusted by his own people, and you support his inability. When are they going to take away his Twitter again, I wonder. Finally, the man is an absolute idiot: doesn't know names, events, and most certainly has no idea about facts. THAT is why you support him not being in the media.

"...has instead tried to convey his message directly to the American public, bypassing the media..."

Last time I checked, White House press conferences are available for all to see on television.

AP: Clinton eventually had one after 276 days and then held several more before Election Day.

It'd be interesting if the AP would enumerate what those were. Wasn't the first one an appearance outdoors in front of an airplane where she only took a few questions? Or was that the one at a minority journalists' association, presumably friendly? What were the 'several more'? I don't remember those. Where they the appearances inside her own plane with the travelling press, a few short questions each?

Here, in fact, is the press trying to decide whether an early September event consisting of Hillary answering a few informal questions ABOARD her plane constituted a 'press conference' or not:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/09/06/hillary-clintons-press-conference-drought-is-finally-over-or-is-it/

Hillary Clinton’s news conference drought is finally over. Or is it? - September 6

.@HillaryClinton held her first press conference in 275 days aboard a plane Monday https://t.co/Om6OCVIE4B | Getty pic http://twitter.com/WcoboG1u4Z — POLITICO (@politico) September 6, 2016

Based on the pic on twitter, looks like my guess is right. At least some of the media really did try to call that on-board-a-plane thing a "press conference".

turbostat : When or where Hillary Clinton had any news conferences is irrelevant now. She is not the president.

Burning Bush : Over 50 news organizations, domestic and foreign, are represented at presidential news conferences. And they are broadcast live without any editing. Maybe that's the real reason Trump will avoid them.

Trump hates the media for fact checking and pointing out his contradictory statements. Twitter doesn't do that so it's a safe space for him. Plus, he would probably come off as kind of stupid and scatterbrained in a press conference anyway....not the best image for America.

SuperLibDEC. 23, 2016 - 11:20AM JST Trump hates the media for fact checking and pointing out his contradictory statements. Twitter doesn't do that so it's a safe space for him.

Exactly. To borrow the terminology of the right, Trump is a special little snowflake who gets triggered whenever facts don't match what he wants to be true. Rather than sack up and explain his position using facts like an adult, he takes his ball in his tiny little hands and runs home to Twitter where he can shout at the rest of us and block anyone who asks him mean things like for evidence.

From the article:

But while his lack of press interaction is a worry to some, many Trump supporters cheered the celebrity businessman’s battles with what they felt were biased reporters. Trump made his antagonistic relationship with the media a centerpiece of his campaign, inciting his rally crowds to boo the press, singling out individual reporters with derogatory names like “sleazebag” and using Twitter to attack coverage he didn’t like.

That's because Trump supporters aren't interested in truth, they're interested in feeling like they're on the winning team. So when Trump spends months getting people to chant "Drain the swamp" and then turns around and stocks his cabinet with billionaires with special interests, they don't notice the cognitive dissonance because their guy got in the office, and that's all that matters to them.

Hahahaha! As opposed to Faux 'News' and The National Review -- your sources? Please!

Pretty reputable and relevant, but then again, liberals look up to Michael Moore and Elizabeth Warren, go figure. LMAO!

He's a coward, and a poor leader, and that's all there is to it.

He's got more money and property and a few Jets and a helicopter and oh, soon the presidency, more than you and I. A loser could NEVER get to all that and then some. All of our enemies are laughing anymore, our allies are breathing a sigh of relief and the Dow is about to hit a record mark, stocks are up, certainty and confidence in the market is up.

Again, a loser couldn't do a 1/3 of that, and he's NOT even an inaugurated president yet. Kudos!

The man cannot be trusted by his own people, and you support his inability.

What in blue blazes of the reefer are you talking about?

When are they going to take away his Twitter again, I wonder.

Probably when the media can learn to take the emotion and hate out of their reporting and report honestly and fairly and not write articles at the twitch of an emotional outburst because they despise the guy.

Finally, the man is an absolute idiot: doesn't know names, events, and most certainly has no idea about facts. THAT is why you support him not being in the media.

Obama didn't know a lot of names, dismissed ISIS as a JV team, doesn't know anything about the economy, a huge reason as to why Hillary lost since she campaigned on running on Obama policies, big Titanic sinker for her, minus the Celine Dion song. Lied about keeping your doctor, inflated the jobs numbers, we can go on all day about Obama's idiocy, but that wouldn't solve anything. Thankfully, he will be out of office soon and life can begin anew.

Trump hates the media for fact checking and pointing out his contradictory statements.

You are joking right? I could be here all day and point out the constant lies the media creates about Trump.

Twitter doesn't do that so it's a safe space for him.

Which is not a bad thing since the media won't give him a fair shake...most of them at least.

Plus, he would probably come off as kind of stupid and scatterbrained in a press conference anyway....not the best image for America.

Hmmm, but at least with Trump you can stay awake, unlike Obama speeches like being in a Sunday morning church service, struggling, struggling.

paulinusa: turbostat : When or where Hillary Clinton had any news conferences is irrelevant now. She is not the president.

I am commenting on today's article. Not an article from two months ago. I can't do that?

When the media is trying to downplay Hillary's months-without-press-conferences by pretending the times she went to the back of the plane and said "Hi!" count as press conferences, so they can attempt to portray her favorably with Trump?

at least with Trump you can stay awake, unlike Obama

= I need lots of entertainment from my president. Carefully articulated ideas make me sleepy. Thinking hurts my brain.

I need lots of entertainment from my president. Carefully articulated ideas make me sleepy. Thinking hurts my brain.

I agree, that's why for the last 8 years, my brain was lethargic.

Why should Trump play by the mainstream media's rules of the game? They made it clear during the election campaign that they did not intend to treat him by the same rules as other candidates/presidents. Don't look for any "journalists" to profess that Trumps election sent a tingle up their leg like when their man Barack took the top prize eight years ago. They are too busy hyperventilating over the fact that someone they disagree with is going to be the president.

I am not a huge Trump fan but I love the fact that he sticks it to the biased media (see WikiLeaks emails) every chance he gets. The more he does it the more their reactionary bias shows. They have been exposed for the Democrat party shills that we all know they are.

@bass I agree, that's why for the last 8 years, my brain was lethargic.

As evidenced by your numerous daily rants against Obama, the Clintons, the Democrats, libs, progressives, non-whites, millennials, among others whose perspectives differ from yours. I had thought of cutting and pasting some of your posts to use in a turnabout-is-fair sort of way, a back at ya approach, but in re-reading found few made any sense at all. No doubt now the lethargy is over and the man you called a lunatic and said was in over his head will soon be in charge you'll be re-energized and expand on some of his tweets.

@bass Which is not a bad thing since the media won't give him a fair shake...most of them at least.

Could you provide some examples - real ones - from where Trump was NOT given a 'fair shake' by the media and also say which media outlets actually did give him a fair shake, besides the outlets owned by Rupert Murdoch, the globalist, corporate media tycoon?

He's going to be the president. He'd better start addressing the citizens of this country. He is supposed to represent the people. HE HAS TO ADDRESS THE PUBLIC. It is part of his JOB.

He's very well on his way to: -Not serving in the best interests of the American people. -Abuse of power (having a hard time getting his fingers out of his personal business).

And until he shows his tax documents, highly suspect of bribery and treason.

last 8 years

Lol

I agree, that's why for the last 8 years, my brain was lethargic.

So you agree that thinking hurts your brain. Speaks volumes about Trumpistan.

Last time I checked, White House press conferences are available for all to see on television.

Except that only certain people are allowed in and permitted to ask questions.

Not by the White House (this is not Japan, China, or Russia)

That's actually decided by the journalists themselves, specifically the White House Correspondents' Association:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_Correspondents%27_Association

The White House Correspondents' Association (WHCA) is an organization of journalists who cover the White House and the President of the United States. The WHCA was founded on February 25, 1914, by journalists in response to an unfounded rumor that a Congressional committee would select which journalists could attend press conferences of President Woodrow Wilson.

The WHCA operates independently of the White House. Among the more notable issues handled by the WHCA are the credentialing process, access to the President and physical conditions in the White House press briefing rooms.

And now ya know how the White House differs from the Kantei, Imperial Palace, or Kremlin

@HonestDictator

What does not showing tax returns have to do with "bribery and treason". Are you suggesting that Obama's IRS hasn't seen Trump's tax returns just because he won't make them public? Trump has filed a tax return every year and if there was evidence of "bribery" or any other irregularities, Trump would be investigated by the IRS and it would make front page news. As far as finding "treason" in his tax returns goes, that makes absolutely no sense at all.

Who knows what's in his tax returns - he won't show them.

But it wouldn't be surprising if he was financially bound to Putin, with the amount of praise he has for the guy. And he certainly seems to want to get rid of the entire idea of investigating Russian interference in the election - very possibly because of his ties to the Kremlin.

As evidenced by your numerous daily rants against Obama, the Clintons, the Democrats, libs, progressives, non-whites, millennials, among others whose perspectives differ from yours.

Now, now, now, most of my friends are liberals, but they tend to be the middle of the road rational liberal thinkers, we differ, but they are fair, honest and can admit their party is a mess.

I had thought of cutting and pasting some of your posts to use in a turnabout-is-fair sort of way, a back at ya approach, but in re-reading found few made any sense at all.

likewise

No doubt now the lethargy is over and the man you called a lunatic

Before I evolved...

and said was in over his head will soon be in charge you'll be re-energized and expand on some of his tweets.

Thank the heavens for that!

Could you provide some examples - real ones - from where Trump was NOT given a 'fair shake' by the media and also say which media outlets actually did give him a fair shake, besides the outlets owned by Rupert Murdoch, the globalist, corporate media tycoon?

During the Debates, the air time on the networks Trump scandals or missteps no matter how small they were that were constantly and unrelenting on the networks, particularly CNN which did a marathon of hit pieces and gave Hillary scandals less than 3 min. compared to Obama 7 hours in total, there are just too many to count, but that's all water under the bridge, the people decided they didn't want Hillary, and voted for Trump and now we can take a breath and a huge sigh of relief for that.

@tsuchifumuazu one of the reasons supposedly is because Trump was currently going under IRS audit during his campaign... and now he's POTUS... So it's already smelling uber fishy where this is all going. How does it help? There has always been the method of "follow the money". Any information (including recent tax forms) helps. Unfortunately the US tax system still has some loopholes that are exploited by those with enough money and have their own team of lawyers.

It also helps let folks get an idea how one intends to manage the budget in the US with congress. Like how financial institutions (and some non-financial) in the US ask for potential employees credit scores... they want to see how they manage their finances. Fiscal responsibility? Would anyone want someone who is continually in the red to have their hands able to "help" manage the money of their country in a position of power?

Putting only CEOs, well heeled, and "loyal" cronies that praised him during his campaign into positions of power in his administration? Attempting to violate constitutional rights by claiming to pass a law to arrest and deport citizens who burn the US flag? While I don't admire flag burning myself, freedom of expression is considered a US constitutional right as long as the flag burning isn't trying to cause arson, or is throwing the burning flag onto a human being with intent to harm. Some Native American first nation people have the best reason in the world to burn the US flag.

The GOP doesn't want to do anything about it. But because they're too busy wallowing in their majority power boots again, they're going to gloss over and attempt to deceive the American public over things that if a non-republican POTUS was going to take office, they'd be up in arms with rhetoric about it.

Quite a large group of GOP senators and congress are on record for saying, "Trumps conflicts of interests with his businesses aren't worth worrying about at all.". WTF is wrong with these people who are supposed to be in charge of running our country!?!?!?!

Reagan is on record for saying, "When you're up to your armpits in alligators. It's hard to remember your initial objective is to drain the swamp."

All the Trumpeteers did was add a different species of 'gator.

Obama didn't know a lot of names, dismissed ISIS as a JV team, doesn't know anything about the economy, a huge reason as to why Hillary lost since she campaigned on running on Obama policies, big Titanic sinker for her, minus the Celine Dion song. Lied about keeping your doctor, inflated the jobs numbers, we can go on all day about Obama's idiocy, but that wouldn't solve anything. Thankfully, he will be out of office soon and life can begin anew.

But at least Obama and Hillary face the media head on. Trump rather duck and hide, like the true coward he is. He is threatening to take away the principles upon which the First Amendment was based on, but his supporters don't even care about it. All they care about is keeping their man in office and keeping their guns. Boggles my mind that they complain about a total lie they created about Obama taking away their guns, but never say a peep about something true like Trump taking away their free speech.

bass4funkDEC. 23, 2016 - 10:32PM JST

...the people decided they didn't want Hillary, and voted for Trump and now we can take a breath and a huge sigh of relief for that.

Except that's not exactly what happened, is it? Or are you just talking about the people in those states coloured red on the Electoral College map?

The fact that Trump managed to get elected really shows that the US has lost the plot. The guy is an embarrassment to not only the US but the whole human race. Like it or not the media does influence people's opinions and Trump will get roasted quickly if he continues down this path. Let's just hope that the system of checks and balances minimizes the damage he's going to cause and that common sense prevails in 4 years' time.

FDT has to avoid press conferences, because he is a CONMAN. For a conman, truth must be avoided and evaded.

But at least Obama and Hillary face the media head on.

Sure, that's because liberals love liberals and liberals love politicians that love the entertainment industry, go figure.

Trump rather duck and hide, like the true coward he is.

Hillary was doing that for 35 years....by the way, where is she these days?

He is threatening to take away the principles upon which the First Amendment was based on, but his supporters don't even care about it.

They do, that's WHY they voted for him.

All they care about is keeping their man in office and keeping their guns.

Really, the Dems were so convinced and so sure that Hillary was going to be crowned and so over confident, they forgot to campaign in Wisconsin a loyal and strong Blue State. Trump managed to flip 1/3 of 2 time Obama voters, so basically what you are saying a lot of former Obama supporters cared about getting Trump in office.

Boggles my mind that they complain about a total lie they created about Obama taking away their guns, but never say a peep about something true like Trump taking away their free speech.

What? Yeah, ok...LMAO!

Except that's not exactly what happened, is it?

It is, check the Electoral college Trump:307 and Hillary:163

Or are you just talking about the people in those states coloured red on the Electoral College map?

Which is that sea of red, yes, sir!

The fact that Trump managed to get elected really shows that the US has lost the plot. The guy is an embarrassment to not only the US but the whole human race.

A lot of Americans felt the same about Obama.

Obama didn't know a lot of names, dismissed ISIS as a JV team, doesn't know anything about the economy, a huge reason as to why Hillary lost since she campaigned on running on Obama policies

Well no, she lost because the electoral college didn't vote for her. Her policies were enough for 2.7 more people to vote for her than for Trump, clearly showing that the will of the people was behind Obama's policies, and her continuance of them. Her loss had nothing to do with said policies.

she lost because the electoral college didn't vote for her.

Exactly! she lost the ELECTORAL COLLEGE they didn't vote for her. they voted for Trump 307 to her 163 which is our system. So anyway the bigger question here is, will you be watching our new presidents inauguration on the 20th of next month?

Clinton was more popular with the people and Obama has very high approval ratings. Just say that Clinton and Obama are more popular but you personally do not like them so you do not approve of them, and leave it at that. All fair and honest.

HonestDictator: @tsuchifumuazu one of the reasons supposedly is because Trump was currently going under IRS audit during his campaign...

He's a 10x-or-so billionaire. He doesn't get audited every year?

peterl: But at least Obama and Hillary face the media head on.

We all know that's not true for Hillary, at least if we don't filter our news in real-time, when we read it. No need even to examine Hillary's avoidance of the press again. As for Obama, his news conference count went down in the runup to the 2012 election and some of the media complained about it then. Trump hasn't even taken office yet. How many news conferences does he need, before inauguration?

bass4funkDEC. 24, 2016 - 01:15AM JST

"Except that's not exactly what happened, is it?"

It is, check the Electoral college Trump:307 and Hillary:163

NO, you said the people didn't want Hillary and voted for Trump. Not the Electoral College. The people. Remember? You typed it. Almost 3 million more people wanted Hillary Clinton. The Electoral College system, which doesn't even work the same way in each State, has deprived the majority of voters of the candidate they wanted for President. It's not really that hard to grasp, is it?

Anyway, where do you get this 163 figure from?

Clinton was more popular with the people and Obama has very high approval ratings.

Clinton is not going to be president. Obama has one month left and he is gone. Clinton lost 30 of 50 statewide elections. Trump won the presidency fair and square. Those are the rules. You can choose not to accept reality - that is your choice.

But by all means do everything you can to oppose Trump and everything Republicans want to accomplish. You will be just like the conservatives that did everything they could over the last eight years to stop Obama from fundamentally changing America into a country that they can no longer recognize. If over the next four years Trump can undo half the damage done by Obama he will have been a successful president.

He is threatening to take away the principles upon which the First Amendment was based on, but his supporters don't even care about it.

Give it a rest - Trump isn't president yet. Obama went after journalists using the police powers of the government. Obama believes in limiting and oppressing freedom of speech that is in opposition to his views of government. These are things Obama has actually done. No one is more threatening of free speech rights in America today than the Democrat party. We will have to wait and see about Trump. What he says is important. But what he does as president is what really matters.

Clinton was more popular with the people and Obama has very high approval ratings.

Yes, in the Bluest of States, California, New York and Mass.

Just say that Clinton and Obama are more popular but you personally do not like them so you do not approve of them, and leave it at that. All fair and honest.

Among the few remaining liberals in the coastal areas, Yes, I admit it.

NO, you said the people didn't want Hillary and voted for Trump. Not the Electoral College.

I'm talking about our system, our Electoral College that we use, what is it with you guys?? It's over, his 307 to her 163, done, finished and that's all that counts. Funny...you libs did not mention ONE single word about the Electoral College until Trump won, until then, complete silence from you guys, now it's the worst thing.

The people. Remember? You typed it.

Yup, the people that live and under the system the founding fathers wanted and those people that gave Trump the 270 he needed to obtain the presidency and he surpassed it. Had it been Clinton and conservatives would gripe about this, Oh, we all know what the Dems would have done. Both knew this going in, they knew the rules and accepted it.

Almost 3 million more people wanted Hillary Clinton. The Electoral College system, which doesn't even work the same way in each State, has deprived the majority of voters of the candidate they wanted for President. It's not really that hard to grasp, is it?

Unbelievable! So we should just ignore all the small states and have California, Mass and NY dictate for the rest of the country who should be president? Yeah, that seems democratic, let's just allow one party to rule consistently, I mean, why not have a monarchy?

http://www.270towin.com/maps/2016-actual-electoral-map

Last I checked. She was 163, my bad. Ok, so Trump: 306 and Hillary: 232 So now you going to get some popcorn like I will and enjoy the festivities as Obama leaves next month?

Exactly! she lost the ELECTORAL COLLEGE they didn't vote for her. they voted for Trump 307 to her 163 which is our system.

Yeah, you said she lost because the people didn't agree with Obama's policies. But actually, those policies brought her 2.7 million more votes than Trump. Looking at the way the people voted, the people prefer Obama's policies over Trump. But it's not the will of the people that determine the president, it's the will of the electoral college, which in this case is at odds with the will of the people.

So your claim that she lost because of Obama's policies is shown to be wrong. She lost because the electoral college didn't vote for her. It's an entirely different thing.

So anyway the bigger question here is, will you be watching our new presidents inauguration on the 20th of next month?

I doubt it. It holds no interest for me whatsoever.

I'm talking about our system, our Electoral College that we use

No, you were talking about why Hillary lost, and trying to claim it was because the people didn't like Obama's policies. But the people did like Obama's policies.

bass4funk: http://www.270towin.com/maps/2016-actual-electoral-map

Last I checked. She was 163, my bad. Ok, so Trump: 306 and Hillary: 232

Final count was Trump 304, Hillary 227.

She's lucky some states have laws against faithless electors, or she'd have dropped to 224.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_2016

... In the Electoral College vote on December 19, several electors voted against their pledged candidates: two against Trump and five against Clinton, yielding three electoral votes for Colin Powell and one each for John Kasich, Ron Paul, Bernie Sanders and Faith Spotted Eagle. A further three electors attempted to vote against Clinton but were replaced or forced to vote again. ...

304 to 227!!! A landslide!!! It's YUUUUGGGEEEE!!!

304 to 227!!! A landslide!!! It's YUUUUGGGEEEE!!!

Definitely a huge landslide. Amazing that it can happen even though millions of more people preferred her over him. But it is what it is.

SuperLib: Just say that Clinton and Obama are more popular but you personally do not like them so you do not approve of them, and leave it at that. All fair and honest.

bass: Yes, I admit it.

Nice. Moving on.

Yeah, you said she lost because the people didn't agree with Obama's policies.

That's right.

But actually, those policies brought her 2.7 million more votes than Trump.

California doesn't dictate who becomes president.

Looking at the way the people voted, the people prefer Obama's policies over Trump.

In the 3 bluest of States, that's right. Oh, by the way, Trump flips 1/3 of two time Obama voters, the GOP holds more seats in Congress, controls both the House and Senate, the presidency, more Governors 33, more Republican legislatures, I guess they just put themselves into power, right? LMAO.

But it's not the will of the people that determine the president, it's the will of the electoral college, which in this case is at odds with the will of the people.

So you're saying then, California should override the rest of the country? One state should tell the majority of Americans that a flawed candidate and a habitual liar should be the president? Strange, give it a rest, please! You are getting worked up for nothing, it's signed, sealed and delivered and nothing (thank God) nothing will change it, I was told when Obama got elected on JT by many libs at the time to get over it and suck it up and I did and you know what? I survived Obama and I am beyond excited that this nut job will next month be out of office and off to Hawaii or California and leave the rest of us alone. He is popular with fanbase, I get it. They can still love him and send him letters and watch him on Ellen or Kimmel, I learned to look forward and not back and can't and won't be bothered by plausible scenarios. But you shouldn't have to worry, you are not American, so please don't worry, we are and will be finally ok now. Will you be drinking and celebrating Obama's departure and Trump's inaugural?

So your claim that she lost because of Obama's policies is shown to be wrong. She lost because the electoral college didn't vote for her. It's an entirely different thing.

Yeah, keep telling yourself that, if that makes you and other liberals feel calm and content, who am I to burst that bubble? We all have the right to dream. Imagine all the people......

Yeah, you said she lost because the people didn't agree with Obama's policies.

That's right.

Well, it's correct that you said that, but what you said is not correct. She didn't lose because the people didn't agree with Obama's policies, she lost because the electoral college didn't vote for her.

California doesn't dictate who becomes president.

I'm not saying it does. I'm clearly recognizing that the electoral college vote determines who becomes president. But I'm pointing out that the will of the people was to continue Obama's policies, and that you are wrong in saying that she lost because of those policies.

So you're saying then, California should override the rest of the country?

Nope. Not even remotely. I'm just pointing out that your statement that she lost because the people were unhappy with Obama's policies is factually incorrect.

bass4funkDEC. 24, 2016 - 10:08AM JST

I'm talking about our system, our Electoral College that we use, what is it with you guys??

You said the people. Nothing about the system. Remember?

bass4funkDEC. 23, 2016 - 10:32PM JST

...the people decided they didn't want Hillary, and voted for Trump...

If it had been down to what the people decided, it would have been a different result. Technicalities aside, Trump voters are a minority.

Once he officially has to take POTUS duties, you'd better believe the legal eagles are waiting for him to be in a position to commit a high treason crime. Remember how B. Clinton was impeached for fooling around with an intern? Now Trump (an obvious womanizer) is going in... are the GOP loyalists going to ignore it because "it's one of ours"? Because I'm going to do something about it and harass the hell out of those in public office to the rule of law that are supposed to be doing their job.

@Bass: California doesn't dictate who becomes president.

Nice observation Bass. And thank goodness it is true.

Now Trump (an obvious womanizer) is going in... are the GOP loyalists going to ignore it because "it's one of ours"?

Only if he lies about it to the FBI. But knowing Trump he will probably brag about how his mistresses are better looking than Hillary's husband's conquests were. I can tell you this though, if Trump uses the IRS to suppress political activism the way Obama's administration did he would deserve impeachment.

HonestDictator: ... Remember how B. Clinton was impeached for fooling around with an intern? ..

He was impeached for perjury and obstruction of justice, related to lying about the affair ... not for the actual affair ...

she lost because the electoral college didn't vote for her.

EXACTLY! Now we are on the same page, so why don't we meet back on inauguration day and celebrate, it's great don't you think, I'm totally excited now that Obama is gone and Trump is in. Good days ahead!

But I'm pointing out that the will of the people was to continue Obama's policies, and that you are wrong in saying that she lost because of those policies.

On planet Venus they might have liked his policies, but when I look at on Earth and seeing how the Dow and stock market are doing and seeing how Democrats are losing everywhere, it is a clear repudiation of Obama and his policies.

Trump voters are a minority.

Oh, Yeah? Judging by the people that put the governors in power and the Senators and Congress, sorry, I choose to believe my eyes and from what I see, the Democrats are a tiny minuscule party. But nice try anyway, love the constant effort you and Strange try to vehemently push. LOL

Rather than just admit that the popular vote indicates a pretty clear rejection of Donald Trump, here you are changing the topic to other elections taking place at the same time. Hillary Clinton got 48% of the votes, Trump got 46%. Never mind all that irrelevant waffle about the Electoral College, congressional elections or gubernatorial elections, you weren't talking about any of them when you made your comment about the people wanting Donald Trump.

EXACTLY! Now we are on the same page

Well, I've always been on that page, so nothing has changed. But we aren't on the same page, because you claimed that she lost due to the people not liking Obama's policies, and I am pointing out that you are wrong about that being the reason she lost, because the people in fact wanted her for president, thereby validating Obama's policies. However, as I've accepted all along, the will of the people is irrelevant, it's only the will of the electoral college that matters in determining the president.

But, any time you try to falsely claim that Trump's win indicated that the people wanted X or didn't want X, I'm going to point out that you are wrong, and that the only thing Trump's win indicates is that the electoral college wanted him to be president, and that his win is not an indication of what the people wanted.

Heheheheh, ya guys realize Abe is in power because rural votes are worth more than urban votes in a proportional election - in a way, Japan's version of electoral system, lol

Nonetheless, Merry Christmas to y'all

Wolf pack: if Trump uses the IRS to suppress political activism the way Obama's administration did he would deserve impeachment

This is another great example of the far right openly spreading disinformation. Research and read about the conclusions of the Republican investigation if you want reality.

Rather than just admit that the popular vote indicates a pretty clear rejection of Donald Trump, here you are changing the topic to other elections taking place at the same time. Hillary Clinton got 48% of the votes, Trump got 46%. Never mind all that irrelevant waffle about the Electoral College, congressional elections or gubernatorial elections, you weren't talking about any of them when you made your comment about the people wanting Donald Trump.

Yeah, so anyway, now that Trump's president and Hillary is NOT and Obama will be OUT will you be celebrating like the rest of us?

Well, I've always been on that page, so nothing has changed.

As always, I am glad when we can agree on something, it's not always, but on this we finally can. So let the festivities begin on the 20th of next month?

Yeah, so anyway, now that Trump's president and Hillary is NOT

There ya go. Just say that. No need to spend so much time escaping Trump's slaughter in the popular vote. Just shrug it off and move on.

I only care what our system is.

Fair enough. But if that's all you care about, you shouldn't make claims that don't fall in line with that system, such as claiming the people don't like Obama's policies, or that they wanted Trump.

I was just stating the fact and that is all, but it we don't have to worry about Obama anymore, we can look to a positive future and we should give Trump a chance, I think it's a great thing.

Actually, it was, so if you see who will be president, it will be Trump and since Hillary was too corrupt and Trump was the responsible for flipping a 1/3 of Obama voters it shows that the people have had enough, anyway, if you don't like the system, you might have to wait 8 years for it to change if that happens, but I am happy that we don't have a Obama or that woman in the WH and if you were an American, you would feel the same. It's going to be a great 4-8 years.

Merry Christmas

Actually, it was, so if you see who will be president, it will be Trump and since Hillary was too corrupt and Trump was the responsible for flipping a 1/3 of Obama voters it shows that the people have had enough

Nope. All Trump's election shows is that the electoral college voted for him. The will of the people was for Hillary to be president, and Obama's policies to be continued. This is shown by the fact that Hillary got 2.7 million more votes than Trump. The people didn't want Trump.

if you don't like the system

I'm not talking about the system, I'm talking about how you are wrong when you say that the people didn't want Hillary, or that they didn't like Obama's policies, because the fact is (and unlike you, I'm using the word correctly) is that the people did want Hillary and did like Obama's policies.

if you were an American, you would feel the same

The fact that the American voters by far preferred Hillary over Trump show this statement to be incorrect.

All Trump's election shows is that the electoral college voted for him.

Yes and that's all that matters in our system. So once he's sworn in, will you have Champagne or wine? I prefer Champagne, can you recommend a good brand? President: Donald J. Trump I hope Hillary enjoys her holidays with her grandkids. I'm sure Obama is packing as we speak, not much time, gotta hurry!

Yes and that's all that matters in our system.

I don't disagree. But you keep trying to equate this to the will of the people. The will of the people is not indicated by the electoral college. So as long as you keep trying to incorrectly state that the people didn't want Hillary, or that they didn't like Obama's policies, I'll keep pointing out how you are wrong.

Hey, I only care that Trump will be president and how our system is run since the founding fathers created the electoral college, I don't and can't change the will of the Electoral system and can't change the sea of red back to blow, I can't cast a spell over people and tell them to love Hillary, I can say is, I am just looking forward to our new president, you should too. I'm getting all excited, you too? 1/20/17 is just around the corner.

Hey, I only care that Trump will be president and how our system is run since the founding fathers created the electoral college

Then why do you keep repeating such falsehoods regarding the people not liking Obama's policies, or that the people didn't want Hillary?

Moderator: You may not accuse another contributor of lying.

I didn't say anything wrong. The bottom line is, it doesn't matter anymore, the election is over and I no matter how much the left whine, kick and scream, it's done, Trump is president and that's it, whatever you say, that's it, it's over and Hillary is not relevant and the popular vote is not our system, so if you want to beat a dead horse, I think we should look forward and move forward. I was just stating the fact and I just wished you a very Merry Christmas and I look forward to the next 8 years, that's all I said. Nothing offensive.

Sure you did:

Obama didn't know a lot of names, dismissed ISIS as a JV team, doesn't know anything about the economy, a huge reason as to why Hillary lost since she campaigned on running on Obama policies

This is wrong - she lost because the electoral college didn't select her, not because the people didn't want Obama's policies.

bass4funkDEC. 25, 2016 - 01:47PM JST

I didn't say anything wrong.

Yes, you did. You said the people didn't want or vote for Hillary Clinton. That's garbage. You should have said the Electoral College don't vote for her. But then again I don't suppose the facts always sound quite so catchy as whatever you would prefer to think.

This is wrong - she lost because the electoral college didn't select her, not because the people didn't want Obama's policies.

That's not what the polls say. If so, she would have easily beaten Donald and she didn't, which means, terrible candidate and people not wanting her. She is not here. Is she not?

Yes, you did. You said the people didn't want or vote for Hillary Clinton. That's garbage. You should have said the Electoral College don't vote for her. But then again I don't suppose the facts always sound quite so catchy as whatever you would prefer to think.

I was always talking about our system and what we go by.

But it doesn't matter at this point, Trump is the NEW president. Hallelujah! This is THE best Christmas a man could ever ask for!

That's not what the polls say.

You're right, it's not what the polls say, it's what the vote said, when she won 2.7 million more votes than Trump.

I was always talking about our system and what we go by.

No you weren't, you were talking about what the people want, which isn't the system nor what you go by.

You're right, it's not what the polls say, it's what the vote said, when she won 2.7 million more votes than Trump.

But the difference is, she didn't win, so are you going to send Trump a congratulatory card, I did and how will you celebrate his inaugural, I'm getting a tingle down my spine know that we are less than a month away from Obama finally leaving us and Trump coming in.

No you weren't, you were talking about what the people want, which isn't the system nor what you go by.

So are you going to change it? Can you change it? No, you can't. So shall we meet on JT on that day and celebrate is inaugural together? Kudos to 4-8 years of Trump our next president.

But the difference is, she didn't win

You're right, she didn't. But that doesn't change the fact that the will of the people was to continue with Obama's policies, contrary to your claims.

So are you going to change it?

Whether it should or should not be changed is a different discussion. I'm simply pointing out how your claim that the people did not want to continue with Obama's policies isn't supported by the facts.

You're right, she didn't.

Exactly my point.

She's not, that's the end result, so I bought a bottle Moet, you think it's good enough to drink for this magnificent upcoming election?

bass4funkDEC. 25, 2016 - 08:00PM JST

That's not what the polls say.

The polls kept putting her ahead. She was only ever behind in enough swing states to secure the Electoral College vote for Donald Trump. Not a great reflection on her as a candidate, of course, but...

If so, she would have easily beaten Donald and she didn't, which means, terrible candidate and people not wanting her.

No, it means that not enough people in swing states wanted her. But less people wanted Donald Trump. Anyway, there you go about the people again, even though...

I was always talking about our system and what we go by.

Why mention the people at all, then?

She's not, that's the end result, so I bought a bottle Moet, you think it's good enough to drink for this magnificent upcoming election?

I thInk it has nothing to do with the fact that you were wrong about the people not wanting a continuation of obamas policies.

@Simon

Who will be the next president as of 1/20/17 just one answer and one answer ONLY please.

I thInk it has nothing to do with the fact that you were wrong about the people not wanting a continuation of obamas policies.

You think so, but Trump will be president next month, so that's your answer there. Where is Hillary? Haven't seen her since she got bulldozed last month, she ok? Now that she won't be president what will she do with her life?

bass: I only care what our system is.

Great. Trump won the electoral college and Clinton won the popular vote. Time to move on?

Hillary was too corrupt and Trump was the responsible for flipping a 1/3 of Obama voters it shows that the people have had enough

Oh, jeeze. Back at it again? Lol. Obama dominates the approval ratings and Clinton dominated the popular vote. Mentioning subsets of data doesn't contradict the entirety of the data.

Look, I know you hate Obama. You said you had to close your media company because of Obamacare and you hold him personally responsible for that failure. But while you are free to give your own opinion, you are simply incorrect when you say your opinion reflects the people when we have data showing otherwise.

Try saying this instead: "I personally do not like Obama and Clinton but I know his approval ratings are high and Clinton won the popular vote by a large margin, so while I do not like them the data shows others do."

HonestDictator - Putting only CEOs, well heeled, and "loyal" cronies that praised him during his campaign into positions of power in his administration?

Wow, that's just sounds crazy the way you say it. Every Hillary worshipper knows that Trump should only appoint homeless people, and Democrats to his administration. Just as if Hillary hadn't lost her 2nd attempt to be POTUS.

bass4funk: ... She's not, that's the end result, so I bought a bottle Moet, you think it's good enough to drink for this magnificent upcoming election?

http://tinyurl.com/zkk583t

(photo caption) The Alex Jones Channel - Establishment media's tears flow freely while we pop champagne bottles in celebration!

Great. Trump won the electoral college

That's our system, please don't get angry when it serves the Democrats as it has in the past, Dems were ok with it, in fact, they never made this an issue until last month, NEVER came up and now you guys cry foul. The clock is ticking, what are you going to do? Either way on 1/20/17 Trump will be our new president and unless something mysteriously happens, that's pretty much it.

Oh, jeeze. Back at it again? Lol. Obama dominates the approval ratings and Clinton dominated the popular vote. Mentioning subsets of data doesn't contradict the entirety of the data.

in one month what will happen to Obama? Where will he be? Where is Hillary right now? Who will be sitting in the oval office next month?

Look, I know you hate Obama. You said you had to close your media company because of Obamacare and you hold him personally responsible for that failure. But while you are free to give your own opinion, you are simply incorrect when you say your opinion reflects the people when we have data showing otherwise.

Well, your first comment you got right at least about disliking Obama, everything else?????

Try saying this instead: "I personally do not like Obama and Clinton but I know his approval ratings are high and Clinton won the popular vote by a large margin, so while I do not like them the data shows others do."

I never said those points weren't true or am I disputing it, "I was only talking about the Electoral College and the system that we use and Trump won it." So how will you be celebrating his inaugural? I got caramel popcorn, my kids love it. We all got family matching Trump shirts for the occasion. 1/20/17 should be fantastic.

Merry Christmas, homies!

Moet and caramel popcorn? Really?

About as classy as the 'Hey the other lady got way more votes than our man but who cares the weirdness of our outdated voting system means that we get to celebrate so let's go all triumphalist about it, brag about our landslide 'victory' and tell lies about stuff that never happened' rants.

Both more than a bit cloying.

You think so, but Trump will be president next month, so that's your answer there. Where is Hillary? Haven't seen her since she got bulldozed last month, she ok? Now that she won't be president what will she do with her life?

To be honest, I don't really care where she is or what she is doing. But I do know it has nothing to do with the fact that you were wrong about the people not wanting a continuation of obamas policies.

Every Hillary worshipper knows that Trump should only appoint homeless people, and Democrats to his administration.

No one is expecting the ridiculous extreme you just put forward as an agreement. But the guy campaigned on draining the swamp, and then filled up the swamp. You don't think that deserves some questioning at the very least, if not outright condemnation?

Of course he wouldn't do a live conference. Even though conferences themselves have pre-prepared questions, he'd choke terribly.

Moet and caramel popcorn? Really?

Yup!

About as classy as the 'Hey the other lady got way more votes than our man but who cares the weirdness of our outdated voting system means that we get to celebrate so let's go all triumphalist about it, brag about our landslide 'victory' and tell lies about stuff that never happened' rants.

Oh, and I forgot to mention, my wife is preparing some freshy hunted and homemade chili I got in the fridge ready to be served with garlic potatoes.

Kudos!

To be honest, I don't really care where she is or what she is doing.

Me neither, I just care that Trump will be sworn in on the 20th of next month, so you never told me how you will be celebrating that glorious day.

You don't think that deserves some questioning at the very least, if not outright condemnation?

He's not president yet, so I'll give him a pass, we can revisit the question after the 20th.

Me neither, I just care that Trump will be sworn in on the 20th of next month, so you never told me how you will be celebrating that glorious day.

I'll be mourning, not celebrating.

your first comment you got right at least about disliking Obama, everything else?????

You said you had to close down your company because Obamacare put it out of business. Was that not you? It's been a while so I could be wrong.

my wife is preparing some freshy hunted and homemade chili

Ah, turning the conversation you worked so hard for into a farce? You can try as many approaches as you'd like but eventually you will run into the same wall of data that contradicts your claims about the popularity of Obama and the votes for Clinton. Talk about anything else that makes you happy. As long as you continue to run away from your claim you actually get closer to honesty.

By the way, we had home cooked prime rib tonight. Big enough to feed 7 adults and 6 kids. Couldn't get enough.

Ah, turning the conversation you worked so hard for into a farce? You can try as many approaches as you'd like but eventually you will run into the same wall of data that contradicts your claims about the popularity of Obama and the votes for Clinton.

Yeah he consistently tried to evade the fact that he was entirely wrong about that comment, but I kept bringing it back.

What was I bringing it back to, new readers may ask - I was bringing it back to Bass' incorrect claim that Trumps election meant the people didn't want to continue Obama's policies and that is why Hillary lost.

We all know the truth is that the people wanted Hillary, and the reason she lost was because the electoral college didn't want to continue her policies. The people actually did want to continue her policies.

I'll be mourning, not celebrating.

That's too bad, I thought you would get over the loss and be happy and celebrat. Good times ahead!

You said you had to close down your company because Obamacare put it out of business. Was that not you? It's been a while so I could be wrong.

I was talking about my sister.

Ah, turning the conversation you worked so hard for into a farce?

Sorry, I don't do that, but its Christmas and it's my favorite time of the year and Trump walking into the White House is better than a pot of gold!

You can try as many approaches as you'd like but eventually you will run into the same wall of data that contradicts your claims about the popularity of Obama and the votes for Clinton. Talk about anything else that makes you happy. As long as you continue to run away from your claim you actually get closer to honesty.

I'm not running away. Not my style. I wasn't raised like that, but I could flip that analogy around and say the same thing about Trump. When you turn on the the TV on 1/20/17 who will be putting their hand on the Bible and taking the oath on that day?

That's too bad, I thought you would get over the loss and be happy and celebrat. Good times ahead!

The loss itself isn't what matters, it's what happens after. Trump suddenly winning doesn't change my opinion of the man one whit - I've thought he was a disaster in the making since the start, and still do.

I hope you're right about good times ahead. I'm pretty skeptical though. Nothing he has done or said so far instills me with any confidence that he is going to make America anything other than worse.

The loss itself isn't what matters,

If it doesn't, why complain of something you OR every other liberal American can't change?

it's what happens after.

Wait until after the 20th and we will see the first 100 days and after that, feel free to give an analytical opinion, for some reason, I know you will.

Trump suddenly winning doesn't change my opinion of the man one whit - I've thought he was a disaster in the making since the start, and still do.

Doesn't have to change your opinion, you are allowed to believe whatever you want, you have the absolute right to do so, as I do and feel about Obama, I feel he was a disaster and now he is out of office next month, that's reality and I'm over flowing over with excitement.

I hope you're right about good times ahead. I'm pretty skeptical though. Nothing he has done or said so far instills me with any confidence that he is going to make America anything other than worse.

At least give it a try, you may not like the man, but give it a shot and remember, Trump was a Democrat for most of his life, so I don't think he will go far, far right on every issue, he will no doubt tee off some Republicans and that's ok, he doesn't have to be a straight hardcore conservative, I don't think his supporters wanted that, if they did, they would have chosen Ted Cruz.I think it's good that Trump wants to meet in the middle of many issues that are dear to Democrats and I hope he continues his outreach at least he's trying. I would have never thought Trump would meet with Gore and his daughter is a big supporter of climate change, so I think for the most part it will be ok, just have an open mind and take a wait and see approach, I don't think it's too much to ask for. Let's see what happens after the first 100 days.

The loss itself isn't what matters,

If it doesn't, why complain of something you OR every other liberal American can't change?

As I said - because of what follows.

At least give it a try, you may not like the man, but give it a shot

I'm open minded. The ideal situation here is that he turns out to be a good president. Like I say, I'm skeptical, but if he does turn out to be a good president, I'm not going to badmouth him simply for being a republican, after all, I'm not a republican.

bass4funkDEC. 26, 2016 - 03:26PM JST

"I'll be mourning, not celebrating."

That's too bad, I thought you would get over the loss and be happy and celebrat.

If it were the other way round, would you?

You don't need to point out that it isn't the other way round, by the way. Trump won, Hillary didn't, Let's take it as read that I do in fact know that already.

Would you celebrate a Hillary Clinton victory, the way you seem to think everyone should celebrate Trump's? Yes or no.

Incidentally, do you think he'll finally hold a press conference when he gets inaugurated? Thing is, conservatives here can talk about how he's smart to avoid the... "MSM" and stick to his tweets, rallies for the faithful and carefully staged meetings. It's also easy. Anyone can fire off a tweet or shoot the breeze with a friendly audience. Of course, he could get misrepresented by biased liberal journalists, but is that worse than making himself look like he doesn't have the guts or the smarts to take on critics face to face?

Strangerland - We all know the truth is that the people wanted Hillary, and the reason she lost was because the electoral college didn't want to continue her policies. The people actually did want to continue her policies.

Who is this "we" you seem to believe that you are speaking for?

According to U.S.A. election rules, the rules that ALL of the U.S. candidates understood, and ran according to, Hillary lost. Hillary lost because not enough Democrats chose to vote for her. Getting a very small, or very large, majority of votes in California means the candidate gets 55 electoral votes. No more, no less.

Trump, Hillary, Sanders, Kasich, Cruz, Rubio, Carson, Bush, Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, Carter, etc. all ran their races based on capturing as many Electoral College electors as possible. Hopefully, more than 270. Under States Rights, each state chooses their pick for U.S. President. The individual states never agreed to a national popular election of presidents. Never.

If the candidates were to have run a national popular election, they would have campaign differently. And there is no way to tell if Trump, or Hillary, would have won such a (non-existent) race. But people can dream, can't they?

Also, most parliamentary systems do not pick their leader by popular vote of the public. The voters chose the winning party, and the winning party picks the new leader.

Who is this "we" you seem to believe that you are speaking for?

Anyone who has looked at the facts and isn't living in a post-truth fantasy of course.

From your comment, it appears that you would prefer to live in the post-truth.

According to U.S.A. election rules, the rules that ALL of the U.S. candidates understood, and ran according to, Hillary lost.

That's correct. And yet, 2.7 million more people voted for her than Trump. Therefore the will of the people was for Hillary.

Hillary lost because not enough Democrats chose to vote for her.

That's correct. And yet, 2.7 million more people voted for her than Trump. Therefore the will of the people was for Hillary.

If the candidates were to have run a national popular election, they would have campaign differently.

Maybe, and yet, 2.7 million more people voted for her than Trump. Therefore the will of the people was for Hillary.

there is no way to tell if Trump, or Hillary, would have won such a (non-existent) race.

You're right, so all we can look at is the numbers we actually have - the numbers where 2.7 million more people voted for Hillary than for Trump.

Also, most parliamentary systems do not pick their leader by popular vote of the public. The voters chose the winning party, and the winning party picks the new leader.

Which doesn't change the fact that 2.7 million more people voted for Hillary than Trump.

If it were the other way round, would you?

No, but I wouldn't let it get me down, I wasn't happy Obama won, I remember saying some expletives and then hitting the Padron and taking a Colombian, but other than the 48 hour meltdown, I was fine.

You don't need to point out that it isn't the other way round, by the way. Trump won, Hillary didn't, Let's take it as read that I do in fact know that already.

Then I hope you guys and other libs stop droning on about the popular vote because as you said, "Trump won" and none of you can change it.

Would you celebrate a Hillary Clinton victory, the way you seem to think everyone should celebrate Trump's? Yes or no.

No, but then again, I wouldn't whine constantly about what can't be undone.

Incidentally, do you think he'll finally hold a press conference when he gets inaugurated? Thing is, conservatives here can talk about how he's smart to avoid the... "MSM" and stick to his tweets, rallies for the faithful and carefully staged meetings.

One thing I love about Trump is that he speaks and shoots from the hip and doesn't need a teleprompter unlike Obama that for some reason without it seems as dim as dark room. Trump is not an eloquent speaker, I get it, but he speaks from the heart and that's refreshing and to the point about the press conference, why should he trust the media? After what they did to him, I would personally make them grovel for a very long time, the press need him, not the other way around.

It's also easy. Anyone can fire off a tweet or shoot the breeze with a friendly audience. Of course, he could get misrepresented by biased liberal journalists, but is that worse than making himself look like he doesn't have the guts or the smarts to take on critics face to face?

To be fair, I think he should face the media, but as I said, they need to treat him better, even msnbc didn't treat him THAT bad as CBS or CNN and The NY Times.

That's correct. And yet, 2.7 million more people voted for her than Trump. Therefore the will of the people was for Hillary.

Ok, But Trump will be president next month, thank you! LMAO!

bass4funkDEC. 27, 2016 - 02:30PM JST

"Would you celebrate a Hillary Clinton victory, the way you seem to think everyone should celebrate Trump's? Yes or no."

No, but then again, I wouldn't whine constantly about what can't be undone.

Well, then. Why do you think people who don't like Trump or the way that he won the election should be celebrating?

One thing I love about Trump is that he speaks and shoots from the hip and doesn't need a teleprompter unlike Obama that for some reason without it seems as dim as dark room.

I would be a bit more impressed if he could shoot from the hip in some forum other than Twitter or a rally full of his fans where people could shoot back, e.g. something a bit like Prime Minister's Questions in the UK. Think Trump could do what Theresa May has to do every week?

he speaks from the heart and that's refreshing...

Yeah, great. So does Jeremy Corbyn but I bet you wouldn't want him to be the next UK Prime Minister.

...and to the point about the press conference, why should he trust the media? After what they did to him, I would personally make them grovel for a very long time, the press need him, not the other way around.

Ha ha. You wish. There will still be plenty the press can write about him even if he doesn't have any media conferences. And have you seen what happens when Trump tries to make them grovel? He gets the finger. But he should go ahead as you suggest. It would be very entertaining to watch and give them even more to write about.

He can't keep avoiding these things for the next four years. God, can you imagine him talking to another statesman in public.

ThePBotDEC. 28, 2016 - 03:24AM JST

He can't keep avoiding these things for the next four years. God, can you imagine him talking to another statesman in public.

If it's Vladimir Putin, Mariane Le Pen or Rodrigo Duterte I'm sure he'll be fine. Although I use the term "statesman" very, very loosely.

Well, then. Why do you think people who don't like Trump or the way that he won the election should be celebrating?

In my case when Obama won, just deal with it, look for a champion candidate that inspires all the issues you hold dear, support that candidate and hope they will win the next election cycle, you guys have 4-8 years to do that. That's what conservatives do. Liberals should do the same, whining and carrying on is NOT going to change the inevitable, it just makes liberals look stupid.

I would be a bit more impressed if he could shoot from the hip in some forum other than Twitter or a rally full of his fans where people could shoot back, e.g. something a bit like Prime Minister's Questions in the UK. Think Trump could do what Theresa May has to do every week?

That might come, who knows, but the way the media has been towards him, I don't blame him avoiding them, I would too, they need him, not the other way around.

Ha ha. You wish. There will still be plenty the press can write about him even if he doesn't have any media conferences.

Sure, they can do that as they have been doing, the people are not stupid, but the majority of the print media in the US is already struggling and the ratings in CNN and CBS have significantly fallen, so if they want to further alienate their readers, they need to cover Trump accurately, if not, readership is already at its lowest point, so it would be imperative to them to get the story straight and try to be as objective as they can.

And have you seen what happens when Trump tries to make them grovel? He gets the finger.

He gives it right back and then they always crawl back. I've been in this business too long, sooner or later, they always give in. Trump is a Journalists goldmine for better or worse, he is a cash cow for journalists, so trying to get an interview with him needs to be productive and if not, well, there is always Twitter.

But he should go ahead as you suggest. It would be very entertaining to watch and give them even more to write about.

I agree and if they embellish and go over what they write and start slinging hash towards Trump, he always has the last say to give the media anything.

bass4funkDEC. 28, 2016 - 07:17AM JST

Well, then. Why do you think people who don't like Trump or the way that he won the election should be celebrating?

In my case when Obama won, just deal with it...

NO, whatever rambling waffle that was, it does NOT answer the question. You said you thought people who didn't like Trump would be happy and celebrating his inauguration. Why? You must know, you wrote it.

"And have you seen what happens when Trump tries to make them grovel? He gets the finger."

He gives it right back and then they always crawl back.

Oh yes? Like when he threatened to sue The New York Times if they wouldn't retract things they wrote that he didn't like? Have they crawled back yet? Any sign of that retraction? Or the lawsuit?

Funny how 5 of the 5 most popular news stories on a Japan news site are about Trump. Even funnier to watch a bunch of 40-year old ALTs scrambling around to talk about what a 'loser; Trump is. And any comment that remotely tries to examine any other view than the most liberal has 11 thumbs down. Telling. Have fun singing the 'Genki Good Afternoon' song at work tomorrow!

NO, whatever rambling waffle that was, it does NOT answer the question. You said you thought people who didn't like Trump would be happy and celebrating his inauguration. Why? You must know, you wrote it.

Yes, and by the way, I like waffles, particularly with Blueberries and maple syrup. Personally, I could care less if the Trump haters are depressed. I have about 12 people coming over and we're going to party on that day.

Oh yes? Like when he threatened to sue The New York Times if they wouldn't retract things they wrote that he didn't like? Have they crawled back yet? Any sign of that retraction? Or the lawsuit?

That's why he has Twitter, he doesn't need to worry about the decline NYT.

bass4funkDEC. 29, 2016 - 11:54PM JST Yes? As in yes, you know why you wrote it but won't say, or just a random yes followed by a pointless non sequitur?

I can see that if Trump ever does hold any press conferences it will be just as well for him that he won't have you there advising him on straight answers.

That's why he has Twitter, he doesn't need to worry about the decline NYT.

Evidently he does because he threatened them with legal action. You have neglected to comment on what's happening about that. He talked a big fight, they told him where to go, and then what do we get from the big man? Nothing. And nothing particularly relevant or insightful from you, either.

I can see that if Trump ever does hold any press conferences it will be just as well for him that he won't have you there advising him on straight answers.

That's ok, he's got Conway, direct, funny and more interesting than even Josh Earnest.

Evidently he does because he threatened them with legal action.

If they continue with his character assassination, I don't see why not.

You have neglected to comment on what's happening about that. He talked a big fight, they told him where to go, and then what do we get from the big man? Nothing. And nothing particularly relevant or insightful from you, either.

I do remember the NYT times senior editor on FOX saying that they will try and do a better job at giving him a fair shake. We shall see.

bass4funkDEC. 30, 2016 - 01:30AM JST

That's ok, he's got Conway, direct, funny and more interesting than even Josh Earnest.

Good for him. If he listens to her. Not much indication of that happening, though.

If they continue with his character assassination, I don't see why not.

Because he doesn't really have the guts and he's scared of what might come out in court? Anyway, never mind if they continue with it or not. The letter threatened action over what they have already printed, didn't it? There's been no retraction, so where's the action?

I do remember the NYT times senior editor on FOX saying that they will try and do a better job at giving him a fair shake. We shall see.

Obviously they did a terrible job of predicting who would win, but otherwise why should they do anything different? The election proved that Trump supporters are in a minority. How's it going to help their declining readership numbers if they start grovelling to Trump thus alienating liberals and Democrat voters, whom there appears to be at least three million more of?