Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
The Democrats did their part to elect Trump, they could easily have chosen a decent candidate. Trump should have been an easy candidate to defeat. Granted my candidate couldn't get the job done (I don't think we even got 5%) some other ideas for next election, do not push people so hard that their only response is to push back. Watching the condescension and arrogance from the left it seemed they were determined to lose what should have been an easy election. Americans are not rejecting the idea of a woman president, but it should have been obvious that it did not want THAT woman. The behavior from the left after their defeat has been equally disgraceful, you don't see us Libertarians out there acting like hooligans.
The silver lining would have been if a third party finally got enough votes to get to wear grown up clothes but I don't even think that happened. Turns out that voting for a third party wouldn't have changed much of anything but it would have done a lot for that third party.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/11 01:09:53
Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
But please try to understand where I'm coming from when I say this statement "The Pro-Trump voters (at least what I've experinced) have range from racist donkey-caves to people who just don't know any better." is . . . disappointing.
You're cherry picking the statement, disconnecting it from the following statement that clarifies the plainly intended meaning.
Yes. Not only can you read things wrong, you can read them wrong and continue to repeat your wrong reading in the face of multiple posters pointing out to you that you read it wrong.
And what's really disappointing is that its not disappointing at all.
But please try to understand where I'm coming from when I say this statement "The Pro-Trump voters (at least what I've experinced) have range from racist donkey-caves to people who just don't know any better." is . . . disappointing.
That's the thing though. Recall Bob, from my example. Just like him trump voters not that are voting out of hate must still either:
A) Be ignorant of his racist positions.
B) Not care about his racist positions enough to be turned off voting for him.
There is really no other option. If they knew about his positions and care about them, they wouldn't vote for him. You cannot both comprehend trump's racism and care about it while still voting for him. The same holds true for the stances he's championed on other disadvantaged groups during his campaign. You must either not know about, or simply not care about it enough to sway your thoughts.
I'd also like to add I should clarify when I saw racist I should probably say "Very Racist" or "Actively Racist". Truth is we're all racist to some extent. Me, you, Trump voters, Trump haters all of us. Tribalism is built into the human soul. You know who you are, what group you're in and who isn't in it. That will always, always introduce natural biases. How cognizant of and guarded against one's own biases one is, varies quite a bit. I'd wager the "I voted for trump but I'm not racist crowd" is on average just a bit less strong in those areas than the "I like a lot of what he's saying, but I just can't vote for him" crowd is.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2016/11/11 01:19:08
Ahtman wrote: Between this and the Bundy acquittal the worst elements in the country have been emboldened and it is going to take people of all stripes from all sides that aren't jackasses to deal with this.
They are the country. What 2016 says is that the racists and the sexists will rule, the worst ingrates will applaud them and create the fantasies needed to proclaim their moral superiority, and everyone else will let them. Either by bemoaning their piss poor choices like entitled brats, cognitive dissonance, desperation, or rose tinted glasses we've learned that when faced with a real hard choice people would rather stay home and let our worst demons rule.
The dream is a lie. There's no point pretending otherwise anymore.
The dream isn't a lie just because fewer people than you thought share the same version of the dream as you. Freedom is scary freedom means people won't always fall in line the way you might want them to do. Freedom means it's just as easy to make a bad decision as a good one. Given the Slate of candidates this year tens of millions of eligible voters opted for one of the above and stayed home. That was their choice and their choice is just as valid as your choice or my choice. That's not bad that's actually great. It shows that there are millions of people out there that have decided that they won't play the game under somebody else's arbitrary rules. Nobody earned the votes of those that abstained and that sends a strong message to the Parties to DO BETTER. People won't just turn out and vote the lesser of two evils just because. Both Parties know it's unlikely that such low numbers of votes can consistently win elections so they need to do better and there are millions of voters waiting for those better candidates. Those voters didn't go anywhere they were right here 4 years ago and if either Party gets its gak together they'll show up again.
The dream would die if everyone kept showing up and eating the turd sandwiches every 4 years holding their noses and willingly lying to themselves that the turd sandwich didn't stink. That's when the dream dies when nobody cares about standards anymore. Don't let the glass be half full, that's not a truth it's just a state of mind.
The majority has spoken, we wanted clinton, but thanks to gerrymandering and the electoral college trump won. Rigged elections indeed.
The majority did not speak. 90 million voters did not vote this year.
From the Business Insider: "While results were still trickling in, and the overall turnout could end up being higher, that preliminary total suggests that only 57% of eligible voters actually voted this year."
Thus, the vast majority of the populace voted against both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, neither won a majority vote. There is a winner of the majority who voted, but not a majority.
Clearly, the majority of Americans did not want her to be president, or else they would have voted for her (I didn't vote for either Clinton or Trump, but I did vote).
We can say that of Americans who voted, the majority voted for Clinton.
We can say that at the very least given the data we have fewer people wanted a trump presidency than a Clinton presidency.
Trump's win is most certainly an artifact of the electoral system more than it is the will of people. How much more is a subjective matter.
Some Americans voiced their opinion on who should be president by voting. Some said trump. Some said Clinton. The system with went with the minority opinion on the matter.
For better or for worse, that's what it is.
We can't say that Clinton won the popular vote until all ballots have been counted and official final totals have been declared and cerified by the states.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/11 01:21:52
thekingofkings wrote: The Democrats did their part to elect Trump, they could easily have chosen a decent candidate. Trump should have been an easy candidate to defeat. Granted my candidate couldn't get the job done (I don't think we even got 5%) some other ideas for next election, do not push people so hard that their only response is to push back. Watching the condescension and arrogance from the left it seemed they were determined to lose what should have been an easy election. Americans are not rejecting the idea of a woman president, but it should have been obvious that it did not want THAT woman. The behavior from the left after their defeat has been equally disgraceful, you don't see us Libertarians out there acting like hooligans.
Hrm, as much as I find myself leaning libertarian in theory, this is the same party that had a candidate for party chair run around naked on camera at the Libertarian party convention. If we're talking about acting like hooligans...
(it was pretty funny though).
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
The dream isn't a lie just because fewer people than you thought share the same version of the dream as you. Freedom is scary freedom means people won't always fall in line the way you might want them to do. Freedom means it's just as easy to make a bad decision as a good one. Given the Slate of candidates this year tens of millions of eligible voters opted for one of the above and stayed home. That was their choice and their choice is just as valid as your choice or my choice. That's not bad that's actually great. It shows that there are millions of people out there that have decided that they won't play the game under somebody else's arbitrary rules. Nobody earned the votes of those that abstained and that sends a strong message to the Parties to DO BETTER. People won't just turn out and vote the lesser of two evils just because. Both Parties know it's unlikely that such low numbers of votes can consistently win elections so they need to do better and there are millions of voters waiting for those better candidates. Those voters didn't go anywhere they were right here 4 years ago and if either Party gets its gak together they'll show up again.
The dream would die if everyone kept showing up and eating the turd sandwiches every 4 years holding their noses and willingly lying to themselves that the turd sandwich didn't stink. That's when the dream dies when nobody cares about standards anymore. Don't let the glass be half full, that's not a truth it's just a state of mind.
thekingofkings wrote: The Democrats did their part to elect Trump, they could easily have chosen a decent candidate. Trump should have been an easy candidate to defeat. Granted my candidate couldn't get the job done (I don't think we even got 5%) some other ideas for next election, do not push people so hard that their only response is to push back. Watching the condescension and arrogance from the left it seemed they were determined to lose what should have been an easy election. Americans are not rejecting the idea of a woman president, but it should have been obvious that it did not want THAT woman. The behavior from the left after their defeat has been equally disgraceful, you don't see us Libertarians out there acting like hooligans.
Hrm, as much as I find myself leaning libertarian in theory, this is the same party that had a candidate for party chair run around naked on camera at the Libertarian party convention. If we're talking about acting like hooligans...
(it was pretty funny though).
Yes, we really do have some whackadoodles, BUT...It was at our convention, sooooo...its our party we will wear pants only if we want to
So, I learned yesterday that Trump wants to end common core in education. As an education major who left the field in disgust from CC and NCLB, I can honestly say this is a huge check-mark in Trump's favor, if he can pull it off!
Reality is a nice place to visit, but I'd hate to live there.
Manchu wrote:I'm a Catholic. We eat our God.
Due to work, I can usually only ship any sales or trades out on Saturday morning. Please trade/purchase with this in mind.
But please try to understand where I'm coming from when I say this statement "The Pro-Trump voters (at least what I've experinced) have range from racist donkey-caves to people who just don't know any better." is . . . disappointing.
That's the thing though. Recall Bob, from my example. Just like him trump voters not that are voting out of hate must still either:
A) Be ignorant of his racist positions. B) Not care about his racist positions enough to be turned off voting for him.
There is really no other option. If they knew about his positions and care about them, they wouldn't vote for him. You cannot both comprehend trump's racism and care about it while still voting for him. The same holds true for the stances he's championed on other disadvantaged groups during his campaign. You must either not know about, or simply not care about it enough to sway your thoughts.
I'd also like to add I should clarify when I saw racist I should probably say "Very Racist" or "Actively Racist". Truth is we're all racist to some extent. Me, you, Trump voters, Trump haters all of us. Tribalism is built into the human soul. You know who you are, what group you're in and who isn't in it. That will always, always introduce natural biases. How cognizant of and guarded against one's own biases one is, varies quite a bit. I'd wager the "I voted for trump but I'm not racist crowd" is on average just a bit less strong in those areas than the "I like a lot of what he's saying, but I just can't vote for him" crowd is.
The quote from earlier in the thread that resonates with me is something like: "The media took his statement's literally, and didn't take him seriously. But those who voted for him didn't take what he's saying literally, but took him seriously." I honestly think much of what he said is "for effect". I could be flat wrong, but my hope is that I'm not.
But please try to understand where I'm coming from when I say this statement "The Pro-Trump voters (at least what I've experinced) have range from racist donkey-caves to people who just don't know any better." is . . . disappointing.
You're cherry picking the statement, disconnecting it from the following statement that clarifies the plainly intended meaning.
Yes. Not only can you read things wrong, you can read them wrong and continue to repeat your wrong reading in the face of multiple posters pointing out to you that you read it wrong.
And what's really disappointing is that its not disappointing at all.
I'm not sure that I am, the post was:
I do think it's imporatn to recoginize the differnce between pro-trump and anti-hillary. The Pro-Trump voters (at least what I've experinced) have range from racist donkey-caves to people who just don't know any better. The anti-hillary crowd (a much, much bigger group) is all sorts. It still doesn't reflect great on them, but it's not "THEY ARE ALL LITERALY MEMBERS OF THE KKK AND THE AMERICAN NAZI PARTY!!one!!1!"
From my reading (and if I am getting this wrong, please explain) I read this:
"Votes for Trump are either Pro-Trump or anti Hillary. Pro Trump voters (in my experience) are [bigots or ignorant]. The anti-Hillary crowd is [large and diverse], and voting for Trump doesn't reflect well on them. But not [all Trump voters] literally bigots."
But the statement is still implying that everyone who is "pro-Trump" (not voted-for, but actually pro-Trump) have illegitimate reasons.
Sorry for dragging this out everybody. I'm looking for clarity.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/11/11 02:30:30
Dont feel bad, you should hear the lefties turning on us Libertarians like they had a right to our vote and we were unprincipled, immoral bigots for following our candidate and not theirs. The biggest thing I took away from this is despite how bad trump is, hillary was worse, or at the very least, her minions certainly were.
If Clinton had won, I doubt that Trump supporters would be burning and rioting the way we see Clinton supporters doing now because she lost. Are the desires to destroy, loot, shoot police officers, and assault people in the street the prime motivators behind Clinton's supporters? Of course not, most are intelligent, caring people, the same as most who support Trump, but the liberal hyperbole is astounding In the way it paints Trump supporters.
It was her dirty laundry and missteps as Secretary of State that kept me and many like me from voting for her. Her lack of foresight was instrumental in turning Lybia into a warzone, further destabilizing the Middle East.
Bailing on her supporters without a word on Tuesday night spoke volumes on what kind of a leader she would have been. A real leader would have spoken to her supporters, offering thanks, encouragement, and comfort in what was the obviously distressed group's darkest hour. Instead, she chose to slink out the back door like a petulant child and have an underling tell those who put their faith in her to go home. Her hubris and that of the DNC destroyed her election.
The drum about the, "basket of deplorables", was beaten again and again, painting Trump's supporters as racists, homophobes, and any other negative thing that could be dredged from the imagination. All the while this was going on, the fact that Clinton's camp contained many deplorables of it's own was seemingly being excused. This is what drove many that I know who voted for Trump or some other candidate to reject Clinton.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/11 01:52:23
Relapse wrote: If Clinton had won, I doubt that Trump supporters would be burning and rioting the way we see Clinton supporters doing now because she lost. Are the desires to destroy, loot, shoot police officers, and assault people in the street the prime motivators behind Clinton's supporters? Of course not, most are intelligent, caring people, the same as most who support Trump, but the liberal hyperbole is astounding In the way it paints Trump supporters.
It was her dirty laundry and missteps as Secretary of State that kept me and many like me from voting for her. Her lack of foresight was instrumental in turning Lybia into a warzone, further destabilizing the Middle East.
Bailing on her supporters without a word on Tuesday night spoke volumes on what kind of a leader she would have been. A real leader would have spoken to her supporters, offering thanks, encouragement, and comfort in what was the obviously distressed group's darkest hour. Instead, she chose to slink out the back door like a petulant child and have an underling tell those who put their faith in her to go home. Her hubris and that of the DNC destroyed her election.
The drum about the, "basket of deplorables", was beaten again and again, painting Trump's supporters as racists, homophobes, and any other negative thing that could be dredged from the imagination. All the while this was going on, the fact that Clinton's camp contained many deplorables of it's own was seemingly being excused. This is what drove many that I know who voted for Trump or some other candidate to reject Clinton.
This in a nutshell, like I said earlier, I am a Libertarian and worked for my candidate. It was not Trump supporters insulting and attacking us, it was the "tolerant and peaceful" liberals. We just sat in disbelief that all this "Trump is so terrible" stuff (which is not entirely inaccurate imo) being spouted by the very people doing the exact same thing. Hillary was not some great and clean candidate here, despite alot of folks wanting it to be so. Lesser of two evils is a very legit reason to vote for Trump (but wish you guys would have voted for us)
timetowaste85 wrote: So, I learned yesterday that Trump wants to end common core in education. As an education major who left the field in disgust from CC and NCLB, I can honestly say this is a huge check-mark in Trump's favor, if he can pull it off!
So you are not in favor of states picking their own standards?
timetowaste85 wrote: So, I learned yesterday that Trump wants to end common core in education. As an education major who left the field in disgust from CC and NCLB, I can honestly say this is a huge check-mark in Trump's favor, if he can pull it off!
So you are not in favor of states picking their own standards?
I'm 100% in favor of removing the biggest mistake ever made in the world of education. And if Trump does that, I'll fully support him.
Reality is a nice place to visit, but I'd hate to live there.
Manchu wrote:I'm a Catholic. We eat our God.
Due to work, I can usually only ship any sales or trades out on Saturday morning. Please trade/purchase with this in mind.
timetowaste85 wrote: So, I learned yesterday that Trump wants to end common core in education. As an education major who left the field in disgust from CC and NCLB, I can honestly say this is a huge check-mark in Trump's favor, if he can pull it off!
So you are not in favor of states picking their own standards?
I'm 100% in favor of removing the biggest mistake ever made in the world of education. And if Trump does that, I'll fully support him.
So you are not in favor of states picking their own standards?
Even though the federal government got you NCLB you now want the federal government to pick the standards?
Relapse wrote: If Clinton had won, I doubt that Trump supporters would be burning and rioting the way we see Clinton supporters doing now because she lost. Are the desires to destroy, loot, shoot police officers, and assault people in the street the prime motivators behind Clinton's supporters? Of course not, most are intelligent, caring people, the same as most who support Trump, but the liberal hyperbole is astounding In the way it paints Trump supporters.
It was her dirty laundry and missteps as Secretary of State that kept me and many like me from voting for her. Her lack of foresight was instrumental in turning Lybia into a warzone, further destabilizing the Middle East.
Bailing on her supporters without a word on Tuesday night spoke volumes on what kind of a leader she would have been. A real leader would have spoken to her supporters, offering thanks, encouragement, and comfort in what was the obviously distressed group's darkest hour. Instead, she chose to slink out the back door like a petulant child and have an underling tell those who put their faith in her to go home. Her hubris and that of the DNC destroyed her election.
The drum about the, "basket of deplorables", was beaten again and again, painting Trump's supporters as racists, homophobes, and any other negative thing that could be dredged from the imagination. All the while this was going on, the fact that Clinton's camp contained many deplorables of it's own was seemingly being excused. This is what drove many that I know who voted for Trump or some other candidate to reject Clinton.
well burning down churches does give the impression of being racists you know. campaigning on repealing marriage equality comes off as homophobic. bragging about sexually assaulting women comes off as a sexist and criminal.
And you're saying if it wasn't for those damn liberals clinton would have won? because they made your friends vote for trump? Not because trump is worthy of their votes, but because liberals hurt their feelings LOL! allow me to quote trump on what I think of them "they're weak"
Relapse wrote: If Clinton had won, I doubt that Trump supporters would be burning and rioting the way we see Clinton supporters doing now because she lost. Are the desires to destroy, loot, shoot police officers, and assault people in the street the prime motivators behind Clinton's supporters? Of course not, most are intelligent, caring people, the same as most who support Trump, but the liberal hyperbole is astounding In the way it paints Trump supporters.
It was her dirty laundry and missteps as Secretary of State that kept me and many like me from voting for her. Her lack of foresight was instrumental in turning Lybia into a warzone, further destabilizing the Middle East.
Bailing on her supporters without a word on Tuesday night spoke volumes on what kind of a leader she would have been. A real leader would have spoken to her supporters, offering thanks, encouragement, and comfort in what was the obviously distressed group's darkest hour. Instead, she chose to slink out the back door like a petulant child and have an underling tell those who put their faith in her to go home. Her hubris and that of the DNC destroyed her election.
The drum about the, "basket of deplorables", was beaten again and again, painting Trump's supporters as racists, homophobes, and any other negative thing that could be dredged from the imagination. All the while this was going on, the fact that Clinton's camp contained many deplorables of it's own was seemingly being excused. This is what drove many that I know who voted for Trump or some other candidate to reject Clinton.
well burning down churches does give the impression of being racists you know. campaigning on repealing marriage equality comes off as homophobic. bragging about sexually assaulting women comes off as a sexist and criminal.
And you're saying if it wasn't for those damn liberals clinton would have won? because they made your friends vote for trump? Not because trump is worthy of their votes, but because liberals hurt their feelings LOL! allow me to quote trump on what I think of them "they're weak"
Clinton and her supporters had enough equal, if not more, negativity about them than Trump apparently did. For many it was the pick of the lesser of two evils and nothing more.
The dream isn't a lie just because fewer people than you thought share the same version of the dream as you. Freedom is scary freedom means people won't always fall in line the way you might want them to do. Freedom means it's just as easy to make a bad decision as a good one. Given the Slate of candidates this year tens of millions of eligible voters opted for one of the above and stayed home. That was their choice and their choice is just as valid as your choice or my choice. That's not bad that's actually great. It shows that there are millions of people out there that have decided that they won't play the game under somebody else's arbitrary rules. Nobody earned the votes of those that abstained and that sends a strong message to the Parties to DO BETTER. People won't just turn out and vote the lesser of two evils just because. Both Parties know it's unlikely that such low numbers of votes can consistently win elections so they need to do better and there are millions of voters waiting for those better candidates. Those voters didn't go anywhere they were right here 4 years ago and if either Party gets its gak together they'll show up again.
The dream would die if everyone kept showing up and eating the turd sandwiches every 4 years holding their noses and willingly lying to themselves that the turd sandwich didn't stink. That's when the dream dies when nobody cares about standards anymore. Don't let the glass be half full, that's not a truth it's just a state of mind.
Case and point.
Your viewpoint that that people choosing not to vote for Hillary is some kind of indictment on people refusing to make the "hard choice" of voting for the candidate that was best in your subjective opinion even though those abstaining voters found her to be an unpalatable candidate isn't the only valid viewpoint. We're all free to think as we will and you're welcome to your broken America fraught with weak willed apathetic people and broken dreams and I honestly hope it brings you serenity and happens but it sounds like a rather dreary and unhealthy place.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/11 02:28:33
timetowaste85 wrote: So, I learned yesterday that Trump wants to end common core in education. As an education major who left the field in disgust from CC and NCLB, I can honestly say this is a huge check-mark in Trump's favor, if he can pull it off!
I agree, the thing is it's a state thing, not a federal thing . It needs to go, but can only be done at that state level.
Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
kronk wrote: Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
sebster wrote: Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens
BaronIveagh wrote: Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace.
Is everyone forgetting about all the talk about a rigged election and not accepting the results if Trump didn't win? Do you really believe that the people chanting 'lock her up' would have gracefully accepted defeat?
We were going to have angry people doing angry things no matter who won.
timetowaste85 wrote: So, I learned yesterday that Trump wants to end common core in education. As an education major who left the field in disgust from CC and NCLB, I can honestly say this is a huge check-mark in Trump's favor, if he can pull it off!
I agree, the thing is it's a state thing, not a federal thing . It needs to go, but can only be done at that state level.
IMHO, I think there needs to be some kind of... I dunno, benchmarks? in regards to education that are held as standard across the country. The reason I say this is because we can see clearly how awesome the Mississippi education system is, and I think it's incredibly unfair for say, a military child who attends a regular elementary school in first grade, get their parents restationed to New London, Conneticut. If we allow Ms to just do whatever they want because it's a "state issue," that child could be quite far behind when they get to a state with much better education.
I think it needs to be benchmarks, but I think that beyond that... the nuts and bolts, the "how" teachers teach, needs to be up to districts and teachers. Timetowaste is trained in a university to teach... let them take the measure of their kids, and deliver the best damn teaching program, that meets those certain benchmarks. There is no one size fits all, and I think it's only the teacher on the ground who can assess what little bobby and mary need to get a good education.
djones520 wrote: I don't think you understand what majority means.
Yes, people need to start saying plurality instead of majority, though I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt that they mean the former.
I do always enjoy though the teeth gnashing against the electoral college when it doesn't go your way. I'd be willing to put my next 5 pay checks on the line that had it been the other way, Trump won the popular, and not the electoral, none of you would be saying the same thing.
And there is where you would be incorrect. My disdain for the electoral system is nonpartisan; the person with the most votes deserves to win if it's a fair system. Right now, our votes aren't equal and that's unacceptable. We shouldn't be bound by an archaic system that really only served as a stopgap when it was implemented to begin with.
d-usa wrote: "When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people."
Spinner wrote: Is everyone forgetting about all the talk about a rigged election and not accepting the results if Trump didn't win? Do you really believe that the people chanting 'lock her up' would have gracefully accepted defeat?
We were going to have angry people doing angry things no matter who won.
This.... It's weird, because while I know there were bad things that happened after both Obama elections, maybe because of where I was during both elections, they just didn't feel as huge as this one.. This one just seems different. People on both sides are pissed off... people on all sides have been lied to, pissed on, and disrespected by their elected officials, in some ways, I think that many of the people who just put Trump in office, voted for the wrong people, because we still have a huge number of those obstructionist republicans in office, they are the ones who did the most disrespecting of the people, in my eyes.
Well seems like this is becoming a bit more common from both sides, hatred and violence towards people just because of all this, Though I assume some would justify this level of violence.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/11 02:46:54
Spinner wrote: Is everyone forgetting about all the talk about a rigged election and not accepting the results if Trump didn't win? Do you really believe that the people chanting 'lock her up' would have gracefully accepted defeat?
We were going to have angry people doing angry things no matter who won.
This.... It's weird, because while I know there were bad things that happened after both Obama elections, maybe because of where I was during both elections, they just didn't feel as huge as this one.. This one just seems different. People on both sides are pissed off... people on all sides have been lied to, pissed on, and disrespected by their elected officials, in some ways, I think that many of the people who just put Trump in office, voted for the wrong people, because we still have a huge number of those obstructionist republicans in office, they are the ones who did the most disrespecting of the people, in my eyes.
Agree. People are mad, and have the right to be mad.
People may have been mad for the 08 election, but even if you didn't vote for Obama, his message was still a positive one. You could say he ran on positivity, Hope and Change and all.
People have voted for change again, but this time it comes from an angrier place. The slogan is positive "Make America Great Again", but the messaging around it seems more bitter.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/11/11 02:53:46
What has happened in America should not be seen as a victory for hatefulness over decency. It is more accurately understood as a repudiation of the American power structure.
At the core of that structure are the political leaders of both parties, their political operatives, and fundraisers; the major media, centered in New York and Washington DC; the country’s biggest corporations, their top executives, and Washington lobbyists and trade associations; the biggest Wall Street banks, their top officers, traders, hedge-fund and private-equity managers, and their lackeys in Washington; and the wealthy individuals who invest directly in politics.
At the start of the 2016 election cycle, this power structure proclaimed Hillary Clinton and Jeb Bush shoo-ins for the nominations of the Democratic and Republican parties. After all, both of these individuals had deep bases of funders, well-established networks of political insiders, experienced political advisers and all the political name recognition any candidate could possibly want.
But a funny thing happened on the way to the White House. The presidency was won by Donald Trump, who made his fortune marketing office towers and casinos, and, more recently, starring in a popular reality-television program, and who has never held elective office or had anything to do with the Republican party. Hillary Clinton narrowly won the popular vote, but not enough of the states and their electors secure a victory.
Hillary Clinton’s defeat is all the more remarkable in that her campaign vastly outspent the Trump campaign on television and radio advertisements, and get-out-the-vote efforts. Moreover, her campaign had the support in the general election not of only the kingpins of the Democratic party but also many leading Republicans, including most of the politically active denizens of Wall Street and the top executives of America’s largest corporations, and even former Republican president George HW Bush. Her campaign team was run by seasoned professionals who knew the ropes. She had the visible and forceful backing of Barack Obama, whose popularity has soared in recent months, and his popular wife. And, of course, she had her husband.
Trump, by contrast, was shunned by the power structure. Mitt Romney, the Republican presidential candidate in 2012, actively worked against Trump’s nomination. Many senior Republicans refused to endorse him, or even give him their support. The Republican National Committee did not raise money for Trump to the extent it had for other Republican candidates for president.
What happened?
There had been hints of the political earthquake to come. Trump had won the Republican primaries, after all. More tellingly, Clinton had been challenged in the Democratic primaries by the unlikeliest of candidates – a 74-year-old Jewish senator from Vermont who described himself as a democratic socialist and who was not even a Democrat. Bernie Sanders went on to win 22 states and 47% of the vote in those primaries. Sanders’ major theme was that the country’s political and economic system was rigged in favor of big corporations, Wall Street and the very wealthy.
The power structure of America wrote off Sanders as an aberration, and, until recently, didn’t take Trump seriously. A respected political insider recently told me most Americans were largely content with the status quo. “The economy is in good shape,” he said. “Most Americans are better off than they’ve been in years.”
Recent economic indicators may be up, but those indicators don’t reflect the insecurity most Americans continue to feel, nor the seeming arbitrariness and unfairness they experience. Nor do the major indicators show the linkages many Americans see between wealth and power, stagnant or declining real wages, soaring CEO pay, and the undermining of democracy by big money.
Median family income is lower now than it was 16 years ago, adjusted for inflation. Workers without college degrees – the old working class – have fallen furthest. Most economic gains, meanwhile, have gone to top. These gains have translated into political power to elicit bank bailouts, corporate subsidies, special tax loopholes, favorable trade deals and increasing market power without interference by anti-monopoly enforcement – all of which have further reduced wages and pulled up profits.
Wealth, power and crony capitalism fit together. Americans know a takeover has occurred, and they blame the establishment for it.
The Democratic party once represented the working class. But over the last three decades the party has been taken over by Washington-based fundraisers, bundlers, analysts, and pollsters who have focused instead on raising campaign money from corporate and Wall Street executives and getting votes from upper middle-class households in “swing” suburbs.
Democrats have occupied the White House for 16 of the last 24 years, and for four of those years had control of both houses of Congress. But in that time they failed to reverse the decline in working-class wages and economic security. Both Bill Clinton and Barack Obama ardently pushed for free trade agreements without providing millions of blue-collar workers who thereby lost their jobs means of getting new ones that paid at least as well.
They stood by as corporations hammered trade unions, the backbone of the white working class – failing to reform labor laws to impose meaningful penalties on companies that violate them, or help workers form unions with simple up-or-down votes. Partly as a result, union membership sank from 22% of all workers when Bill Clinton was elected president to less than 12% today, and the working class lost bargaining leverage to get a share of the economy’s gains.
Bill Clinton and Obama also allowed antitrust enforcement to ossify – with the result that large corporations have grown far larger, and major industries more concentrated. The unsurprising result of this combination – more trade, declining unionization and more industry concentration – has been to shift political and economic power to big corporations and the wealthy, and to shaft the working class. This created an opening for Donald Trump’s authoritarian demagoguery, and his presidency.
Now Americans have rebelled by supporting someone who wants to fortify America against foreigners as well as foreign-made goods. The power structure understandably fears that Trump’s isolationism will stymie economic growth. But most Americans couldn’t care less about growth because for years they have received few of its benefits, while suffering most of its burdens in the forms of lost jobs and lower wages.
The power structure is shocked by the outcome of the 2016 election because it has cut itself off from the lives of most Americans. Perhaps it also doesn’t wish to understand, because that would mean acknowledging its role in enabling the presidency of Donald Trump.
d-usa wrote: "When the Internet sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending posters that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing strawmen. They're bringing spam. They're trolls. And some, I assume, are good people."
timetowaste85 wrote: So, I learned yesterday that Trump wants to end common core in education. As an education major who left the field in disgust from CC and NCLB, I can honestly say this is a huge check-mark in Trump's favor, if he can pull it off!
I agree, the thing is it's a state thing, not a federal thing . It needs to go, but can only be done at that state level.
IMHO, I think there needs to be some kind of... I dunno, benchmarks? in regards to education that are held as standard across the country. The reason I say this is because we can see clearly how awesome the Mississippi education system is, and I think it's incredibly unfair for say, a military child who attends a regular elementary school in first grade, get their parents restationed to New London, Conneticut. If we allow Ms to just do whatever they want because it's a "state issue," that child could be quite far behind when they get to a state with much better education.
I think it needs to be benchmarks, but I think that beyond that... the nuts and bolts, the "how" teachers teach, needs to be up to districts and teachers. Timetowaste is trained in a university to teach... let them take the measure of their kids, and deliver the best damn teaching program, that meets those certain benchmarks. There is no one size fits all, and I think it's only the teacher on the ground who can assess what little bobby and mary need to get a good education.
My thoughts exactly.
Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
kronk wrote: Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
sebster wrote: Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens
BaronIveagh wrote: Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace.
Prestor Jon wrote: Your viewpoint that that people choosing not to vote for Hillary is some kind of indictment on people refusing to make the "hard choice" of voting for the candidate that was best in your subjective opinion even though those abstaining voters found her to be an unpalatable candidate isn't the only valid viewpoint. We're all free to think as we will and you're welcome to your broken America fraught with weak willed apathetic people and broken dreams and I honestly hope it brings you serenity and happens but it sounds like a rather dreary and unhealthy place.
My melancholy isn't about the choice people made. It's about what those choices reveal. And yes. It is a very dreary reality.
