djsunyc wrote:well there is one thing that *could* benefit me personally...

Masai Ujiri responded to the United States' election results in which Donald Trump is the president-elect.

"I want to thank Donald Trump for making Toronto an unbelievable destination," said Ujiri.

"This country (Canada) has an obligation to show the world how peaceful and friendly we are," Ujiri continued.

The Raptors have re-signed both Kyle Lowry and DeMar DeRozan in free agency in recent seasons and also signed DeMarre Carroll from the Atlanta Hawks in 2015.

Ujiri became general manager of the Raptors in 2013 after several seasons with the Denver Nuggets.

:)

meloshouldgo wrote:Arkud - I'll give you this, your level of tunnel vision is probably museum worthy. You are not stupid, but you are severely limited in your scope and unable or unwilling to comprehend anything that doesn't fit your own world view. Anyone who can cherry pick a line out of Einstein explaining "Why socialism" to spin it into "Why not socialism", deserves respect. Take a day off and stay away from my posts, I'll do the same with yours.

School's over kid.

Man don't you see that when you describing me you actually describing yourself?
The only difference my opinion is based on live experience and your on dogmatic imagination.
Live experience which shared with millions of Russians, Chines, Vietnamese, Cambodians, Germans, Western Europeans, Cubans, Brazilians, Venezuelans, North Koreans, an many more.
Experience of mass deceiving which ends with death camps, mass unnamed graves, wars, and level of brutality and neglect to human life in the name of ideology of "bright future" and to empower the small groups of criminals.

djsunyc wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/796900183955095552

ARE YOU F CKING KIDDING ME?

what a f cking loser. lol.

Welpee wrote:

djsunyc wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/796900183955095552

ARE YOU F CKING KIDDING ME?

what a f cking loser. lol.

Welcome to the next four years.

This thread is epic...
Probably time to move to off-topic...
Or may be keep it until Knocks will win championship or Trump will end second term?

The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy.

Bonn1997 wrote:So Hillary got about four hundred thousand more votes than Donald but lost the electoral college. You might wonder what was Donald Trump's position on the electoral college before this election? In 2012 he said this:

The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2016/live-updates/general-election/real-time-updates-on-the-2016-election-voting-and-race-results/trump-in-2012-the-electoral-college-is-a-disaster-for-a-democracy/

I'll keep saying Wyoming with a population of 500k have 2 Senators and California with a population of 40 mil have 2 Senators..Those Senator cast votes according to the wishes of their constituents..

Rookie wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Rookie wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Rookie wrote:

nixluva wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

TheGame wrote:At this point, I am fairly convinced that 90% of everything Trump said was total BS, and he is not going to do most of what he claimed. He is never going to get Mexico to pay for a wall. He is not getting term limits passed (which would require a constitutional amendment). He probably is not going to cut regulations to any significant extent and he simply is not smart enough to fix the tax code. He will lower taxes on the rich, he will pull back Obamacare, and he will increase defense spending. Beyond that, I have doubts he will do much else. The real danger is in foreign policy because we have to worry about his temperament, and if he really plans to play the role of isolationist, it may give countries like Iran, North Korea, China, and Russia the opportunity to expand their power. We will just have to wait and see.

I agree with that except the part about regulations. Why do you think he won't cut back regulations? I think he wants corporations to have free reign.
I also think he's very good at selling ideas to the public. Even if he doesn't do 90% of what he said he would or if he does them and things get worse in the country, I worry he'll be able to convince enough people that he's doing a good job.

A lot of Trump's campaign promises were just for show. The Congress will effectively slow him down on the really expensive policy. His Tax policy will create a sugar rush but then inevitably the crash will come.

I think the culture stuff and the Supreme Court will be a huge deal for Progressives to accept. The foreign policy stuff is scary. He's very naive about foreign affairs and that can be dangerous.

Democrats have been running on the 'change' platform for a decade or more now and haven't delivered. Now we have a President elect who might actually follow through with making real changes to our failing systems and Democrats are freaking out and crying gloom and doom for the free world as we know it. It is all just so surreal. Liberal democrats are labeling Trump a racist and yet race relations are as bad as they have ever been under Obama.

Liberal democrats in urban areas employ millions of illegals, paying them sub standard wages and paying nothing into the tax system. These illegals need to join the system, get decent wages and pay their share of taxes. The middle class has been carrying this country on it's shoulders for far to long. Things need to change. I don't think deportation is the answer, but I would like to see everyone who is here illegally pay their fair share of taxes to support the system that they take so much from for nothing.

it was Romney/Ryan, or McCain/Palin, or Bush/Cheney or Bush/Quail or Regan/Bush I would 100% agree with this and say these guys deserve their shot to move things in a better direction. However the commander is chief is a con man who openly trashes women with no accountability, cheats laborers, has a detailed history of discrimination and has shown a very poor temperment. "Balancing" that is Pence, a religious zealot who believes gays can be "cured" with therapy.

Is this a case of "Dems get what they deserve" because of the failures you outlined above? Is this what is best for this country? Maybe it is... maybe we need this level of trash elevated to the highest positions in the land for voters to wake up and mobilize. I guess thats the upside? I do think its kinda funny to hear things like "America has spoken" when HRC won the popular vote (as Gore did). GOP won fair and square, I have no qualms about that... but the rhetoric is funny to say the least.

I do not disagree with you character assessment of the man. At this point I am looking at the policies he wants to implement in the first 100 days and I'm hoping for the best. I strongly believe that this country was founded on, and needs, a strong middle class. We need to bring manufacturing and light manufacturing jobs back to America and reduce the tax burden on the middle class. Trump said all the right things that resonate with working class America. Having lived in NYC most of my life and working in the same industry as Trump, I know who he is and still think he is the wrong person saying the right things, but here we are. I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt for now and I am not buying into the doom and gloom that he is the next Hitler or is the antichrist. He is a flawed man who maybe just wants to do the right things for this country. His methods are questionable at best, but you can't argue with the results.

you totally can argue. His companies have underperformed. He's declared bankruptcy 6 times. He's left a trail behind him. The only results you cant argue with is that Trump has done very well for Trump.

Briggs can joke about sexism. When its his daughter assaulted by rich white kid and that kids father says "tough sentence for a little tail" lets see his comments then. I wouldnt wish that on anyone, but he fails to see the connection and there is one. People ask what kind of a culture can we have where this exists? The answer is a Trump culture, where there is no accountability.

I am fine with GOP leadership and I think the on again off again is important. I respect conservative values, small gov and states rights. What Trump brings is a different level. I do wish him well.

I find this article particularly interesting, so I'll just attach it here https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/11/09/trump-won-because-college-educated-americans-are-out-of-touch/?wpisrc=nl_most-draw7&wpmm=1

Trump won because college-educated Americans are out of touch

Higher education is isolated, insular and liberal. Average voters aren't.

As the reality of President-elect Donald Trump settled in very early Wednesday morning, MSNBC’s Chris Hayes summed up an explanation common to many on the left: The Republican nominee pulled ahead thanks to old-fashioned American racism.

But the attempt to make Trump’s victory about racism appears to be at odds with what actually happened on Election Day. Consider the following facts.

Twenty-nine percent of Latinos voted for Trump, per exit polls. Remarkably, despite the near-ubiquitous narrative that Trump would have deep problems with this demographic given his comments and position on immigration, this was a higher percentage of those who voted for GOP nominee Mitt Romney in 2012. Meanwhile, African Americans did not turn out to vote against Trump. In fact, Trump received a higher percentage of African American votes than Romney did.

And while many white voters deeply disliked Trump, they disliked Democrat Hillary Clinton even more. Of those who had negative feelings about both Trump and Clinton, Trump got their votes by a margin of 2 to 1. Votes for Trump seemed to signal a rejection of the norms and values for which Clinton stood more than an outright embrace of Trump. He was viewed unfavorably, for instance, by 61 percent of Wisconsinites, but 1 in 5 in that group voted for him anyway.

The most important divide in this election was not between whites and non-whites. It was between those who are often referred to as “educated” voters and those who are described as “working class” voters.

The reality is that six in 10 Americans do not have a college degree, and they elected Donald Trump. College-educated people didn’t just fail to see this coming — they have struggled to display even a rudimentary understanding of the worldviews of those who voted for Trump. This is an indictment of the monolithic, insulated political culture in the vast majority our colleges and universities.

As a college professor, I know that there are many ways in which college graduates simply know more about the world than those who do not have such degrees. This is especially true — with some exceptions, of course — when it comes to “hard facts” learned in science, history and sociology courses.

But I also know that that those with college degrees — again, with some significant exceptions — don’t necessarily know philosophy or theology. And they have especially paltry knowledge about the foundational role that different philosophical or theological claims play in public thought compared with what is common to college campuses. In my experience, many professors and college students don’t even realize that their views on political issues rely on a particular philosophical or theological stance.

As a college professor, I know that there are many ways in which college graduates simply know more about the world than those who do not have such degrees. This is especially true — with some exceptions, of course — when it comes to “hard facts” learned in science, history and sociology courses.

But I also know that that those with college degrees — again, with some significant exceptions — don’t necessarily know philosophy or theology. And they have especially paltry knowledge about the foundational role that different philosophical or theological claims play in public thought compared with what is common to college campuses. In my experience, many professors and college students don’t even realize that their views on political issues rely on a particular philosophical or theological stance.

Sometimes the college-educated find themselves so unable to understand a particular working-class point of view that they will respond to those perspectives with shocking condescension. Recall that President Obama, in the midst of the 2012 election cycle, suggested that job losses were the reason working-class voters were bitterly clinging “to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them.” The religious themselves, meanwhile, likely do not chalk their faith up to unhappy economic prospects, and they probably find it hard to connect with politicians who seem to assume such.

Thus today’s college graduates are formed by a campus culture that leaves them unable to understand people with unfamiliar or heterodox views on guns, abortion, religion, marriage, gender and privilege. And that same culture leads such educated people to either label those with whom they disagree as bad people or reduce their stated views on these issues as actually being about something else, as in Obama’s case. Most college grads in this culture are simply never forced to engage with or seriously consider professors or texts which could provide a genuine, compelling alternative view.

For decades now, U.S. colleges and universities have quite rightly been trying to become more diverse when it comes to race and gender. But this election highlights the fact that our institutions of higher education should use similar methods to cultivate philosophical, theological and political diversity.

These institutions should consider using quotas in hiring that help faculties and administrations more accurately reflect the wide range of norms and values present in the American people. There should be systemwide attempts to have texts assigned in classes written by people from intellectually underrepresented groups. There should be concerted efforts to protect political minorities from discrimination and marginalization, even if their views are unpopular or uncomfortable to consider.

The goal of such changes would not be to convince students that their political approaches are either correct or incorrect. The goal would instead be educational: to identify and understand the norms, values, first principles, intuitions and stories which have been traditionally underrepresented in higher education. This would better equip college graduates to engage with the world as it is, including with their fellow citizens.

The alternative, a reduction of all disagreement to racism, bigotry and ignorance — in addition to being wrong about its primary source — will simply make the disagreement far more personal, entrenched and vitriolic. And it won’t make liberal values more persuasive to the less educated, as Trump victory demonstrates.

It is time to do the hard work of forging the kind of understanding that moves beyond mere dismissal to actual argument. Today’s election results indicate that our colleges and universities are places where this hard work is particularly necessary.

This is exactly what I meant when I mentioned the dumbing down and re-programming of the American youth for political gain. All part of the liberal plan and it almost worked as we almost elected Hillary Clinton!

Except it didn't work and my faith in America as I know has hopefully been restored. That's why you see so many unpatriotic college kids on their parents dime at these protests. They've been brainwashed since childhood

gunsnewing wrote:

Rookie wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Rookie wrote:

fishmike wrote:

Rookie wrote:

nixluva wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

TheGame wrote:At this point, I am fairly convinced that 90% of everything Trump said was total BS, and he is not going to do most of what he claimed. He is never going to get Mexico to pay for a wall. He is not getting term limits passed (which would require a constitutional amendment). He probably is not going to cut regulations to any significant extent and he simply is not smart enough to fix the tax code. He will lower taxes on the rich, he will pull back Obamacare, and he will increase defense spending. Beyond that, I have doubts he will do much else. The real danger is in foreign policy because we have to worry about his temperament, and if he really plans to play the role of isolationist, it may give countries like Iran, North Korea, China, and Russia the opportunity to expand their power. We will just have to wait and see.

I agree with that except the part about regulations. Why do you think he won't cut back regulations? I think he wants corporations to have free reign.
I also think he's very good at selling ideas to the public. Even if he doesn't do 90% of what he said he would or if he does them and things get worse in the country, I worry he'll be able to convince enough people that he's doing a good job.

A lot of Trump's campaign promises were just for show. The Congress will effectively slow him down on the really expensive policy. His Tax policy will create a sugar rush but then inevitably the crash will come.

I think the culture stuff and the Supreme Court will be a huge deal for Progressives to accept. The foreign policy stuff is scary. He's very naive about foreign affairs and that can be dangerous.

Democrats have been running on the 'change' platform for a decade or more now and haven't delivered. Now we have a President elect who might actually follow through with making real changes to our failing systems and Democrats are freaking out and crying gloom and doom for the free world as we know it. It is all just so surreal. Liberal democrats are labeling Trump a racist and yet race relations are as bad as they have ever been under Obama.

Liberal democrats in urban areas employ millions of illegals, paying them sub standard wages and paying nothing into the tax system. These illegals need to join the system, get decent wages and pay their share of taxes. The middle class has been carrying this country on it's shoulders for far to long. Things need to change. I don't think deportation is the answer, but I would like to see everyone who is here illegally pay their fair share of taxes to support the system that they take so much from for nothing.

it was Romney/Ryan, or McCain/Palin, or Bush/Cheney or Bush/Quail or Regan/Bush I would 100% agree with this and say these guys deserve their shot to move things in a better direction. However the commander is chief is a con man who openly trashes women with no accountability, cheats laborers, has a detailed history of discrimination and has shown a very poor temperment. "Balancing" that is Pence, a religious zealot who believes gays can be "cured" with therapy.

Is this a case of "Dems get what they deserve" because of the failures you outlined above? Is this what is best for this country? Maybe it is... maybe we need this level of trash elevated to the highest positions in the land for voters to wake up and mobilize. I guess thats the upside? I do think its kinda funny to hear things like "America has spoken" when HRC won the popular vote (as Gore did). GOP won fair and square, I have no qualms about that... but the rhetoric is funny to say the least.

I do not disagree with you character assessment of the man. At this point I am looking at the policies he wants to implement in the first 100 days and I'm hoping for the best. I strongly believe that this country was founded on, and needs, a strong middle class. We need to bring manufacturing and light manufacturing jobs back to America and reduce the tax burden on the middle class. Trump said all the right things that resonate with working class America. Having lived in NYC most of my life and working in the same industry as Trump, I know who he is and still think he is the wrong person saying the right things, but here we are. I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt for now and I am not buying into the doom and gloom that he is the next Hitler or is the antichrist. He is a flawed man who maybe just wants to do the right things for this country. His methods are questionable at best, but you can't argue with the results.

you totally can argue. His companies have underperformed. He's declared bankruptcy 6 times. He's left a trail behind him. The only results you cant argue with is that Trump has done very well for Trump.

Briggs can joke about sexism. When its his daughter assaulted by rich white kid and that kids father says "tough sentence for a little tail" lets see his comments then. I wouldnt wish that on anyone, but he fails to see the connection and there is one. People ask what kind of a culture can we have where this exists? The answer is a Trump culture, where there is no accountability.

I am fine with GOP leadership and I think the on again off again is important. I respect conservative values, small gov and states rights. What Trump brings is a different level. I do wish him well.

I find this article particularly interesting, so I'll just attach it here https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/11/09/trump-won-because-college-educated-americans-are-out-of-touch/?wpisrc=nl_most-draw7&wpmm=1

Trump won because college-educated Americans are out of touch

Higher education is isolated, insular and liberal. Average voters aren't.

As the reality of President-elect Donald Trump settled in very early Wednesday morning, MSNBC’s Chris Hayes summed up an explanation common to many on the left: The Republican nominee pulled ahead thanks to old-fashioned American racism.

But the attempt to make Trump’s victory about racism appears to be at odds with what actually happened on Election Day. Consider the following facts.

Twenty-nine percent of Latinos voted for Trump, per exit polls. Remarkably, despite the near-ubiquitous narrative that Trump would have deep problems with this demographic given his comments and position on immigration, this was a higher percentage of those who voted for GOP nominee Mitt Romney in 2012. Meanwhile, African Americans did not turn out to vote against Trump. In fact, Trump received a higher percentage of African American votes than Romney did.

And while many white voters deeply disliked Trump, they disliked Democrat Hillary Clinton even more. Of those who had negative feelings about both Trump and Clinton, Trump got their votes by a margin of 2 to 1. Votes for Trump seemed to signal a rejection of the norms and values for which Clinton stood more than an outright embrace of Trump. He was viewed unfavorably, for instance, by 61 percent of Wisconsinites, but 1 in 5 in that group voted for him anyway.

The most important divide in this election was not between whites and non-whites. It was between those who are often referred to as “educated” voters and those who are described as “working class” voters.

The reality is that six in 10 Americans do not have a college degree, and they elected Donald Trump. College-educated people didn’t just fail to see this coming — they have struggled to display even a rudimentary understanding of the worldviews of those who voted for Trump. This is an indictment of the monolithic, insulated political culture in the vast majority our colleges and universities.

As a college professor, I know that there are many ways in which college graduates simply know more about the world than those who do not have such degrees. This is especially true — with some exceptions, of course — when it comes to “hard facts” learned in science, history and sociology courses.

But I also know that that those with college degrees — again, with some significant exceptions — don’t necessarily know philosophy or theology. And they have especially paltry knowledge about the foundational role that different philosophical or theological claims play in public thought compared with what is common to college campuses. In my experience, many professors and college students don’t even realize that their views on political issues rely on a particular philosophical or theological stance.

As a college professor, I know that there are many ways in which college graduates simply know more about the world than those who do not have such degrees. This is especially true — with some exceptions, of course — when it comes to “hard facts” learned in science, history and sociology courses.

But I also know that that those with college degrees — again, with some significant exceptions — don’t necessarily know philosophy or theology. And they have especially paltry knowledge about the foundational role that different philosophical or theological claims play in public thought compared with what is common to college campuses. In my experience, many professors and college students don’t even realize that their views on political issues rely on a particular philosophical or theological stance.

Sometimes the college-educated find themselves so unable to understand a particular working-class point of view that they will respond to those perspectives with shocking condescension. Recall that President Obama, in the midst of the 2012 election cycle, suggested that job losses were the reason working-class voters were bitterly clinging “to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them.” The religious themselves, meanwhile, likely do not chalk their faith up to unhappy economic prospects, and they probably find it hard to connect with politicians who seem to assume such.

Thus today’s college graduates are formed by a campus culture that leaves them unable to understand people with unfamiliar or heterodox views on guns, abortion, religion, marriage, gender and privilege. And that same culture leads such educated people to either label those with whom they disagree as bad people or reduce their stated views on these issues as actually being about something else, as in Obama’s case. Most college grads in this culture are simply never forced to engage with or seriously consider professors or texts which could provide a genuine, compelling alternative view.

For decades now, U.S. colleges and universities have quite rightly been trying to become more diverse when it comes to race and gender. But this election highlights the fact that our institutions of higher education should use similar methods to cultivate philosophical, theological and political diversity.

These institutions should consider using quotas in hiring that help faculties and administrations more accurately reflect the wide range of norms and values present in the American people. There should be systemwide attempts to have texts assigned in classes written by people from intellectually underrepresented groups. There should be concerted efforts to protect political minorities from discrimination and marginalization, even if their views are unpopular or uncomfortable to consider.

The goal of such changes would not be to convince students that their political approaches are either correct or incorrect. The goal would instead be educational: to identify and understand the norms, values, first principles, intuitions and stories which have been traditionally underrepresented in higher education. This would better equip college graduates to engage with the world as it is, including with their fellow citizens.

The alternative, a reduction of all disagreement to racism, bigotry and ignorance — in addition to being wrong about its primary source — will simply make the disagreement far more personal, entrenched and vitriolic. And it won’t make liberal values more persuasive to the less educated, as Trump victory demonstrates.

It is time to do the hard work of forging the kind of understanding that moves beyond mere dismissal to actual argument. Today’s election results indicate that our colleges and universities are places where this hard work is particularly necessary.

This is exactly what I meant when I mentioned the dumbing down and re-programming of the American youth for political gain. All part of the liberal plan and it almost worked as we almost elected Hillary Clinton!

Except it didn't work and my faith in America as I know has hopefully been restored

Look, I understand the electoral college is what it is. It's the rule, everybody knew the set up before they decided to run. I have no issue with that. But Trump supporters, understand that more voters wanted Clinton than your guy. So when people start making statements about Dems being out of touch when it was the republican nominee who received fewer votes, I just gotta scratch my head. And this doesn't even factor in the voter suppression tactics that nobody on the Trump side on this thread ever wants to address.

And how Paul Ryan can claim Trump has a mandate is equally baffling.

djsunyc wrote:

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/796900183955095552

ARE YOU F CKING KIDDING ME?

what a f cking loser. lol.

LOL. Trump put the Twitter down now. Hes been doing this for 15 months straight-- hes used to getting stroked by his supporters which fuels his fire.
Hes only had to deal with a few people at his rallies who go the other way--now they're are thousands down below from his suite. It would be awesome if he walked out in his underwear and said STFU or your heading to Chinaaaaaaaa.

GustavBahler wrote:

Welpee wrote:

GustavBahler wrote:Here is what probably is going to happen. GOP and Trump are going to engage in an orgy of deregulation, tax cuts (mostly for the rich), and break unions. Wall Street, the economy, will do well for a couple of years. Trump supporters, just like Reagan supporters, Bush supporters, Clinton supporters, Obama supporters, will cheer that their man has brought America back.

Then the effects of all the deregulation, the decrease in revenue from the tax cuts, will cause great suffering to the poor and middle class. They will argue that gutting social programs, or privatizing them, is the only way to pay for the shortfall. Just like Obama wanted to but Americans from both major parties pushed back hard.

No you say? Its been the MO of almost every administration of both parties for decades now. Dont be fooled again. Deregulation isnt about making things easier for the small business man. More often than not deregulation is structured to keep small businesses from competing with the big ones. It doesn't encourage competition, it stifles it.

Ive heard Trump propose some things Im in favor of, like scrapping the TPP, better relations with Russia, making Nato pay their fair share. They should try single payer health care without the US paying for most of the NATO tab.

Still, many of the things Trump proposes are nothing but failed trickle down economics. If you still believe that after decades of evidence to the contrary that gutting taxes on the rich benefits everyone, seek help immediately.

Here is an example of the games I think Trump is going to engage in. Take the wall for instance, one of the pillars of his candidacy. He claims Mexico will pay for it. Here is how he does it: convince Mexico to publicly agree to pay for it and cut the US a check for say $10 billion. Trump then under the table works out a deal to funnel $15 billion back to Mexico. Trump fulfilled his promise and solidifies the narrative that he gets things done. All it cost the US tax payer is an extra $5 billion, but who cares? All we care about is perception, right?

Smoke and mirrors folks. Whatever it cost to make him look good.

What amazes me about conservatives and the wall is something they never seem factor into their stance. A wall can be used to keep people out, and a wall can be used to keep people in. First a southern wall, then a northern wall, then it looks a lot like the old East Germany. You trust the federal govt that much?

Those walls are not going up in only 8yrs. It's one of the many things Trump had to keep repeating
In order to get elected and it worked.

Any republican who thinks building The wall was priority #1 is delusional. All you have to do is ask border patrol and homeland security for input on better border control and vetting. They will tell you exactly how to do it more effectively.

The problem which they've been vocal about is their hands are tied. The previous administration didnt want an impenetrable border for their own political gain. That's why you have so many people living here who feel empowered to opening hate America.

Again there plan almost worked. If only they elected a slightly better candidate. Maybe Biden. Certainly not Bernie Sanders who's primary supporters are millennials and younger. Many of which don't bother to vote or have any clue what socialism/communism and it's ramifications even mean. Most minority's wanted Hillary from day one. Very mid to upper class Americans would ever vote for a socialist. I'm shocked so many here would've.

Russia: "There were contacts" with Donald Trump's campaign before election

Last Updated Nov 10, 2016 3:51 PM EST

MOSCOW -- A top Russian diplomat and Vladimir Putin’s spokesman said Thursday that Russian experts were in contact with some members of President-elect Donald Trump’s staff during the presidential campaign, a period in which the United States accused Russia of hacking into Democratic Party email systems.

A spokeswoman for Trump denied the assertion, but it raised the ongoing suspicions about the president-elect’s relationship with Putin’s government that had dogged his campaign with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Russia is hopeful that a Trump presidency will herald improved relations with the United States. But, in a sign of the cold realism that Putin is known for, Moscow is not betting on an immediate drastic turnaround in the strained relationship.

And while Trump himself has said he wants to be friends with Russia and join forces in the fight against terrorism, he has outlined few specifics as to how he would go about it. President Obama began his presidency with a similar goal, only to see progress unravel over the conflicts in Ukraine and Syria.