This is what the US Voted For, Good Luck....

[Meadmaker]

The President doesn't have enough power to accomplish the kind of agenda set out in the OP.

Some elements of it, certainly, but not a lot of it.

I do suspect that funding for Planned Parenthood is in trouble.

I don't see how Obergefell is overturned without at least one additional justice, and that won't happen for a while, so gay marriage is pretty safe. There certainly is not going to be a constitutional amendment about it. 38 states would ratify that? I don't think so.

The ACA, in its current form, is done, but that genie can't be stuffed back in the bottle easily. It's one thing to hold off government health care, as they did for so many years, but to actually remove the only path to health insurance for millions? Congresscritters have to run for reelection, and "I used to have health insurance until Trump and his cronies took it away" is a very powerful, even if not entirely accurate, ad.

Trump can call for stop and frisk until the cows come home, but since he doesn't control local police, he can't make it happen. He could help create an atmosphere where local pols feel more emboldened, and he could appoint judges who would be less inclined to overturn it.

I do think it is very likely that his decision on the keystone pipeline will be almost completely uninfluenced by any element of concern for Native American cultural concerns, although I think he's fairly likely, more so than Democrats even, to be concerned about their property rights, if that's an issue.

I think it's fairly likely that food stamps and the school lunch program will be cut back. Those things ebb and flow with time and election results.

In short, there will be change, but not catastrophe. He won't get everything he wants. He doesn't even want some of the things he said in campaign speeches. I don't like the guy and I wish he would not become President, but it's too late for that. Not enough of the right people showed up to vote to prevent it.

 

[Minoosh]

They have repeatedly attempted to defund Planned Parenthood, will this not happen now they have full control?

IMO no, that was always just a grandstanding issue. But I don't know; they might. This is, ironically, affordable health care that is still fee-for-service which is what the government supposedly wants. People live in areas with those clinics and they'll have something to say.

With the Supreme Court set up to overturn same sex marriage

Right now, they uphold it, and the appointment of one conservative Supreme Court justice won't change that.

and Roe vs Wade, why do you believe that they would not uphold these laws? (Thankfully the current SCotUS struck down Senate Bill 5, but not before it has had a catastrophic effect on young Texas women.)

Well, we know Trump lies all the time, right? So what he said while campaigning, I'm setting aside for now. Why would he suddenly start keeping his promises?

 

[Minoosh]

Trump bashing at this stage makes as much sense as the B.S. Peace Prize for Obama before he took office.

I agree, we will have opportunities to bash him once he's in office.

 

[theprestige]

See, I don't think you understand 'cool story bro' then. It's said when you think something is completely made up. The OP isn't, and has cited why they believe those things will be attempted. Saying 'cool story bro' means you don't think they will be, but then you clarification acts as if we were supposed to infer that from your original comment? Why?

And why don't you think being critical of those things is skeptical?

Pedantry over Internet memes is your best play? Seriously? Leftist rhetoric is even more bankrupt than I thought.

 

[ddt]

The ironic thing is, that on a lot of the issues that the OP mentions, polls show that there's a majority for the liberal position. A majority of the US populace wants to keep abortion according to Roe vs. Wade. A majority is in favour of gay marriage. A majority wants to keep the ACA.

And yet, they just elected a party in power - president, House and Senate majorities - which has the opposite as its platform. So yes, they can try a lot of that.

Although he can stack the SC and change the constitution that way, he can only do so one at a time and my understanding is that he wants less judicial activism in the SC - not more.

He first has to get a SCOTUS candidate approved by the Senate. Does the filibuster apply to SCOTUS appointments? If yes, I thought the rule was that a president in the last four years of his term is a lame duck and you should let the people have their say. The Democrats in the Senate could obstruct any unfavourable SCOTUS nominee and give the Republicans a bit of their own medicine. It's nowhere written that SCOTUS must have 9 judges.

 

[ddt]

The ACA, in its current form, is done, but that genie can't be stuffed back in the bottle easily. It's one thing to hold off government health care, as they did for so many years, but to actually remove the only path to health insurance for millions? Congresscritters have to run for reelection, and "I used to have health insurance until Trump and his cronies took it away" is a very powerful, even if not entirely accurate, ad.

Oh yes they can.

Repeal the ACA per 1/1/2019. So it won't have happened when the mid-term elections roll around. And by the time of the next presidential elections, people have already forgotten about and the Republicans can simply blame the Democrats for the repeal.

Really, mundus vult decipi.

 

[psionl0]

He first has to get a SCOTUS candidate approved by the Senate.

The republicans control both houses of congress so that is less of a problem for him than it was for Obama.

By coincidence, DT and the republican party both want conservative judges on the SC.

 

[theprestige]

The ironic thing is, that on a lot of the issues that the OP mentions, polls show that there's a majority for the liberal position. A majority of the US populace wants to keep abortion according to Roe vs. Wade. A majority is in favour of gay marriage. A majority wants to keep the ACA.

And yet, they just elected a party in power - president, House and Senate majorities - which has the opposite as its platform. So yes, they can try a lot of that.

Opinion polls say one thing. Election results say another. Sound familiar? I wonder what the recently-elected politicians imagine people really want.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Given that it was Republican support that got the Civil Rights act through, I think your article, while interesting, begins with a number of false assumptions. I still think that the GOP is in the process of self destructing, as the Whigs did in the 19th century, and Trump's success is another crack in the foundation.

GOP civil rights is living in the past. The GOP hasn't been for civil rights since Lincoln.

They do look to be imploding if Trump's cabinet choices are any indication. Too bad the self destruct process includes burning down the house.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

If you pay attention to the news then it's well known that the Republican Party, assuming they keep their word, want to roll back the clock and so now the USA is about to regress several decades as they dismantle the social programs that Democrats have fought hard for since the 1960's.

I am going to do my best to link to as many of these as possible. Most of these effect minority groups, or the under privileged.

Women face a huge hit.

The biggest of these will revolve about control of reproduction. With the Republicans ready to repeal the ACA (a move that will cost 21 million people their Insurance coverage, many of whom will not be able to get new cover due to pre-existing conditions) they will lose access to cheap contraception.

Add to this the defunding of Planned Parenthood, the targeting of other Woman's Health Clinics like the GOP did in Texas, the rise of Catholic Hospitals taking over the marketplace, and the probable overturning of Row vs Wade, women's health and reproduction issues are going to be decided not by them and their doctors, but rather a bunch of elderly men in Government Buildings and Churches.

This action will lead to higher pregnancy rates, especially among the poor, and just as we are seeing in Texas, where while unplanned pregnancy as a whole has been dropping, amongst the poor it has been rising. It will also lead to greater mortality rates amongst women, again as shown in Texas which currently has the highest pregnancy related mortality rate in the developed world.
But it is not just in reproductive rights where women will feel this result. The struggle for equal pay for equivalent work will be lost for many years to come, and a good standard of paid Maternity leave for either parent allowing them to bond with their children before being required to return to work will not be forthcoming.

The next large group to feel this result will be the LGBTQ community.

Say goodbye to marriage equality. Current marriages will be forcibly dissolved and the Constitution amended to enshrine this discrimination.

Speaking of discrimination, following from the North Carolina HB2 Law, expect to see the overturning of Executive Order 13672, the banning of discrimination against LGBTQ by Federal Contractors, and the allowing of discrimination by employers based on Sexual Orientation. The likelihood is that in its place there will be Religious Freedom legislation permitting that use of one's religion to overrule any form of discrimination, allowing those that claim religious reasons to for opposing the LGBTQ community to legally refuse to provide custom or service to them.

Could it be even worse? This depends on how much power Mike Pence has. Pence not only opposed Gay marriage to the point of wanting to make it illegal for gay people to apply for a marriage licence, but also wanted to divert funding for AIDS research into Conversion Theory! He also opposed the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, so while not an open policy, it could be that Republicans might force Gay military personal out of the Service.

What is well known is that both Trump and Pence have spoken admiringly of Putin, who of course enacted Russia's own Anti-Gay legislation. Similar laws in the US could see public affection or displays made illegal for the LGBTQ community as well as the banning of any such characters on TV programming.

Of course it goes without saying that advances in Transgender Rights over the past few months will be erased with laws such as HB2 forcing Transgender people to out themselves and suffer those consequences, or else suffer other, health, consequences. Or course this is also likely to add to the rise of women who aren't seen as feminine enough being targeted as well.

Let's move on.

What does it mean for people that aren't white?

Trump has called for the reinstatement of the most divisive program in resent US History, Stop and Frisk. This policy treats blacks as criminals and is both discriminatory and dehumanizing. Polls have shown that 70-75% of Blacks oppose Stop and Frisk. This also creates a greater resentment and barrier between the police and the community, at a time when the two groups need to come together and break down the institutionalised racism, not to increase it.

It will also mean that with the Supreme Court supporting them, the GOP will be free to enact greater and stronger Voter Suppression Laws such as those recently overturned in North Carolina

Latinos will suffer many of the same issues, but added to this will be laws such as Arizona's SB 1070 anti-immigrant law where anyone looking like they are Latino could be stopped and have proof of their citizenship demanded.

Even Native Americans are not spared with Trump already having shown his feelings towards them previously, he has now stated that he wants to push the Keystone Pipeline through without regard to cultural heritage or native land rights.

Of course we haven't covered Muslims who would suffer major travel issues and be suspected of being terrorists merely because of their religion. While there is no set methods of dealing with the GOP seems to believe is the "Muslim Problem," early in the campaign Trump was not adverse to the idea of forcing all American Muslims to register.

Of course it doesn't stop at Minorities who will feel this.

The Environment will pay the cost as Trump has plans to dismantle the EPA. Not to mention Climate Change research funding and the Paris Accord both being threatened by a party that doesn't believe in Climate Change.

Anyone addicted to eating safe food might be in danger too, as He goes after the FDA

With the NRA behind him, prepare to have all gun safety legislation gutted along with the BAFTE, or maybe just get rid of it altogether.

There will be food taken off the poor with the Republicans now free to cut the Federal Food Stamp program by $23 billion and the School Lunches Program.

I did have a bunch of stuff that would affect the way things are with the US overseas, but if I carry in I'll be here forever, so final one...

The stripping of protections for a Constitutionally Protected Free Media. Trump wants to make it easier to sue the media weakening Free Speech and making it harder for the Media to publish anything that would be disagreeable to those wealthy enough to cost them bigly in court even if what they printed was true. This attack would make it too easy to tie up media organisations in court long enough to make it too costly to publish controversial things about the rich and litigant powers that be even if what was published was true and in the public interest.

Yes I know this list isn't exclusive, that would have made it way too long.

I can only hope for a backlash to rival all backlashes.

 

[Meadmaker]

I can only hope for a backlash to rival all backlashes.

I think that describes the Trump victory.

 

[3point14]

Gee you waste a lot of effort chastising people. I doubt I'd have even commented after my one line, had you not felt the need to express your dislike of a throwaway comment.

I'm using colloquial language incorrectly now?

you respond flippantly and dismissively to a well written and well researched post win an attempt to dismiss the context of the post and now you're confused that you're being taken to task?

Was your 'cool story bro' designed to be anything other than a pointless drive by posting? Why did you choose to make a 'thowaway comment' that's normally reserved as a response to anecdotal evidence (hence the 'story part of it)

Don't get all upset cos you weren't allowed to get away with a pointless post designed to detract from the good information you were responding to. Don't do that.

 

[Caper]

This is nothing more then the ramblings of the insane left.

 

[3point14]

This is nothing more then the ramblings of the insane left.

All of it?

You think there's zero chance of any of the above coming to pass?

 

[casebro]

A wall? No, but deporting illegals as soon as they get out of jail is doable. And federal sanctions against "sanctuary cities".

Do away with ACA? Doubt it. But a heavy tune up is needed.

Restricting legal immigration of single Muslim males without vetting? Doable.

Reining in bleeding heart, non-thinking Zero Tolerance policies all across the board? Doable.

Eliminating class action law suits that give millions to lawyers and $6 to each plaintiff? Doable.

Do away with Awards to Environmental Activists that don't have to spend any of it on remediation, doable.

 

[NoahFence]

Trump bashing at this stage makes as much sense as the B.S. Peace Prize for Obama before he took office.

Hardly.

At minimum, the man is the face of sexual assault.

He is to sexual assault what Charles Manson is to murder.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Gee you waste a lot of effort chastising people. I doubt I'd have even commented after my one line, had you not felt the need to express your dislike of a throwaway comment.

I'm using colloquial language incorrectly now?

It's not a wasted effort if you learn something from it.

Although, on second thought ...

 

[johnny karate]

This is nothing more then the ramblings of the insane left.

I'm confused by this comment.

What specifically is insane or rambling about the OP?

 

[steve s]

The Minimum Wage is a poor one to use as when the wash come in, he actually supports a $10 minimum wage.

Trump has taken so many positions on minimum wage that it's impossible to tell what he believes. He's said that he'd leave it alone, he'd raise it to $10, and he'd let the states decide. He's said that wages are too high, and he's said we have to do something to help people making minimum wage, saying "I don’t know how people make it on $7.25 an hour."

Here's a good article on his flip-flopping on the subject.
https://thinkprogress.org/donald-tr...-less-than-30-seconds-d88c8d8648ba#.u4pciib0c

 

[Garrette]

I have concerns about the domestic agenda and fear for much in the short term. My own daughter, voting in her first Presidential election, has been distraught over the prospect of losing access to birth control.

But my largest concern is international. Domestic issues can be fixed over the long term, but the dominoes of conflict do not need much to start tumbling.