How Donald Trump's election as U.S. President could affect Apple

1234568

Comments

  • Reply 141 of 163
    mtbnut said:
    Well, to be clear, where the electors have the power to decide (electors can ignore the state's will, if you will). Clinton won the popular vote.
    Enough with popular vote comments.  We can't actually know what the popular vote was because many precincts never open the mail in ballots they receive if the margin of victory for the winner is greater than the received ballots.
    ibill
  • Reply 142 of 163
    svanthem said:
    misogynistic, bigoted, racist, climate-denying, thin-skinned birther
    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA


    apple ][roake
  • Reply 143 of 163
    schlack said:
    I am ashamed of my country. That little thing called democracy elected Hitler, elected Hamas, and made slavery legal for nearly one hundred years. Don't think that it being the will of the people, makes the evil of Trump and his agenda justifiable. Americans who voted for Trump will have to live with their choice. Let's just hope America is around in 4 years and that elections take place.
    It's BS comments like this that are simply ridiculous.  Just blatantly, stupidly moronic.

    Obama won in 2008.  Did the reigns of power pass to him peacefully?  Yes, they did.  And he will hand them to Trump in the same manner.  When Trump is done in 4 or 8 years, he'll do the same thing.  I voted for Trump and I'll gladly live with that choice.  If I don't like how he performs as president, I'll gladly vote for someone else in 4 years.  You should to.  Other than that, stop your whining.
    nolamacguyroake
  • Reply 144 of 163
    dysamoria said:

    wizard69 said:
    fpplan said:
    Comments from trump fans prove they tend to be nothing but unintelligent, angry people who get all their opinions and information from an echo chamber of internet memes.
    Oh really? All the violent protests and garbage on the media is a positive reflection on the Democrats. Frankly I've seen far more hostility from the left this election than any time in the past. Why? Probably because the failure of their policies have been observed by the general electorate as BS.
    What "violent protests"?
    DNC paid professional trouble  makers 1500 dollars to go and create trouble at trump rallies.

    Watch this, because liberals has difficulty understanding even simple things.

    http://heavy.com/news/2016/10/democrats-incite-start-violence-at-trump-rallies-video-violent-protests-agitator-dnc-democracy-partners-scott-foval-james-okeefe-veritas-hoax-truth/
  • Reply 145 of 163
    512ke512ke Posts: 782member
    Will the Trump Presidency help or harm Apple?

    Who knows? Campaign promises are just that... But here are some PERSONAL predictions:

    1) Trump said, “I think we’re going to get things coming. We’re going to get Apple to start building their damn computers and things in this country instead of in other countries.”

    I call b.s. on this one. You CAN'T FORCE APPLE to bring its manufacturing to the USA because Apple doesn't manufacture anything. The company doesn't have any factories. They outsource manufacturing all their components. The US Govt is not going to force Apple to change its business model and start building iPhone factories in Kentucky. Nor does the USA have the necessary manufacturing expertise any more to create viable iPhone factories. Therefore I predict ZERO EFFECT ON APPLE.

    2) Cash repatriation. Incentivize Apple to bring the money back to the USA. Apple already has the cash. Whether Apple keeps it in the US is important for the US, but not for Apple in a *hugely important way.  MINOR POSITIVE EFFECT.

    3) Lowered corporate taxes. This also won't make a big splash from Apple's POV. Apple already pays low corporate taxes. The company doesn't care who they write the check to. ZERO EFFECT ON APPLE.

    4) Forcing Apple to open its encryption. Apple's phones would be less valuable from a privacy POV to consumers. Potentially NEGATIVE EFFECT.

    5) Vengeance. Trump has vowed to jail Hillary. Tim Cook not only supported Hillary, he was on her list of potential running mates. Potentially NEGATIVE EFFECT.

    6) Anti globalization. 
    If Trump backs out of TRADE DEALS with China or starts a so-called trade war, Apple's sales will suffer. POSSIBLY ENORMOUS NEGATIVE EFFECT.

    7) Trump has vowed to double the USA's economic growth. POSSIBLY LARGE POSITIVE EFFECT if he succeeds. But it won't make up for 6) above in magnitude if global trade shrinks.

    8) Renewable energy. Trump may end incentives and end up costing Apple money. In the spirit of a wild uneducated guess, I would say, NEGATIVE EFFECT.

    Trump seems to use a Samsung Galaxy phone, by the way, although some of his staff tweeted from an iPhone.

    That is all lol. Thanks for reading my purely speculative and highly subjective analysis lol.
    edited November 2016 anantksundaramdasanman69raz0r
  • Reply 146 of 163
    dysamoria said:

    Outlawing abortions-- not going to impact me!
    Congratulations on your absolute antipathy for women everywhere.
    I could see your antipathy towards weakest and those who do not have voice in the society, unborn.
    tallest skil
  • Reply 147 of 163
    512ke said:
    Will the Trump Presidency help or harm Apple?

    Who knows? Campaign promises are just that... But here are some PERSONAL predictions:

    1) Trump said, “I think we’re going to get things coming. We’re going to get Apple to start building their damn computers and things in this country instead of in other countries.”

    I call b.s. on this one. You CAN'T FORCE APPLE to bring its manufacturing to the USA because Apple doesn't manufacture anything. The company doesn't have any factories. They outsource manufacturing all their components. The US Govt is not going to force Apple to change its business model and start building iPhone factories in Kentucky. Nor does the USA have the necessary manufacturing expertise any more to create viable iPhone factories. Therefore I predict ZERO EFFECT ON APPLE.

    2) Cash repatriation. Incentivize Apple to bring the money back to the USA. Apple already has the cash. Whether Apple keeps it in the US is important for the US, but not for Apple in a *hugely important way.  MINOR POSITIVE EFFECT.

    3) Lowered corporate taxes. This also won't make a big splash from Apple's POV. Apple already pays low corporate taxes. The company doesn't care who they write the check to. ZERO EFFECT ON APPLE.

    4) Forcing Apple to open its encryption. Apple's phones would be less valuable from a privacy POV to consumers. Potentially NEGATIVE EFFECT.

    5) Vengeance. Trump has vowed to jail Hillary. Tim Cook not only supported Hillary, he was on her list of potential running mates. Potentially NEGATIVE EFFECT.

    6) Anti globalization. If Trump backs out of TRADE DEALS with China or starts a so-called trade war, Apple's sales will suffer. POSSIBLY ENORMOUS NEGATIVE EFFECT.

    7) Trump has vowed to double the USA's economic growth. POSSIBLY LARGE POSITIVE EFFECT if he succeeds. But it won't make up for 6) above in magnitude if global trade shrinks.

    8) Renewable energy. Trump may end incentives and end up costing Apple money. In the spirit of a wild uneducated guess, I would say, NEGATIVE EFFECT.

    Trump seems to use a Samsung Galaxy phone, by the way, although some of his staff tweeted from an iPhone.

    That is all lol. Thanks for reading my purely speculative and highly subjective analysis lol.
    Stop, stop. You're making too much sense.... it's getting in the way of all the epithets and invectives flying back and forth...
    mattinoz
  • Reply 148 of 163
    dysamoria said:
    securtis said:
    fpplan said:
    Comments from trump fans prove they tend to be nothing but unintelligent, angry people who get all their opinions and information from an echo chamber of internet memes.
    Obviously, lots of flyover country and the rust belt felt quite alienated by the political machine. Hillary was more of the same, nothing exciting, just like a buick car. At least with trump, he was unique and gave them something to believe in. Gary Johnson may/may not have acted as Ralph Nader II and siphoned some votes from Hillary.
    It is far more likely that Johnson got votes that might've otherwise gone to Trump. Libertarians tend to side with republicans more than democrats.
    I agree.
    tallest skil
  • Reply 149 of 163
    "being targeted by the European Commission, looking for ways to grab corporate cash at the expense of those companies' investors and employees" Or in other words, claw back the tax dodged by massive corporations using sweetheart deals in low tax countries. Like the way Ireland gets the tax from profits from the UK. Tim calls this political crap. Well the US just crapped on itself big time on Tuesday.
    singularity
  • Reply 150 of 163
    Liberals, Hollywood elite, and CNN one week ago: "It's imperative for the healing of our country for Trump supporters to graciously accept the legitimacy of the election."

    Today: <rage>

    I agreed with CNN when they pushed for togetherness and moving forward last week. I still do. Let's move forward like adults.
    tallest skilSpamSandwichibillgatorguy
  • Reply 151 of 163
    bugsnw said:
    Today: <rage>
    Soros has started funding groups to delegitimize the Electoral College. Oh, and of course we have everyone from random citizens to celebrities, public officials, and media employees calling for assassination. Which, of course, is a crime.


    edited November 2016 SpamSandwich
  • Reply 152 of 163
    Possibly the worst, misinformed article that I've ever read on appleinsider. Stick to technology.
    tallest skilroake
  • Reply 153 of 163
    canukstorm: "There's this little thing called a democracy where the people have the power to decide who leads the country and who doesn't. And they have spoken." Yeah, they spoke. And the majority of the popular vote went to Hillary Clinton (at last count over 400,000 votes more). The only reason Trump won was because of the antiquated Electoral College system. So there's your "little thing called a democracy."
    edited November 2016 singularity
  • Reply 154 of 163
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,980member
    dhuff said:
    canukstorm: "There's this little thing called a democracy where the people have the power to decide who leads the country and who doesn't. And they have spoken." Yeah, they spoke. And the majority of the popular vote went to Hillary Clinton (at last count over 400,000 votes more). The only reason Trump won was because of the antiquated Electoral College system. So there's your "little thing called a democracy."
    I don't have a problem with the electoral college. Trump won many more states than Hillary, and people in land locked states should not always be subjected to the will of the coastal elites. I did not vote for Trump but I understand why people did,and I'm hoping he'll change the culture in DC for the better. 
  • Reply 155 of 163
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,988member
    dhuff said:
    canukstorm: "There's this little thing called a democracy where the people have the power to decide who leads the country and who doesn't. And they have spoken." Yeah, they spoke. And the majority of the popular vote went to Hillary Clinton (at last count over 400,000 votes more). The only reason Trump won was because of the antiquated Electoral College system. So there's your "little thing called a democracy."
    I don't have a problem with the electoral college. Trump won many more states than Hillary, and people in land locked states should not always be subjected to the will of the coastal elites. I did not vote for Trump but I understand why people did,and I'm hoping he'll change the culture in DC for the better. 
    1) The EC isn't about landlocked v coastal.

    2) The EC is flawed, because a state like CA has its per person vote only have 1/3rd the value of votes from states like Montana. With over a 7% failure rating for the EC compared to the popular vote, I'd like to see an Amendment that can help resolve some of its inherent flaws. A couple simple ideas are:

    • EC votes are to be split up as evenly as possible within a state. That means no more "all or nothing" for states. This means that all states are important, not just swing states. In CA, of the 55 EC votes to be cast on 19-DEC-2017, only 34 would go to Clinton, and in FL, 14 would go to Clinton. Of the 84 for those 2 states, that's 48 for Clinton and the remaining 36 going to Trump (although I might be wrong on what Trump gets—Johnson may actually get one in CA because 55 EC votes means that each is worth 1.82%). This is not a perfect system since the number of EC votes will stay affect the value that each voters has in a state, but no longer will a vote be useless. For example, in CA, if you supported Trump, you'd go in knowing that your vote is pointless with only 1/3 of the people supporting him. With my proposal, those votes become important which would likely lead to an increase in voter turnout.
    • If the popular and EC votes aren't congruent—as it's now happened 4 times—then additional steps are to be taken to make sure the EC voters want to vote the way of their state (the popular vote) or cast a vote they believe is best for the country. Let's remember the EC was created to prevent a bunch of dumb dumbs from overpowering the  system in the slave states. The founding fathers were skeptical of the average person's ability to exercise wise political judgment. That said, I think that if the EC voters were to do the right thing and give the votes to another candidate for this election, the uniqueness of this action without any setup to indicate this was a new option (even though the option exists already) could tear the fabric of this country apart. It may be the right thing for an individual's conscience, but the long-term effect would be disastrous, so the country—and the world—is going to have to endure the most unqualified US president we've ever seen. On the bright side, Germany eventually recovered and hopefully we've built well enough that 4 years with a climate change denier appointed by Trump to deal with the environment won't create long lasting issues that become unreasonably costly or impossible to resolve down the road.
    • Addendum: Make that Tuesday a holiday, move the voting to a weekend, and/or have multiple days in which to cast a vote. Also, make voting for different precincts more fair. Having poor neighborhoods, which tend to vote Democratic, result in 5 hours of waiting in line, while a rich neighborhoods are in out in 5 minutes, isn't a fair and just system, especially when those poor districts are the ones where people are more likely to be hourly employees and where draconian voter ID laws are enforced.

    3) So far, he's already backed away from all those big promises he made people during the election… and that's a good thing for humanity, but it's surely going to piss off his base who oddly seem to believe he's against cronyism and gov't. despite having been taking advantage of it his entire adult life. "Hell change the culture in DC" LOL
    edited November 2016 singularitydasanman69dhuffpropod
  • Reply 156 of 163
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,448member
    dhuff said:
    canukstorm: "There's this little thing called a democracy where the people have the power to decide who leads the country and who doesn't. And they have spoken." Yeah, they spoke. And the majority of the popular vote went to Hillary Clinton (at last count over 400,000 votes more). The only reason Trump won was because of the antiquated Electoral College system. So there's your "little thing called a democracy."
    The electoral collage is part of the checks and balances of power. If a truly flawed candidate is elected by the general population, or by corruption in individual states, the electoral college can vote against the popular vote to protect the nation. Only once has a major block of electors used this power, but it's there none the less. Take that away and a misguided population can undermine democracy itself. And keep in mind Clinton has not won the popular vote yet, only leads in the count. If she loses even by 10 votes, and Trump truly flawed such that he should not be given the reigns of power, the electoral college is all that stands between making him the most powerful leader in the world, and not.

    More practically, it also helps balance out the needs of smaller states with lower populations. If an anti agriculture president were elected by states without important agricultural infrastructures, but much larger populations, it would be devastating for the economies of the agricultural states, something which has no impact on the states that chose the president, but important to the nation as a whole. This is the same reason every state has equal representation in the senate regardless of population.
    edited November 2016 tallest skil
  • Reply 157 of 163
    dhuff said:
    The only reason Trump won was because of the antiquated Electoral College system. So there's your "little thing called a democracy.”
    The US isn’t a democracy. Get the fuck over it. The Electoral College is going nowhere. It exists for a reason. And when the fake votes are removed by the current court cases, Trump will have won the popular vote anyway.


    SpamSandwich
  • Reply 158 of 163
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,988member
    dhuff said:
    The only reason Trump won was because of the antiquated Electoral College system. So there's your "little thing called a democracy.”
    The US isn’t a democracy. Get the fuck over it. The Electoral College is going nowhere. It exists for a reason. And when the fake votes are removed by the current court cases, Trump will have won the popular vote anyway.
    Trump won, and without getting the most votes, and you're still crying that "it'a rigged!" in her favour. Amazing.
    edited November 2016 singularitydhuffmattinozpropod
  • Reply 159 of 163
    crowleycrowley Posts: 5,935member
  • Reply 160 of 163
    crowley said:
    Sure, he was wrong about it then. He's a businessman, not a student of Constitutional history like Tom Woods or Ron Paul or even Ted Cruz. Then again, the office of the President and members of Congress were all meant to be filled by regular Americans, not appointed for a lifetime politicians.
    edited November 2016 tallest skilgatorguy
This discussion has been closed.