So you think? I still have family and property there, go often, and am planning to return. A better question is for those who have nothing to do with it, let alone, even understand it..

A hopefully siimple question to the trump supporters. How do you rationalise this behaviour? how do you see anything here except a madman.

Donald Trump to his supporters at a rally
“I went to see my wife. I say, ‘Baby, I tell you what. We’re not going to win tonight, The polls are coming out .”

Donald Trump on twitter
"Various media outlets and pundits say that I thought I was going to lose the election. Wrong..."I thought and felt I would win big, easily over the fabled 270" electoral votes.

These are not up for debate, not interpretations by the nasty media, these are on the record from the man you support. How do you accept this nonsense and still support him, this is a genuine qquestion, tell me what you think when you read this.

So even those factors didn't move you sufficiently to vote, then? Or did you think Putin had it all sewn up..?

U.S. intel report: Putin directed cyber campaign to help Trump

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-us...-idUSKBN14Q1T8

Trump twitter
Arnold's reply
Is this really the president elect posting this childish stuff.

Interesting that Trump says the leaked information did not influence the election result whereas in last Tuesday's Fox News interview Assange says it did.

He's a politician. They're all full of shit if you hadn't realized.

Meh, still better than Hilary.

But he's not a politician. This is a massive career change. It's like me getting the top job at GlaxoSmithKline after 10yrs in travel.

So what you're saying is the rest of them are politicians and are full of shit, but Trump is not a politician and therefore he represents a change to the same old same old.
Ok I can run with that.

I don't think too many people (on EF) actually think Trump was a great candidate, rather I believe that some think he was a better choice than Hillary and others just want to make the best out of a bad situation.

It seems to me that Trump didn't win the election so much as Hillary lost it.

Seriously, how terrible of a candidate do you have to be to lose to Donald 'The Pussy Grabber' Trump?

Oh really. Is that unsubstantiated and inconclusive drivel the best that they could come up with after all this time.

I tried to find a similar Main Stream Media report, but one which is open to readers' comments:
The only ones I can come up with so far are from The Australian which seems to vanish behind a paywall after use or Aljazera. Unsurprisingly, the comments are not wholly positive towards the "report".

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/0...204140853.html

https://www.google.ch/url?sa=t&rct=j...,d.bGg&cad=rjt

__________________
If you have difficulties with a post which contains a link to a site in one of the Swiss languages, use Google Translate or your own favourite translating browser.

Nah. That's what you're saying.

I woudn't say he was a better candidate in any way, shape or form. His election only serves to highlight what a poor selection of candidates were fielded by both sides.

Some refer to this as part of a populist movement. I see it as sham politics where 'make do and mend' will be the best that people can hope for. When the bar is set so low only certain creatures can slither under it.

Oh I totally agree. I also have no clue why the DNC chose a despicable creature like Hillary to run. Mind boggling.

Well thems the breaks, now the Americans will all have to move forward and MAGA!

The Daily Fail has two related articles, both open for their mouth-breathing readers to vent their outraged collective spleen.

The DM is one of the widest read papers/online news in the UK.

Ah yes. I see it now. I googled for "US Intel Report Election". The Daily Mail article is listed at the bottom of page 6 in my browser. The comments though are mostly one-liners and a large number from America. I guess they have no possibility to express their points of view in a more local publication.

The comments are a treat, aren't they? I should have bought shares in aluminium considering the amount of foil that must have gone into making all their hats...

Anyway, I don't understand what all the fuss is about. They'll simply have to get used to having Trump as president. And if it is any consolation, Russia has had its Boris Jeltzin, and Italy it's Silvio Berlusconi. Switzerland narrowly missed a Christoph Blocker, Austria a Jörg Haider and the UK a Boris Johnson (at least as PM). So America is actually due for one.

As for entertainment, when all the Trump election stuff has died down, there will still be the BREXIT, the elections in France and Germany and later, probably, the impeachment of Donald Trump.

__________________
If you have difficulties with a post which contains a link to a site in one of the Swiss languages, use Google Translate or your own favourite translating browser.

As you seem to find google too challenging here are some links to a few US main stream media with readers comments.

one

two

three

four

five

six

seven

eight

Mostly the comments are in two groups.
The first group deny the Putin hacking but without presenting any evidence.
The second group believe the Putin hacking and challenge the first group to supply their sources.

Russian roulette?

I disagree, I believe his banter and trolling put Hillary to shame. Overall his shtick resonated better with the plebs.

I thought the only one who might be able to out-troll him was Putin. But then Mexico's ex-President is also looking a contender:

Attached Thumbnails

 

I hope he gets trolled constantly.

But how can you say that the schtick resonated better with the plebs when Hillary still won the popular vote by nearly 3 million? Clearly he resonated better with some people, but not a majority of voters.

I always thought it was better to take the high road, but this election has taught me to that.