Presidential Election 2016 - Nachbetrachtung
-
Dies und Das
Wanli, 12.12.2016 22:00, Reply toIch hate Deine Frage nach einem Markt so verstanden, daß Du einen Markt über die Dauer von Trumps Präsidentschaft anregst.
Nö; ich hatte aber mal einen Markt vorgeschlagen, bei dem nach Trumps Job Approval (also der öffentlichen Zustimmung zu seiner Politik) nach einem Jahr seiner Präsidentschaft gefragt wird. Fände ich ganz interessant. Der entsprechende RCP-Wert im Januar 2017 würde dann zur Ausschüttung herangezogen.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval-1044. html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trumps Sieg beschäftigt nach wie vor die Analysten; Umfragezahlen legen nahe, dass der ominöse Brief des FBI-Chefs Comey Clinton etwa zwei Prozent gekostet haben dürfte. Wie sich die Zahlen entwickelt hätten, wenn Comey nicht an die Öffentlichkeit gegangen wäre, weiß man natürlich nicht.
This is decidedly not normal. Comey knew exactly what he was doing. He was warned that it would be an unprecedented bit of interference in an election. But he went ahead anyway, and went ahead in a manner perfectly calculated to do the maximum damage. The press played along and the rest is history.
Without Comey's letter, Clinton likely would have won the popular vote by four points and the Electoral College by 300 votes or more. Who knows about the Senate? Maybe Democrats would have won that too. Eliminate the Russian ratfucking and Clinton would have won in a landslide. Instead, a game show host is about to be sworn in as president of the United States and everyone is convinced that the Democratic Party is practically on its last legs.
This. Is. Not. Normal.
http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/12/how-did-trump-win-fbi-and-russians
Von russischer Schützenhilfe will Trump allerdings nach wie vor nichts wissen; sein designierter Vizeaußenminister John Bolton brachte jetzt eine ganz andere Erklärung ins Spiel: Vielleicht seien die Hackerangriffe auf die Parteizentrale der Demokraten samt Email-Leaks ja eine False-Flag-Operation gewesen, vielleicht stecke die Regierung Obama dahinter?
Derweil hat das Clinton-Team beantragt, die Wahlmänner vor ihrer Stimmabgabe in einer Woche detailliert über die aktuellen Geheimdiensterkenntnisse über die russischen Aktivitäten zu informieren.
Hillary Clinton’s campaign is calling for the members of the Electoral College to receive an intelligence briefing on possible Russian interference in the presidential election before that body makes the results official on December 19.
With just one week before the Electoral College vote, Clinton campaign chair John Podesta released a statement today supporting a movement by some of the electors to receive the intelligence briefing. (Earlier on Monday, 10 presidential electors, mostly from states Clinton won, signed a letter requesting the briefing from Director of National Intelligence James Clapper.)
http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/12/12/13922454/hillary-clinton-elect ors-podesta
Kann mir nicht recht vorstellen, dass sich genug Abtrünnige im Electoral College finden, aber vorenthalten will ich Euch den ungewöhnlichen Schritt natürlich nicht.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Derweil darf sich der Donald über ein überraschendes Präsent freuen: Die von der Regierung betriebenen Medien, unter anderem die Voice of America, untersteht demnächst nicht mehr einem überparteilich besetzten Aufsichtsgremium, sondern praktisch direkt dem Weißen Haus. Der Mann liebäugelte ja schon im Wahlkampf mit einem eigenen Medienverbund, nun bekommt er ihn, finanziert vom Steuerzahler.
Voice of America based its legitimacy on the principle that it was run by a bipartisan board– essentially keeping it removed from the partisan political preferences of particular administrations. The organization's mission was to report the news with "accuracy, balance, comprehensiveness, and objectivity," Politico reported.
Now, Politico points out "Trump is finally getting his Trump TV – financed by taxpayers to the tune of $800 million per year."
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/voice-of-america-could-become-trump-s-mout h-piece
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Die chinesische Regierung wird das natürlich wenig beeindrucken, Beijing hat schließlich die weitgehende Kontrolle über alle Medien des Reichs der Mitte. Die zum Portfolio gehörende englischsprachige Global Times ist demnach ein Sprachrohr der Regierung - und lässt es nach diversen Provokationen Drumpfs jetzt mal ein wenig kesseln:
China has become a country with substantial strength among the countries in the West Pacific Ocean. It has never expanded its battlefront and therefore accumulated enough power to deal with any strategic challenge in its peripheral areas. Especially in the Taiwan Strait, China is now confident enough to arm-wrestle with the US.
A series of outrageous remarks from Trump reflect that he despises China strategically. Pride goes before a fall. Even before entering the White House, he has already put his cards over blackmailing China on the table. After playing the one-China policy card, the greater part of his strategic initiative has been overused.
China must win respect from Trump's team, otherwise it will be hard to interact with Washington in the next four years. Fantasizing over an appeasement policy is not an option. A new round of gamesmanship between the two countries will be needed to test how much respect the two should pay to each other based on their strength. [...]If Trump wants to play tough, China will not fail.
Beijing should start from severely punishing Taiwan independence forces, exploring the possibility of disciplining those forces through non-peaceful means and make the use of military force an actual option to realize reunification.
Facing Trump, who is always unpredictable, China needs more imagination in its foreign policies. It should dare to make surprise moves and create a new pattern over the relationship with the US - while you play your game, I play mine.http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1023308.shtml
Kein "appeasement", sondern "surprise moves" - vermutlich erstmal nur Propaganda, begleitet von entsprechendem Säbelrasseln: Beijing ließ passend zu den markigen Worten einen nuklearwaffenfähigen Bomber über der südchinesischen See kreisen.
Preventing Taiwan from achieving internationally recognized independence is one of the top priorities of Chinese foreign policy — one that its military is prepared to go to war over. Following Trump’s call, China decided to clarify that last point, by flying a nuclear-capable bomber over its disputed islands in the South China Sea — while also preparing to ship new surface-to-air missiles to those islands, according to U.S. officials who spoke with Fox News.
Meine Güte, der Mann ist noch nicht mal Präsident. Alles natürlich erstmal nur Drohgebärden, aber die sollen vor gut hundert Jahren ja schon einmal zu einem Krieg geführt haben, den angeblich keiner wollte. Und verglichen mit dem Donald war Wilhelm Zwo ein Gott der Diplomatie. Von einem John Bolton im Außenministerium mal ganz zu schweigen...
Trump and his advisers may believe China is just bluffing, and that Beijing knows its economy is so intertwined with that of the US that it would literally be too costly for the country to escalate tensions with the US.
That could be a catastrophic misjudgment. Jessica Chen Weiss, a scholar of Chinese foreign relations at Cornell University, says the Chinese government’s insistence that the One China policy remain in place isn’t simply to preserve a linchpin of diplomatic relations between China and the US — it’s to help preserve its own existence.
Her argument is that since the beginning of communist rule in China, standing up to foreign interference has been a bedrock principle in the country’s political life, and that it’s not something that should be underestimated. Failing to respond to Trump’s provocative language about Taiwan could easily spark public criticism that the government was reneging on a core value and giving in to a bully from a country that much of China already distrusts.
The upshot: Beijing is far more likely to lash out at the US economically or make shows of its military might than it is to roll over on the issue of Taiwan’s sovereignty. [...]
Trump’s style of negotiating, in other words, is likely the entirely wrong approach to take with a rising superpower anxious to maintain its standing abroad and at home.
http://www.vox.com/world/2016/12/12/13919308/trump-taiwan-one-china
