So how are y'all preparing for the Apocalypse?

[Fish Owl]

I think people are overreacting. When Obama was elected everyone was waiting for fundamental changes. In my opinion after few months people will understand that new president is not so different from the old one aside from appearance and speeches. Because you just can’t suddenly change the way world politics and economics works.

 

[Av Demeisen]

@Fish Owl You can if you break the law. Like the FBI, last week.

 

[Fish Owl]

You can if you break the law. Like the FBI, last week.

Revolution is not about breaking the law. It’s about completely ignoring the old system and introducing something new.

 

[Av Demeisen]

Continuously breaking the law to change the system and retain a hold on power ad infinitum is precisely what fascists do once they get a hold on power. See Germany 1933.

 

[Fish Owl]

Continuously breaking the law to change the system and retain a hold on power ad infinitum is precisely what fascists do once they get a hold on power. See Germany 1933.

It's interesting you mentioned nazi because they were actually doing nothing new or revolutionary. On the contrary. Fascism and Nazism was an attempt to return to the values of 18-19th century when colonial empires build on racism and brute force ruled the planet. In my opinion it is people who make history, not leaders. And election of Trump or Clinton won't change American people in one night.

 

[Av Demeisen]

A great group of Americans on the lunatic right, both fundamentalist Christian and not, have finally got the leaders they craved in Trump and Pence. And the rest just have to be bullied into submission.

 

[Av Demeisen]

And they long for a return to an imagined America and its core values not based in reality in the first place, just like the Nazi fantasy of a Germanic past based on fantasy and distortion.

 

[Matthew Hughes]

I'm not sure that's possible with Canadian weather

Of course it is. My eldest son, the technogenius, is saving up to build himself an off-grid house on acreage on southern Vancouver Island. Weather there is about the same as England's.

My preparations for the Trumpocalypse involved leaving the housesit in Washington State where I'd been since early May and getting back over the border to a new sit on Vancouver Island.

VR drones are going to make 'travel' trivial in a decade or so. Just log in and rent a drone wherever you want to 'be'.

I think not. I've been wandering the world for a little over nine years now. No drone is going to give me the taste of Italian coffee drunk while sitting outside a little cafe in a hillside village, or the smell of French boudin noir frying in the morning.

There is no substitute for being there.

 

[Matthew Hughes]

It's going to be interesting watching Trump - the ultimate narcissist - explode out of sheer frustration as he realises he can't do any of the things he wants to.

It's a reassuring thought, except that he's surrounded himself with radical right-wingers -- Breitbart types -- who will respond to the system of checks and balances the way Hermann Goering responded whenever he heard the word "culture."

There will be genuine homegrown fascists in the west wing, only one daring move away from real power. Trump's head ought to lie uneasy, but he's probably too narcissistic to conceive of Steve Bannon removing him from office by traditional fascist means. But the temptation will surely be there, especially if the deed could be blamed on a terrorist conspiracy between ISIS and the international financial cabal.

 

[JacenAster]

I think people are overreacting. When Obama was elected everyone was waiting for fundamental changes. In my opinion after few months people will understand that new president is not so different from the old one aside from appearance and speeches. Because you just can’t suddenly change the way world politics and economics works.

Except that you're missing the reason those fundamental changes didn't happen(and, actually, in Obamacare they did happen). Namely, Obama's party didn't possess complete control of congress (at points they did control either the house or senate but, so far as I remember, not both at once). Internal policy changes are funneled through congress for the most part, not the executive branch. Mind you, I'm not really an adherent the doom and gloom group, I don't think the world is going to go to hell because he was elected. As a final note, however, "world" economics is already changing and he hasn't taken office yet. The Asian markets dropped sharply when it was clear he won.

Though, to be fair, it wasn't as sharp a drop as Brexit caused(in my understanding, I haven't had the time to do proper research yet). Real effects will have to wait until he's actually in office to determine, but many of his economic plans are the reason that foreign governments(baring Russia) didn't want him anywhere near the whitehouse. As the U.S. economy no longer really exists as an independent entity, it's tied too deeply into the world markets, as the world goes so goes the United States.

Still, all told, you are probably correct in that people are overreacting. Mr. Trump is primarily a showman, and it's very probable that half his rhetoric did not reflect his actual plans going forward. While I am dismayed about his victory, it is primarily on the grounds of personal distaste for his tactics and public behavior. I don't particularly like the idea that we American's can be lead by promises of violence and appeals to the lowest common denominators of fear, hate, and anger. As to his actual capability to run a world superpower successfully...I will reserve judgement for February.

 

[Matthew Hughes]

Because you just can’t suddenly change the way world politics and economics works.

I think Trump thinks he can. We'll find out in January.

The thing is, Trump doesn't actually know what a president does or how he does it. Months into his job application, he hadn't even read the US Constitution, which is the basic operating manual. I'll bet he still hasn't read it. Between now and January 20, his team are going to try to get him to focus on the work, but that means a lot of brain work and reading. Trump has never done that stuff. He's not going start at 70.

He's going to come into the Oval Office thinking he's the boss. Being the boss is what he knows. He'll give orders and expect them to be carried out. That's when he'll get a crash course in civics. How he reacts when he is told he can't do whatever he likes because of, well, the Constitution, will determine whether everything may change.

Say some Congressmen tell him he can't rip up NAFTA because a majority in the House and Senate want to keep it (or, to be realistic, because their campaign donors want it kept). Trump may enter into a protracted negotiation, do some horse-trading. Or he may send over some new hires in Homeland Security to arrest the ringleaders.

That's what authoritarian heads of government do. And I'm pretty sure that's what Americans have just elected.

 

[Edward M. Grant]

Presidents haven't been expected to obey the Constitution for decades, and Trump will have all the powers that Obama gave himself.

One of the main reasons for being more optimistic about Trump as President than Clinton is that the Republicans didn't want him in the White House, and will impeach him if they feel they can. They'd have let Clinton get away with anything, just as they did last time.

Similar for the US media. Clinton would have got a free pass, while they'll be watching Trump as closely as they can.

 

[Matthew Hughes]

Republicans didn't want him in the White House, and will impeach him if they feel they can.

Say, come spring, Trump goes on national TV and FB and Twitter and says, "I want to do the things America elected me to do but the corrupt establishment Congressmen won't let me. Should I lock 'em up?"

All over the country, people are going to be shouting, "Lock 'em up!"

Soon after he takes office, Trump is going to hire a lot of people for his deportation force. They're going to be small-town folks, mostly white and with little education. He will have rescued them from long-term unemployment, and they will owe their new security to him. They will do what he tells them to do.

The checks and balances don't mean a thing if the man in power is backed up by popular support and a police apparatus ready to follow orders. There is nothing new about this. It's a tried and tested recipe that has worked all over the world.

 

[Edward M. Grant]

I don't particularly like the idea that we American's can be lead by promises of violence and appeals to the lowest common denominators of fear, hate, and anger.

Trump didn't create the fear, hate and anger. The fear, hate and anger created President Trump.

The Tea Party went to DC all nice and civil, believing that the Republicans would listen if their supporters asked them politely to do something. The Republicans took their money, used them for votes, then tossed them aside. The Tea Party then tried to nominate Ron Paul, but the Republican establishment made sure Romney won, instead.

So the Tea Party went home, smoked some crack, and decided to nominate Trump.

And here we are.

Trumps the effect, not the cause. The cause is decades of politicians ignoring the people who vote for them.

 

[Matthew Hughes]

The cause is decades of politicians ignoring the people who vote for them.

And keeping them in ignorance. A republic needs an educated citizenry.

 

[JacenAster]

Trump didn't create the fear, hate and anger. The fear, hate and anger created President Trump.

I never claimed he created it, I claimed he preyed upon it. It was/is pretty much what his entire campaign consisted/consists of. Fear, anger, and hate always exist in any society that has poor, downtrodden, marginalized or entitled groups. But preying upon those factors, amplifying them rather than trying to soothe the hurts that cause them, is not a positive tactic.

Hell, it's not even a good tactic, as historically it tends to paint people foolish enough to overuse it into corners they can't escape from. No politician in the modern world is truly altruistic, but the intelligent ones tend to understand that being a balm for the problems, rather than a knife that cuts the wounds open further or salt that makes people more aware of their injuries, tends to be the only way to achieve anything remotely useful.

As this is a Sci-fi& Fantasy community it is, perhaps, appropriate to quote from Isaac Asimov Foundation series. "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent." While that sentiment is either flawed or incomplete, at best, the basic intent is not in error. Purely negative manipulations cannot result in a positive outcome. Riots and rabble rousing, short of outright rebellion, do not result in positive changes, only more pain.

 

[Fish Owl]

Except that you're missing the reason those fundamental changes didn't happen

Because they can’t happen in one country only. Even if it’s USA. For example you can’t just withdraw from Iraq or Afghanistan. Because Russia or other superpower will move in and US will have to react to it somehow. If US will suddenly cease all its current external politics it will probably collapse like USSR in 1991. Obama and his administration knew this, still they promised change because they needed those votes.

As a final note, however, "world" economics is already changing and he hasn't taken office yet. The Asian markets dropped sharply when it was clear he won.

It happens all the time for various reasons.
Fundamental changes in economy are nationalization, massive government interference or liberalization, transition to socialistic model, etc. I don’t see how Trump can do any of this. He claims that he will stand up to China and revive American industry but the way he describe it his promises seem to be lip service (same with Hilary and her big talks about helping the poor and creating eco-friendly energy).

Riots and rabble rousing, short of outright rebellion, do not result in positive changes, only more pain.

Yes. And I’m very glad that majority of American citizens understand this. If Trump and his electorate will try to force someone into submission – it is correct to resist this and fight for your rights. But before this happens “preventive resistance” is not the answer. Today I hear a lot of democratic electorate talking like “we have to stand up to them before it’s too late, we have to strike first”. This is actually rhetoric’s of the Nazi and Hitler: “Strike now before it’s too late”.

 

[Matthew Hughes]

I’m very glad that majority of American citizens understand this

Here's what astonishes this Canadian: only a little more than half of the American electorate showed up to vote.

 

[Fish Owl]

only a little more than half of the American electorate showed up to vote.

When people believe that both candidates are equally evil it's natural they just do not want to elect any of them and thus be responsible for it.

 

[hscope]

Given his constant stream of lies, it's difficult to know what Trump will do now he has no need to manipulate the people who voted for him. Even if he tries to change the status quo, he's up against two houses controlled by zealous right wingers who will be hell-bent on resisting any change at all.
He'll probably loose patience quickly and fire nuclear missiles at the House and Senate.