No we do not hate you.

[Godsanvil]

I Have read a lot of people saying how people who voted for Trump are racist, misogynist, and Sexist. That we are stupid and uneducated. That they will be glad when we die out and they can take over. We are back woods inbred hillbillies. Well I have to admit that its hurts to have people think that.
I just want to tell you. That is not why so many people voted for Trump. Because we aren't. I could tell you one of my best friends is a black man we lived together for 5 years. I dated his sister and loved his parents. I could tell you that another nest friend I have is a Mexican man that came from Honduras a place most people have no idea where it is. I was in his wedding play with his kid and helped him build his house. He is illegal he barely speaks English. He calls me Donald Trump when he loses at cards. But he is my friend. I didn't vote for Trump because I wanted him deported. I could tell you about my two friends who are gay that have been a couple for 13 years. That when I asked if they voted for Hillary said..."Hell no..Are you nuts? She wants to bring millions of people in here that hate women and want to kill gays... Did you not see what happened at that night club when one pissed off guy that was just inspired by the people from that area did? You think we want millions of those people here wanting to kill us? Ill stick with the people who just don't want to bake us a cake and keep my head." I honestly didn't know what to think about that. If you saw who my friends are if you saw half of my family is people from south America maybe you would understand why I voted from Trump.
I did not vote for him because I think he is great. I voted from him because I am sick of politicians lying to us. Just saying what they think we want to hear to get elected. I am sick of paying taxes. While people who have done nothing get money for no reason other then they don't feel like working. While people game the system to get food stamps to sell or use to stock the stores they own. That they want us to pay for people to go to college when I worked my way through and paid every cent of it before I was done. So they can be lazy and not work. That people can come and live for years and not pay a cent in taxes while they use the same schools and roads and services I do. I am sick of sending money to other nations that hate us look at the list! We send millions to Russia! I have more but ill stop. I will say I didn't vote for him because I hate anyone. I voted for him because Clinton would just be more of the same. Hell his own party wouldn't support him. That's the bomb I wanted to drop.
Then I saw this video and it said it better then I could. never thought id agree with this man but he is right.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YY-CiPVo_NQ
The big FUCK YOU to the establishment.
Thanks. Also I wont argue with you as I am sure you will do. I like you people and honestly don't think either of these people that ran are worth areguing with you over.

[Luftstreitkräfte]

Well said. You will be cynically dismissed here, but thank you for sharing this. I voted trump too.

[Wrathbringer]

I farted.

[Godsanvil]

I farted.

Try doing that in the bathtub and eating the bubbles.

[macgyver]

To be brutally honest. When I look at Trump now after he's elected he seems to have this "omg what did I get myself into look." A bit of nervousness much less bravado. But this could be his desire to appear more presidential .. I really really hope it's that.

[zennsunni]

Let me get this straight. You voted for Trump BECAUSE you think he will be a better president for minorities and the LGBT community? Because you are tired of politicians telling you what you want to hear? Because you think the NYC real-estate tycoon is gonna 'stick it to the man' and help the little guy? Do you have any idea how dirty the real-estate business is in NYC and how much it fucks over the average person (no you don't).

Bullshit.

Listen pal, you can vote for who you want to, and that's your right. I don't think it makes you a bad person. But don't come seeking validation from the people that think you're fucking crazy for voting someone into office that openly brags about molesting women, cheated on all his wives, refers to the African American community as "the blacks" etc etc, all to assuage some vague sense of guilt you feel. You voted for him and by extension you put yourself behind all the crazy, awful shit he said.

Act like a man and own up, and don't come with your hat in your hand asking for a moral side door.

[Gesaril]

Gingrich, Giuliani, Christie. So outsider, so anti-establisment!

I don't think Trump voters are all racist, but they're certainly willing to overlook it.

[Wrathbringer]

waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa we lost waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Get over it. The gays and the blacks had their 8 years, now it's our turn again.

[Back]

Of all the republicans people could have voted for... Trump? Really? It's awful. I'd take Romney or any one else any day of the week. But Trump? I don't want whatever everyone was smoking that made it seem like a good idea to elect him president of the United States. What an embarrassment.

[Gelston]

Of all the republicans people could have voted for... Trump? Really? It's awful. I'd take Romney or any one else any day of the week. But Trump? I don't want whatever everyone was smoking that made it seem like a good idea to elect him president of the United States. What an embarrassment.

Fortunately, you aren't a Republican.

[Tisket]

That we are stupid and uneducated.

I don't think you are stupid for voting Trump.

No, I think you are stupid for not using a readable format when posting.

Line breaks are not your enemy.

[Taernath]

Of all the republicans people could have voted for... Trump? Really? It's awful. I'd take Romney or any one else any day of the week. But Trump? I don't want whatever everyone was smoking that made it seem like a good idea to elect him president of the United States. What an embarrassment.

Trump was supposedly the 'outsider' candidate. You saw how Jeb! performed during the primaries.

[ClydeR]

That people can come and live for years and not pay a cent in taxes while they use the same schools and roads and services I do.

Thanks for posting. I can already tell that you're one of the sharpest people here.




I will say I didn't vote for him because I hate anyone. I voted for him because Clinton would just be more of the same. Hell his own party wouldn't support him. That's the bomb I wanted to drop.

I also didn't vote for Trump because I hate most people. I just don't care about the little concerns of the people you mentioned are your friends. The main thing is to cut taxes.

[time4fun]

I Have read a lot of people saying how people who voted for Trump are racist, misogynist, and Sexist. That we are stupid and uneducated. That they will be glad when we die out and they can take over. We are back woods inbred hillbillies. Well I have to admit that its hurts to have people think that.
I just want to tell you. That is not why so many people voted for Trump. Because we aren't. I could tell you one of my best friends is a black man we lived together for 5 years. I dated his sister and loved his parents. I could tell you that another nest friend I have is a Mexican man that came from Honduras a place most people have no idea where it is. I was in his wedding play with his kid and helped him build his house. He is illegal he barely speaks English. He calls me Donald Trump when he loses at cards. But he is my friend. I didn't vote for Trump because I wanted him deported. I could tell you about my two friends who are gay that have been a couple for 13 years. That when I asked if they voted for Hillary said..."Hell no..Are you nuts? She wants to bring millions of people in here that hate women and want to kill gays... Did you not see what happened at that night club when one pissed off guy that was just inspired by the people from that area did? You think we want millions of those people here wanting to kill us? Ill stick with the people who just don't want to bake us a cake and keep my head." I honestly didn't know what to think about that. If you saw who my friends are if you saw half of my family is people from south America maybe you would understand why I voted from Trump.
I did not vote for him because I think he is great. I voted from him because I am sick of politicians lying to us. Just saying what they think we want to hear to get elected. I am sick of paying taxes. While people who have done nothing get money for no reason other then they don't feel like working. While people game the system to get food stamps to sell or use to stock the stores they own. That they want us to pay for people to go to college when I worked my way through and paid every cent of it before I was done. So they can be lazy and not work. That people can come and live for years and not pay a cent in taxes while they use the same schools and roads and services I do. I am sick of sending money to other nations that hate us look at the list! We send millions to Russia! I have more but ill stop. I will say I didn't vote for him because I hate anyone. I voted for him because Clinton would just be more of the same. Hell his own party wouldn't support him. That's the bomb I wanted to drop.
Then I saw this video and it said it better then I could. never thought id agree with this man but he is right.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YY-CiPVo_NQ
The big FUCK YOU to the establishment.
Thanks. Also I wont argue with you as I am sure you will do. I like you people and honestly don't think either of these people that ran are worth areguing with you over.

Your vote does beg the question here- what's the difference between someone who wants Muslims put on a register and the people who vote to allow them put on a register? What's the difference between someone who desperately wants to see gay people lose their civil liberties and someone who votes to allow them to lose those liberties? Hitler wasn't voted in by a bunch of people who hated Jews, he was voted in by a small group of people who hated Jews and a huge group of people who considered the risks to the Jews to be acceptable political costs.

A lot of people in this country just took a bet on Trump, but it was other peoples' lives they bet with. Most people who voted for Trump don't hate the people who are going to pay for that vote- they were just indifferent to those lives. As it turns out, for the millions of people in this country who are terrified of what's going to happen next- there's no difference between hate and indifference.

I'm sorry that you're feeling attacked for your vote, and you're right that it's not fair to say everyone who supported Trump is a bigot. But forgive us if the line, "I'm not a bigot, I just helped one get into office" rings hollow right now.

[Wrathbringer]

Your vote does beg the question here- what's the difference between someone who wants Muslims put on a register and the people who vote to allow them put on a register? What's the difference between someone who desperately wants to see gay people lose their civil liberties and someone who votes to allow them to lose those liberties? Hitler wasn't voted in by a bunch of people who hated Jews, he was voted in by a small group of people who hated Jews and a huge group of people who considered the risks to the Jews to be acceptable political costs.

A lot of people in this country just took a bet on Trump, but it was other peoples' lives they bet with. Most people who voted for Trump don't hate the people who are going to pay for that vote- they were just indifferent to those lives. As it turns out, for the millions of people in this country who are terrified of what's going to happen next- there's no difference between hate and indifference.

I'm sorry that you're feeling attacked for your vote, and you're right that it's not fair to say everyone who supported Trump is a bigot. But forgive us if the line, "I'm not a bigot, I just helped one get into office" rings hollow right now.

I just want to say that your tears have been and continue to be especially sweet. Please, keep whining- I mean, posting in a butthurt manner. I mean, I knew it would be great, but wow. Loving it.

[Methais]

Your vote does beg the question here- what's the difference between someone who wants Muslims put on a register and the people who vote to allow them put on a register? What's the difference between someone who desperately wants to see gay people lose their civil liberties and someone who votes to allow them to lose those liberties? Hitler wasn't voted in by a bunch of people who hated Jews, he was voted in by a small group of people who hated Jews and a huge group of people who considered the risks to the Jews to be acceptable political costs.

A lot of people in this country just took a bet on Trump, but it was other peoples' lives they bet with. Most people who voted for Trump don't hate the people who are going to pay for that vote- they were just indifferent to those lives. As it turns out, for the millions of people in this country who are terrified of what's going to happen next- there's no difference between hate and indifference.

I'm sorry that you're feeling attacked for your vote, and you're right that it's not fair to say everyone who supported Trump is a bigot. But forgive us if the line, "I'm not a bigot, I just helped one get into office" rings hollow right now.

:lol:

[Gelston]

Time4fun knows bigots, she is one.

[kutter]

But forgive us if the line, "I'm not a bigot, I just helped one get into office" rings hollow right now.

You mean kind of like when you elected Obama in 2008 and 2012 when he made asinine statements like this:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25HN1kZtRIw

And it is astounding to me with the President, the supposed leader of the free world saying things like that and you wonder why there was finally a backlash.

Things that make you go hmmmmmm.

[Parkbandit]

Let all the tears flow!!

https://m.popkey.co/98d31c/gNa5_f-maxage-0.gif

[Tgo01]

Your vote does beg the question here- what's the difference between someone who wants Muslims put on a register and the people who vote to allow them put on a register?

Trump doesn't want Muslims put on a register. But I do find it funny how liberals have no problem with gun owners being put on a register but flipped their shit when it was floated that Muslims should be.


What's the difference between someone who desperately wants to see gay people lose their civil liberties and someone who votes to allow them to lose those liberties?

Except Trump never said that. Stop strawmanning, that's WB's territory.


Hitler wasn't voted in by a bunch of people who hated Jews, he was voted in by a small group of people who hated Jews and a huge group of people who considered the risks to the Jews to be acceptable political costs.

And here we have come to the "Trump is literally Hitler!" line. You are getting kind of pathetic.


I'm sorry that you're feeling attacked for your vote

No you're not.


Dear God I am so tired of entitled straight white men over 35 being so angry all the time.

Sorry that the black guy has been in charge of you for 8 years. Sorry that a white woman is about to be in charge of you for 8 years.

(But not really)

[Jeril]

Let me get this straight. You voted for Trump BECAUSE you think he will be a better president for minorities and the LGBT community? Because you are tired of politicians telling you what you want to hear? Because you think the NYC real-estate tycoon is gonna 'stick it to the man' and help the little guy? Do you have any idea how dirty the real-estate business is in NYC and how much it fucks over the average person (no you don't).

Bullshit.

Listen pal, you can vote for who you want to, and that's your right. I don't think it makes you a bad person. But don't come seeking validation from the people that think you're fucking crazy for voting someone into office that openly brags about molesting women, cheated on all his wives, refers to the African American community as "the blacks" etc etc, all to assuage some vague sense of guilt you feel. You voted for him and by extension you put yourself behind all the crazy, awful shit he said.

Act like a man and own up, and don't come with your hat in your hand asking for a moral side door.

The thing is when you say "African American" you are speaking of people with a particular skin type, which most people identify as black. However, all those people don't identify as "African American". Some aren't American in the sense it is meant, as one from the USA and others are from places like Jamaica where they have their own culture and don't identify as being from Africa at all. You also have white people who come from Africa whom many wouldn't call "African American" because they aren't black. Although that is exactly what they are, American citizens who originated from the continent of Africa.

[Parkbandit]

Sorry that a white woman is about to be in charge of you for 8 years.

This gif is 100x as funny since she was on TV following the election, saying she can't move to Spain like she promised because she just has too darned many responsibilities here!

http://anasattic.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/tumblr_inline_mx9fa2XTli1qce30r.gif

[Gelston]

We call black people black here in Louisiana. When the police ask for race if they are black you say black.

[Latrinsorm]

We're not worried about those of you that do not hate us.
We're shocked and disappointed that when a candidate said he did, you didn't care (as much as you care about other things).
We're worried that candidate will follow through on his promises.
And we're very worried about those of you that do hate us,
who have been emboldened by the election of such a candidate, and
who will react extremely violently if it turns out that candidate was stringing them along.

President Trump will keep his promises or he won't. Either way, we lose.

[Tgo01]

We call black people black here in Louisiana. When the police ask for race if they are black you say black.

Your first thought when talking about blacks is talking about blacks committing crimes huh?

Racist!

[Gelston]

Your first thought when talking about blacks is talking about blacks committing crimes huh?

Racist!

That was just a recent time when I had to use that. Saw a purse snatcher downtown. We were chasing him and a bicycle cop dove off his bike and tackled him, caught red handed, still made me give a statement though.

[Tgo01]

That was just a recent time when I had to use that. Saw a purse snatcher downtown. We were chasing him and a bicycle cop dove off his bike and tackled him, caught red handed, still made me give a statement though.

Did you get it all on video on your phone?

[Gelston]

Did you get it all on video on your phone?

I was busy running. :(

[Neveragain]

Let me get this straight. You voted for Trump BECAUSE you think he will be a better president for minorities and the LGBT community? Because you are tired of politicians telling you what you want to hear? Because you think the NYC real-estate tycoon is gonna 'stick it to the man' and help the little guy? Do you have any idea how dirty the real-estate business is in NYC and how much it fucks over the average person (no you don't).

Bullshit.

Listen pal, you can vote for who you want to, and that's your right. I don't think it makes you a bad person. But don't come seeking validation from the people that think you're fucking crazy for voting someone into office that openly brags about molesting women, cheated on all his wives, refers to the African American community as "the blacks" etc etc, all to assuage some vague sense of guilt you feel. You voted for him and by extension you put yourself behind all the crazy, awful shit he said.

Act like a man and own up, and don't come with your hat in your hand asking for a moral side door.

Fucking Democrat hack, fucking twats always creating the demographic labels then cry victim when someone else uses the term. How fucking dense can you be? Supporters have been telling you for months what Michael Moore said in this video. While the whole time you've been supporting the party that through our countries history has done just the opposite of what you say you appose.

It's totally like you don't understand that Trump voters don't give a fuck about what pussy grabbing conversation he had whenever the fuck long ago it was, they don't give two fucks if he has been married however many fucking times he's been married. Clinton's have the same fucked up past, you're whole argument is fucked.

You twits talk about paradigm change, then go out and set fucking buildings on fire when you lose. What fucking kind of paradigm are you after for fucks sake? Nobody wants that shit, you're all a bunch of authoritarians that need to be grabbed by their pussies and taken out behind the shed.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sv9XNFpRdhg

[Wrathbringer]

We call black people black here in Louisiana. When the police ask for race if they are black you say black.

What if they're brown tho?

[Wrathbringer]

We're not worried about those of you that do not hate us.
We're shocked and disappointed that when a candidate said he did, you didn't care (as much as you care about other things).
We're worried that candidate will follow through on his promises.
And we're very worried about those of you that do hate us,
who have been emboldened by the election of such a candidate, and
who will react extremely violently if it turns out that candidate was stringing them along.

President Trump will keep his promises or he won't. Either way, we lose.

Maybe you lose, but we don't.

[Gelston]

What if they're brown tho?

No one is actually black. Well, I take it back, I did see a dude when I was in Africa that was blacker than his shadow.

[Wrathbringer]

No one is actually black. Well, I take it back, I did see a dude when I was in Africa that was blacker than his shadow.

Racist. So if they're brown you still say black? Isn't that lying?

[Latrinsorm]

Maybe you lose, but we don't.First they came for the Muslims, and you did not speak out, because you were not a Muslim.
Then Donald Trump was literally a literal Nazi, and you did not speak out, because you were not a liberal.
Then they came for the sharters, and there was no one left to speak for you.

[Gelston]

Racist. So if they're brown you still say black? Isn't that lying?

Everyone still says black.

[Neveragain]

Racist. So if they're brown you still say black? Isn't that lying?

White people will now be called milky.

[Methais]

We call black people black here in Louisiana. When the police ask for race if they are black you say black.

And nobody gets triggered.

Not even the blacks.

[Wrathbringer]

Everyone still says black.

Everyone? How can you even know that?

[Godsanvil]

Well when the guy I am talking about refers to himself as a black man. I suppose that he is ok with me calling him a black man.

[Taernath]

Well when the guy I am talking about refers to himself as a black man. I suppose that he is ok with me calling him a black man.

No, that's a common trap people of a Darker Persuasion use to get you.

[Wrathbringer]

First they came for the Muslims, and you did not speak out, because you were not a Muslim.
Then Donald Trump was literally a literal Nazi, and you did not speak out, because you were not a liberal.
Then they came for the sharters, and there was no one left to speak for you.

Lol

[time4fun]

Well Jeril's post completely missed the actual point of...everything in this thread, black is actually the appropriate default term (unless given a preference otherwise by the party you're referring to) for all of the reasons Jeril laid out. The problem with the Trump quote in question has nothing to do with the use of the term black- it's literally every other part of that quote that was problematic.

[Godsanvil]

Well after 30 years it a slow developing trap.

[Jeril]

Well Jeril's post completely missed the actual point of...everything in this thread, black is actually the appropriate default term (unless given a preference otherwise by the party you're referring to) for all of the reasons Jeril laid out. The problem with the Trump quote in question has nothing to do with the use of the term black- it's literally every other part of that quote that was problematic.

I haven't been following all of the dumb things most people have said, so I am not sure to what quote is being vaguely referred to be the OP but even you are saying he was wrong to just label them all "African Americans".

And I figured it would be a bit too easy to point out that these minorities that are all supposed to be against Trump are the very reason why he won. He didn't just get the vote of the white man, if that was all he had he'd have lost.

[Androidpk]

Of all the democratic people could have voted for... Hillary? Really? It's awful. I'd take Chafee or any one else any day of the week. But Hillary? I don't want whatever everyone was smoking that made it seem like a good idea to elect her president of the United States. What an embarrassment.

.

[Latrinsorm]

I haven't been following all of the dumb things most people have said, so I am not sure to what quote is being vaguely referred to be the OP but even you are saying he was wrong to just label them all "African Americans". And I figured it would be a bit too easy to point out that these minorities that are all supposed to be against Trump are the very reason why he won. He didn't just get the vote of the white man, if that was all he had he'd have lost.Every minority was against Trump, as has been the case with the Republican candidate going back to the year 2000. This does not mean he received literally 0% of the minority vote, which no one has ever claimed. The reason President Trump won was because he secured the extreme right without alienating the center right. Common decency tells us that an openly bigoted candidate on either side would alienate and depress turnout of their side of center, so a candidate taking the center would win. What we learned in this election is that only some (that is to say less than most) moderate Republicans are alienated by open bigotry. This has very interesting implications for future elections, but people are getting too caught up in openly erroneous sweeping pronouncements to consider them. Such is life.

[Androidpk]

What we learned from this election is that Latrin/ClydeR's predictions are terrible.

[Methais]

Well when the guy I am talking about refers to himself as a black man. I suppose that he is ok with me calling him a black man.

What if he calls himself a nigga?

[Tgo01]

What we learned in this election is that only some (that is to say less than most) moderate Republicans are alienated by open bigotry.

lol

Keep in mind everyone; Latrin used to claim to be a Republican. What's more, WB actually bought into that and used to hold Latrin up as an example of a Republican who goes against many Republican values.

[Warriorbird]

lol

Keep in mind everyone; Latrin used to claim to be a Republican. What's more, WB actually bought into that and used to hold Latrin up as an example of a Republican who goes against many Republican values.

He voted for Bush twice. There are some other Republicans who voted for Johnson or Clinton. Given all you and PK's spasmodic diatribes about Hillary Clinton it's shocking Trump didn't win by 50 points... or alternately maybe he had a few problems too.

[Parkbandit]

He voted for Bush twice. There are some other Republicans who voted for Johnson or Clinton.

Does anyone really care what Latrinsorm pretends to be on these forums?


Given all you and PK's spasmodic diatribes about Hillary Clinton it's shocking Trump didn't win by 50 points... or alternately maybe he had a few problems too.

He didn't win by 50.. he won by 78 if the Michigan vote holds out for him.

228 to 306.

Can you say: Election Mandate?

[Warriorbird]

Does anyone really care what Latrinsorm pretends to be on these forums?



He didn't win by 50.. he won by 78 if the Michigan vote holds out for him.

228 to 306.

Can you say: Election Mandate?

I meant by percentage. There's certainly a degree of one given Congress though. We'll see what he does with it. I doubt term limits will happen. He's backtracked on Muslims. Deportations? Quite possible.

[time4fun]

I meant by percentage. There's certainly a degree of one given Congress though. We'll see what he does with it. I doubt term limits will happen. He's backtracked on Muslims. Deportations? Quite possible.


He can't make term limits happen- only Congress can do that. Anyone who voted for him because of term limits is a raging fool.

His "backtracking" on Muslims so far seems to be a retreat into dog whistle territory more than a policy change. Remember all of the "We'll look at countries with a history of terrorism" and "extreme vetting"? That's a rhetorical way to ban most Muslims from entering the country without having to call it that.

Deportation can happen- the executive branch is in charge of enforcement. He's just one EO away. Congress will neither pass any legislation to help the effort nor will they pass legislation to hinder it.

[Seizer]

I'll just leave this here for you time4fun.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GLG9g7BcjKs

[Godsanvil]

I'll just leave this here for you time4fun.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GLG9g7BcjKs
A lot of people on here need to watch that. He hit the nail on the head with a 10 lb sledge

[Parkbandit]

Deportation can happen- the executive branch is in charge of enforcement. He's just one EO away. Congress will neither pass any legislation to help the effort nor will they pass legislation to hinder it.

Hope so.

Say bye to your brother for us.

[Geijon Khyree]

PK is a piece of utter shit. You never say a single thing worth reading.

[Geijon Khyree]

Get out of this forum. All of you. Negative on life motherfuckers.

[Wrathbringer]

Get out of this forum. All of you. Negative on life motherfuckers.

You're going to have to be more specific.

[Androidpk]

PK is a piece of utter shit. You never say a single thing worth reading.

I have no idea who you are.

[Taernath]

I have no idea who you are.

He stops by from time to time to remind us how much he holds us in contempt.

[RichardCranium]

And we're very worried about those of you that do hate us,
who have been emboldened by the election of such a candidate, and
who will react extremely violently if it turns out that candidate was stringing them along.

People have being reacting extremely violently lately because things didn't follow through like they believed it would. Not sure who they voted for, though.

[Androidpk]

He stops by from time to time to remind us how much he holds us in contempt.

http://media.giphy.com/media/blFm2zVPCtkbK/giphy.gif

[Latrinsorm]

lol Keep in mind everyone; Latrin used to claim to be a Republican. What's more, WB actually bought into that and used to hold Latrin up as an example of a Republican who goes against many Republican values.I am still a Republican. :shrug:
He voted for Bush twice. There are some other Republicans who voted for Johnson or Clinton. Given all you and PK's spasmodic diatribes about Hillary Clinton it's shocking Trump didn't win by 50 points... or alternately maybe he had a few problems too.Technically I only voted for Bush once, because I was only 15 in 2000, but I am confident I would have voted for him then too.

[Androidpk]

I am still a Republican

Sure, Clyde

[Methais]

I am still a Republican. :shrug:Technically I only voted for Bush once, because I was only 15 in 2000, but I am confident I would have voted for him then too.

At what age did you first start becoming ClydeR though? That's the important issue here.

[Parkbandit]

PK is a piece of utter shit. You never say a single thing worth reading.

Irony.

[Parkbandit]

Get out of this forum. All of you. Negative on life motherfuckers.

Ironyx2

[Gelston]

Get out of this forum. All of you. Negative on life motherfuckers.

Translation - People disagree with what I agree with so I'm going to tell them to go away and call them names.

[Parkbandit]

Translation - People disagree with what I agree with so I'm going to tell them to go away and call them names.

He's just so upset and afraid from the results of the election, he's just pulling a time4fun and lashing out because they are the real victims here!

[Latrinsorm]

At what age did you first start becoming ClydeR though? That's the important issue here.It seems to me like the people who still post here daily are a lot more likely to be ClydeR than I am. Just throwing that out there.

[Tgo01]

It seems to me like the people who still post here daily are a lot more likely to be ClydeR than I am.

Why? Clyder doesn't post everyday so it would make more sense that he's someone who doesn't post here everyday. Math!

[Warriorbird]

It seems to me like the people who still post here daily are a lot more likely to be ClydeR than I am. Just throwing that out there.

If we're honest... who in the Politics Folder loves multiaccounting the most? Who wrote a roleplaying script?

[Androidpk]

If we're honest... who in the Politics Folder loves multiaccounting the most? Who wrote a roleplaying script?

You think there are multi-account scripts on the pc?

[Tgo01]

If we're honest... who in the Politics Folder loves multiaccounting the most? Who wrote a roleplaying script?

Interesting theory, but Clyder has been around these forums 3 years longer than I have. So I made my trolling Clyder persona first then made my normal account?

[Androidpk]

Interesting theory, but Clyder has been around these forums 3 years longer than I have. So I made my trolling Clyder persona first then made my normal account?

Is that what you would tell the FBI if they were running a security inquiry?

[ClydeR]

Can you say: Election Mandate?

His mandate is to fulfill his campaign promises. Politifact compiled his top 10 campaign promises, starting with the one he repeated most often..

‘Build a wall' — and make Mexico pay for it
Temporarily ban Muslims from entering the United States
‘Bring manufacturing (jobs) back'
Impose tariffs on goods made in China and Mexico
Renegotiate or withdraw from the North American Free Trade Agreement and Trans-Pacific Partnership
‘Full repeal of Obamacare' and replace it with a market-based alternative
Renegotiate the Iran deal
Leave Social Security as is
Cut taxes
‘Bomb' and/or ‘take the oil' from ISIS
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/jul/15/donald-trumps-top-10-campaign-promises/

He's already fudging on numbers 2 and 6.

[Warriorbird]

You think there are multi-account scripts on the pc?

There are VBulletin rep scripts. It's... the next level!

[Methais]

It seems to me like the people who still post here daily are a lot more likely to be ClydeR than I am. Just throwing that out there.

It seems to me like the opposite is true. Just throwing that out there.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I particularly am enjoying how all these groups are coming out with shit like this...

NAACP President Cornell William Brooks tweet: “Racism has been routinized; anti-Semitism normalized; xenophobia deexceptionalized; & misogyny mainstreamed.”

And how facebook is blowing up with liberals saying if you voted Trump you don't care about <insert ism here>.

Why you might ask... well mainly because the vast majority of people who voted Trump are none of it. It's just petulant children aimlessly lashing out.

I'm tired of you liberal cunts thinking because I'm white, working class moderately successful man I'm somehow a bad person. And PS, I didn't vote for Trump.

[Parkbandit]

I particularly am enjoying how all these groups are coming out with shit like this...

NAACP President Cornell William Brooks tweet: “Racism has been routinized; anti-Semitism normalized; xenophobia deexceptionalized; & misogyny mainstreamed.”

And how facebook is blowing up with liberals saying if you voted Trump you don't care about <insert ism here>.

Why you might ask... well mainly because the vast majority of people who voted Trump are none of it. It's just petulant children aimlessly lashing out.

I'm tired of you liberal cunts thinking because I'm white, working class moderately successful man I'm somehow a bad person. And PS, I didn't vote for Trump.

I am a proud Trump voter. He wasn't my first, second, third or fourth choice, but I'm SO GLAD he's our President Elect.

Even if he does nothing for the next 4 years, it was SO WORTH IT.

https://www.askideas.com/media/48/He-Game-In-Like-A-Wrecking-Ball-Donald-Trump-For-President-2016-Funny-Donald-Trump-Meme-Image.jpg

[Warriorbird]

Interesting theory, but Clyder has been around these forums 3 years longer than I have. So I made my trolling Clyder persona first then made my normal account?

Who's the real person and who's the satire account any more? We know how many characters you can run. You started some before the others. Was Dreaven the first?

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I am a proud Trump voter. He wasn't my first, second, third or fourth choice, but I'm SO GLAD he's our President Elect.

Even if he does nothing for the next 4 years, it was SO WORTH IT.



I'm glad that you voted for him, being in Florida. In Kansas me voting for him didn't matter. I just skipped the POTUS and did all the down ballot voting. Retarded way of bucking the system I guess, since I didn't care for any of the nominees. Had it be closer in KS, I'd have voted Trump for sure.

[Candor]

I was informed today by the wife of one of my friends (now former friend it seems) that their house is now a "Republican Free Zone". As such, I am no longer welcome.

[Tgo01]

I was informed today by the wife of one of my friends (now former friend it seems) that their house is now a "Republican Free Zone". As such, I am no longer welcome.

The party of tolerance.

[Taernath]

If Gun Free Zones don't work, Republican Free Zones probably don't either. Go kick down his door.

[Methais]

I was informed today by the wife of one of my friends (now former friend it seems) that their house is now a "Republican Free Zone". As such, I am no longer welcome.

Can you give us their address so we can troll them with anonymous memes of butthurt liberals in their RL mailbox?

[Stanley Burrell]

612 Wharf Avenue

[Gelston]

612 Wharf Avenue

http://vignette3.wikia.nocookie.net/athfwiki/images/3/3d/Mcpeepants280.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20080622193111

[Taernath]

Can you give us their address so we can troll them with anonymous memes of butthurt liberals in their RL mailbox?

22 the avenue, that's the place where we all go.

[drauz]

I hate the cameraman but just listen to it without watching.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLG9g7BcjKs

[Shaps]

Best.. video.. ever.

Guy makes a ton of sense and happy he's putting it out there.

And why are things so much more persuasive in a British accent?

[Methais]

And why are things so much more persuasive in a British accent?

Because they're the best at swearing.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lKwKvhkNyo

[Candor]

I was informed today by the wife of one of my friends (now former friend it seems) that their house is now a "Republican Free Zone". As such, I am no longer welcome.

Sigh...I have lost a friend. As it turns out this is primarily his wife's doing, but he is not going to stand up to her for it.

And THIS folks, is what Democrats mean by tolerance and inclusion.

[Neveragain]

Sigh...I have lost a friend. As it turns out this is primarily his wife's doing, but he is not going to stand up to her for it.

And THIS folks, is what Democrats mean by tolerance and inclusion.

Your friend needs to get a divorce ASAP and get his balls back.

[jumbodog]

I was informed today by the wife of one of my friends (now former friend it seems) that their house is now a "Republican Free Zone". As such, I am no longer welcome.

This is damned tragic. Fucking liberals (and I lean that way) need to pull their heads out of their asses before they get consumed by the hate they claim to reject.

I work in a very republican office. You know what I've learned from all of this? We're all just people. We all want similar things. Very few actually wanted either candidate. The both sucked big fat pachyderm testicles. But on the more broad scale I learned that left-leaners claim to think anyone should be able to join (as long as you feel the same). Right-leaners think Americans should be able to join. I find myself torn and somewhere in the middle lately largely based on my thinking of where the line should be drawn between "everyone" and "American." I believe in equal rights for all people, but we have to get America straightened out first. Then we can go back to walking softly and carrying a big stick (or armored tank division if you prefer Col. Nathan Jessup's version of the quote).

Regardless, this is unacceptable. I'm sorry for the loss of your friend.

[Gelston]

Sigh...I have lost a friend. As it turns out this is primarily his wife's doing, but he is not going to stand up to her for it.

And THIS folks, is what Democrats mean by tolerance and inclusion.

Fun replying to your own comments.

[Androidpk]

I am a proud Trump voter. He wasn't my first, second, third or fourth choice, but I'm SO GLAD he's our President Elect.

Even if he does nothing for the next 4 years, it was SO WORTH IT.



Rand Paul 2020!

[Gelston]

Rand Paul 2020!

Yeah, not happening. Unless Trump decides to not run again.

[Androidpk]

http://img.pandawhale.com/post-29966-ITS-HAPPENING-gif-Ron-Paul-HD-xThK.gif

[Parkbandit]

Rand Paul 2020!

You jump from wagon to wagon.. what happened to this:

https://img0.etsystatic.com/169/1/13867578/il_340x270.1079820056_t84t.jpg

[Gelston]

You jump from wagon to wagon.. what happened to this:

https://img0.etsystatic.com/169/1/13867578/il_340x270.1079820056_t84t.jpg

He's been on the Rand Paul wagon for a looong time.

[Taernath]

He's been on the Rand Paul wagon for a looong time.

It went:

Ron > Rand > Bernie > Trump > Bernie

[macgyver]

Bernie would've crushed any Repub and would've excited the Dem base enough to get a majority in the House. He's too old though now. In 4 years he'll be 83?

[Thondalar]

Well Jeril's post completely missed the actual point of...everything in this thread, black is actually the appropriate default term (unless given a preference otherwise by the party you're referring to) for all of the reasons Jeril laid out. The problem with the Trump quote in question has nothing to do with the use of the term black- it's literally every other part of that quote that was problematic.

Well, the other candidate called blacks super predators. Given a choice of the two, I'd rather be called "the blacks".

Probably why more blacks voted for Trump than Romney 4 years ago.

[Thondalar]

I hate the cameraman but just listen to it without watching.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLG9g7BcjKs


Holy shit this guy is so spot-on. Unfortunately most of the leftists here won't be able to handle that much truth.

I can already see what will happen...they'll listen to the first minute or so of Trump-bashing and nod their heads...then the next 30-45 seconds they'll be a bit confused...then it'll start to dawn on them...and they'll shut it off.

[time4fun]

Well, the other candidate called blacks super predators. Given a choice of the two, I'd rather be called "the blacks".

Probably why more blacks voted for Trump than Romney 4 years ago.

I think what you meant to say was:

Given the choice between a man who has been sued for racial discrimination three times (housing and employment), was quoted as being bothered by the fact that he had black accountants, put a prominent white nationalist in a key position in his campaign (and in the White House), and who spent years engaging in racially-charged harassment of the Central Park 5 vs a woman who has fought tirelessly for racial equality including going under cover to bust schools who were refusing to integrate...you'd take the latter.

[Methais]

Sigh...I have lost a friend. As it turns out this is primarily his wife's doing, but he is not going to stand up to her for it.

And THIS folks, is what Democrats mean by tolerance and inclusion.

https://i.imgur.com/ml1WgZw.jpg

[Taernath]

lol @ believing Candor

[Parkbandit]

I think what you meant to say was:

Given the choice between a man who has been sued for racial discrimination three times (housing and employment), was quoted as being bothered by the fact that he had black accountants, put a prominent white nationalist in a key position in his campaign (and in the White House), and who spent years engaging in racially-charged harassment of the Central Park 5 vs a woman who has fought tirelessly for racial equality including going under cover to bust schools who were refusing to integrate...you'd take the latter.

Make sure you hydrate. I'm worried about your health.

[time4fun]

Holy shit this guy is so spot-on. Unfortunately most of the leftists here won't be able to handle that much truth.

I can already see what will happen...they'll listen to the first minute or so of Trump-bashing and nod their heads...then the next 30-45 seconds they'll be a bit confused...then it'll start to dawn on them...and they'll shut it off.

Uh.

So a few clarifying points here:

1) This guy says the majority of people didn't vote for Clinton- that's factually incorrect. Trump didn't win because more people saw him as a better candidate, he won because of the quirks of the Electoral College system.

2) Leave it to a straight white guy to fail to reflect on the fact that the difference between someone who is racist/sexist/Islamophobic/etc and someone who "just" votes for those things is rhetorical at best. While that certainly means you can't just call every Trump supporter a racist/sexist/homophobic/etc person, you do not get to vote for those things to happen and then get off the hook by saying "That wasn't my primary motivation, but it didn't bother me much either". Defining racism as the most extreme elements- the white hoods, the David Dukes, etc. only serves to normalize the infinitely more prevalent and downright mundane racism that does the most damage.

3) This whole "Clinton was a wall street shill" thing is fucking hysterical- given Trump WAS the exact kind of person everyone was mad at Clinton for pandering to. You don't get to vote a big business guy who has exploited every string and loophole and questionable bribery tactic and say it was because Clinton was too pro-wall street.

4) I love how your "Big point" video is a crazy straight white guy screaming into a camera saying you voted for a monster. If that's the best you've got- maybe you made a bad decision.

[Thondalar]

Uh.

So a few clarifying points here:

1) This guy says the majority of people didn't vote for Clinton- that's factually incorrect. Trump didn't win because more people saw him as a better candidate, he won because of the quirks of the Electoral College system.

2) Leave it to a straight white guy to fail to reflect on the fact that the difference between someone who is racist/sexist/Islamophobic/etc and someone who "just" votes for those things is rhetorical at best. While that certainly means you can't just call every Trump supporter a racist/sexist/homophobic/etc person, you do not get to vote for those things to happen and then get off the hook by saying "That wasn't my primary motivation, but it didn't bother me much either". Defining racism as the most extreme elements- the white hoods, the David Dukes, etc. only serves to normalize the infinitely more prevalent and downright mundane racism that does the most damage.

3) This whole "Clinton was a wall street shill" thing is fucking hysterical- given Trump WAS the exact kind of person everyone was mad at Clinton for pandering to. You don't get to vote a big business guy who has exploited every string and loophole and questionable bribery tactic and say it was because Clinton was too pro-wall street.

4) I love how your "Big point" video is a crazy straight white guy screaming into a camera saying you voted for a monster. If that's the best you've got- maybe you made a bad decision.

You really don't get it. Your Ivory Tower is crashing down all around you, and you still don't get it.

[Taernath]

1) This guy says the majority of people didn't vote for Clinton- that's factually incorrect. Trump didn't win because more people saw him as a better candidate, he won because of the quirks of the Electoral College system.

No, he won because the Democrats chose someone who was almost as/more disliked than he was. If the situation were reversed and the Democrats somehow squeaked through a win this election, you can bet that the Republicans would be sitting down trying to figure out how an angry cheeto made it as far as he did. Make no mistake, I voted for Clinton and would do so again given the circumstances, but I didn't -want- to.

[Wrathbringer]

No, he won because the Democrats chose someone who was almost as/more disliked than he was. If the situation were reversed and the Democrats somehow squeaked through a win this election, you can bet that the Republicans would be sitting down trying to figure out how an angry cheeto made it as far as he did. Make no mistake, I voted for Clinton and would do so again given the circumstances, but I didn't -want- to.

Hahahahahahaha you lost, whiner

[Androidpk]

It went:

Ron > Rand > Bernie > Trump > Bernie

Ron > Rand > Bernie.

I never got on the Trump train and Bernie hasn't redeemed himself just yet. Rand is still cool in my books.

[Androidpk]

Trump didn't win because more people saw him as a better candidate, he won because of the quirks of the Electoral College system.

2) Leave it to a straight white guy to fail to reflect on the fact that the difference between someone who is racist/sexist/Islamophobic/etc and someone who "just" votes for those things is rhetorical at best. While that certainly means you can't just call every Trump supporter a racist/sexist/homophobic/etc person, you do not get to vote for those things to happen and then get off the hook by saying "That wasn't my primary motivation, but it didn't bother me much either". Defining racism as the most extreme elements- the white hoods, the David Dukes, etc. only serves to normalize the infinitely more prevalent and downright mundane racism that does the most damage.

3) This whole "Clinton was a wall street shill" thing is fucking hysterical- given Trump WAS the exact kind of person everyone was mad at Clinton for pandering to. You don't get to vote a big business guy who has exploited every string and loophole and questionable bribery tactic and say it was because Clinton was too pro-wall street.

4) I love how your "Big point" video is a crazy straight white guy screaming into a camera saying you voted for a monster. If that's the best you've got- maybe you made a bad decision.

stay classy, girl (and educated)

[Seizer]

stay classy, girl (and educated)

At this point in her tirade and mouth frothing, I don't think it's possible.

[Ashliana]

You really don't get it. (Time4fun's) Ivory Tower is crashing down all around you, and you still don't get it.

:rofl:

Thond, I like you, you're generally well-grounded and not an ideologue. Some of the left has had their bubble burst (and a certain segment of them are hysterical about it), but the stance you seem to be implying here isn't borne out of the facts. Time's correct, in that Trump won without even a bare majority of voters -- meaning that a Republican has won the popular vote in only 1 out of the last 7 elections, Dubya's re-election.

Trump's election isn't going to reverse the demographic trends that will make it harder and harder for a Republican to win the presidency. If you look at how young people voted, the map would look like this:

http://i.imgur.com/s2KRCMP.jpg

In order to stay relevant, the GOP is going to have to find a way to resonate with the minorities that are making an ever-increasing proportion of the population. Will Trump be the one to change the party into doing so? Well, stranger things have happened, but I don't see it.

[time4fun]

No, he won because the Democrats chose someone who was almost as/more disliked than he was. If the situation were reversed and the Democrats somehow squeaked through a win this election, you can bet that the Republicans would be sitting down trying to figure out how an angry cheeto made it as far as he did. Make no mistake, I voted for Clinton and would do so again given the circumstances, but I didn't -want- to.

She's up by over 1 million votes in the popular vote. So this is a difficult case to make.

I would also caution those of us on the left here- the Republicans of the House Oversight Committee waged a two year character assassination campaign against Clinton. Before they started going crazy with literally dozens of investigations (massive abuse of power), Clinton had great approval ratings. Never forget that one billionaire was the largest donor to the SuperPAC that funded Trump's campaign, was the largest financial backer of Breibart, and was the one who financed the Clinton Cash book. An extraordinary amount of work went into spinning conspiracy theories and discrediting Clinton even before she started running.

Be careful that you don't reward cynical acts of political corruption while parsing out the blame. I'm not saying Clinton was perfect, but we're evoking some powerful double standard voodoo here to say she wasn't good enough- when she is 10x the person Trump is.

[Parkbandit]

She's up by over 1 million votes in the popular vote. So this is a difficult case to make.

I would also caution those of us on the left here- the Republicans of the House Oversight Committee waged a two year character assassination campaign against Clinton. Before they started going crazy with literally dozens of investigations (massive abuse of power), Clinton had great approval ratings. Never forget that one billionaire was the largest donor to the SuperPAC that funded Trump's campaign, was the largest financial backer of Breibart, and was the one who financed the Clinton Cash book. An extraordinary amount of work went into spinning conspiracy theories and discrediting Clinton even before she started running.

Be careful that you don't reward cynical acts of political corruption while parsing out the blame. I'm not saying Clinton was perfect, but we're evoking some powerful double standard voodoo here to say she wasn't good enough- when she is 10x the person Trump is.

https://derpicdn.net/img/2016/5/23/1160866/full.gif

[Gelston]

She's up by over 1 million votes in the popular vote. So this is a difficult case to make.

I would also caution those of us on the left here- the Republicans of the House Oversight Committee waged a two year character assassination campaign against Clinton. Before they started going crazy with literally dozens of investigations (massive abuse of power), Clinton had great approval ratings. Never forget that one billionaire was the largest donor to the SuperPAC that funded Trump's campaign, was the largest financial backer of Breibart, and was the one who financed the Clinton Cash book. An extraordinary amount of work went into spinning conspiracy theories and discrediting Clinton even before she started running.

Be careful that you don't reward cynical acts of political corruption while parsing out the blame. I'm not saying Clinton was perfect, but we're evoking some powerful double standard voodoo here to say she wasn't good enough- when she is 10x the person Trump is.

Because Trump campaigned for Electorals, not Popular. Again, no one gives a fuck about popular. They don't win elections and you don't campaign for them.

[Jeril]

She's up by over 1 million votes in the popular vote. So this is a difficult case to make.

I would also caution those of us on the left here- the Republicans of the House Oversight Committee waged a two year character assassination campaign against Clinton. Before they started going crazy with literally dozens of investigations (massive abuse of power), Clinton had great approval ratings. Never forget that one billionaire was the largest donor to the SuperPAC that funded Trump's campaign, was the largest financial backer of Breibart, and was the one who financed the Clinton Cash book. An extraordinary amount of work went into spinning conspiracy theories and discrediting Clinton even before she started running.

Be careful that you don't reward cynical acts of political corruption while parsing out the blame. I'm not saying Clinton was perfect, but we're evoking some powerful double standard voodoo here to say she wasn't good enough- when she is 10x the person Trump is.

Considering how great of a person Hillary isn't, you must think Trump is the anti-christ or something. Any good she has done hasn't been done because she is a good person she has done it for political and monetary gain. You just have to look at how she treats secret service members and even her own husband when not in view of the public. Even WB who met her in person and doesn't have the political bias of a republican doesn't think she is a nice person.

Even your own politics are dictated by selfish means and that is a large part of the problem we are in now and why we'll continue to have problems.

[time4fun]

Because Trump campaigned for Electorals, not Popular. Again, no one gives a fuck about popular. They don't win elections and you don't campaign for them.

Pretty much the weirdest statement you could make. Stop repeating Trump's talking points. Everyone campaigns for as many votes as they can get. He's lost by over 1m votes so far, and that's important context that can't be wiped away.

[Parkbandit]

Pretty much the weirdest statement you could make. Stop repeating Trump's talking points. Everyone campaigns for as many votes as they can get. He's lost by over 1m votes so far, and that's important context that can't be wiped away.

Elections: HOW DO THEY WORK!?

There is a reason why candidates concentrate on a handful of states.. and it's not population. How many times did Clinton go to New York to campaign? Or California? Or Oregon? Or Washington?

On the flip side, how many times did she go to Ohio or Florida or North Carolina?

Come on.. grab yourself a tissue and join us in the real world. It's been a week. Let's start healing.

[Jeril]

Pretty much the weirdest statement you could make. Stop repeating Trump's talking points. Everyone campaigns for as many votes as they can get. He's lost by over 1m votes so far, and that's important context that can't be wiped away.

So, how much campaigning did Hilary do in states that are considered republican? Or even democrat? Why do politicians only focus on "key" states come election time. Could it possibly be that the goal isn't anywhere near to getting the most votes but getting the right ones to win? And when you consider the fact that we've got a population of 320 million plus people in the US and roughly 246 million of them are of voting age, winning the popular vote by a 1 or 2 isn't really saying much. You'd also think that with democrats controlling most of the major populated areas of the country that she'd win by a lot more.

[Tgo01]

Everyone campaigns for as many votes as they can get.

No, they don't. Both Hillary and Trump spent hardly any time at all campaigning in California, the most populous state in the country. Why? Because they both knew it would go 100% to Democrats.

Likewise I'm pretty sure Hillary all but ignored states such as Texas (second most populous state) and Georgia because she knew it would be 100% electoral votes towards Trump. Oh wait, Hillary did start to focus on these two states a little bit towards the end when they thought the states became battle states, lol.

[time4fun]

So, how much campaigning did Hilary do in states that are considered republican? Or even democrat? Why do politicians only focus on "key" states come election time. Could it possibly be that the goal isn't anywhere near to getting the most votes but getting the right ones to win? And when you consider the fact that we've got a population of 320 million plus people in the US and roughly 246 million of them are of voting age, winning the popular vote by a 1 or 2 isn't really saying much. You'd also think that with democrats controlling most of the major populated areas of the country that she'd win by a lot more.

Here's the fundamental problem with Trump's juvenile argument (which is repeated here)-

Regardless of anything you say, the only way that this argument that Trump would've done better if he had tried (classic Trump), is that it implies that Clinton was focusing on popular vote more than the electoral college. Even if we accept your argument that people don't campaign for popular vote, then neither of them would have been, and she still got more votes than he did.

So either way, it's a ridiculous talking point that no one over the age of "I'M THIS MANY!" should be using. Trump is pathologically incapable of admitting that he lost the popular vote because he was, in fact, less popular.

The single most concerning part about this whole situation is that we have a President-elect whose ego is so fragile and whose behavior is so compulsive that he has to jump out on to Twitter to "defend" himself against facts. This in addition to his alarming tweets against Protesters and a media outlet that had unfavorable coverage of him. (You might notice both of those things are cornerstone citizen protections covered by the 1st Amendment that NO elected official should be trying to undermine).

[Stolis]

So either way, it's a ridiculous talking point that no one over the age of "I'M THIS MANY!" should be using. Trump is pathologically incapable of admitting that he lost the popular vote because he was, in fact, less popular.

Last I checked, the electoral vote is the one that decides who sits in the Oval Office, not the popular vote. He won the vote that mattered.

[Tgo01]

Here's the fundamental problem with Trump's juvenile argument (which is repeated here)

It isn't Trump's "juvenile" argument, this is the argument every semi educated person has made since the beginning of the electoral college. It wasn't until Trump's win that Democrats suddenly thought "Hey...everyone tries to get the most votes and Trump didn't get them so he really lost!!!"


Regardless of anything you say, the only way that this argument that Trump would've done better if he had tried (classic Trump)

The argument isn't that Trump would have "done better" if he "tried", the argument is BOTH candidates (as in Trump and Clinton) were trying to actually win the election, and to win the election you try to secure as many electoral votes as possible, not popular votes. Do you understand now? Do I need to draw you stick figures?


is that it implies that Clinton was focusing on popular vote more than the electoral college.

No, it doesn't. And no, she wasn't. Both Trump and Clinton spent more time and money in battleground states than more populated states such as California and Texas. The only reason Hillary spent a lot of time in California was because she was fundraising there. Yeah. She shows up to California to collect millions of dollars then pretty much ignores all of the normal citizens' needs and wants because she knows she has 100% of the votes there in the bag.


Even if we accept your argument that people don't campaign for popular vote

They don't. Everyone but the new regressive left knows this.


then neither of them would have been, and she still got more votes than he did.

This makes zero sense. Please rephrase and try again.


Trump is pathologically incapable of admitting that he lost the popular vote because he was, in fact, less popular.

Trump isn't admitting shit because the popular vote means exactly jack shit.

If you and I play a game of Monopoly and I follow all of the rules set forth and try to win based on those rules and the goal of winning the game and I end up kicking your ass, do you get to sit around afterward smugly and say "Well according to 10 family members I just called, they think I should have won the game. So it looks like I'm more popular." And yes, I can actually see you doing something like this in real life in the situation I described.

But the real answer is; no. Because no one gives a shit what your friends think, or what Hillary voters think, because Trump and Clinton both played the game by the rules, and tried to win the game based on the rules and goals presented to them.

Things would work out a lot differently if the winner were decided by a simple majority.

Likewise, what I find really funny, is people act like other Western countries have a better more "democratic" system. In a lot of western countries the winner would be declared by who controls the majority of Congress, which in this case would be the Republicans still. No matter how you slice this the Democrats lost and would have lost, oh but except in this fantasy you have created for yourself where the winner was really Hillary because of a metric that has nothing at all to do with winning.

[Taernath]

She's up by over 1 million votes in the popular vote. So this is a difficult case to make.

Did you know Obama received 69.5 million votes in 2008, and 65.9 million votes in 2012? Where did these voters go in 2016? It wasn't to the Republicans who have hovered between 59 and 62 million the last 12 years. That's indicative of an electorate who may not have liked the other guy, but weren't willing to get behind Clinton. This was always Clinton's election to lose.

Besides, popular vote is only a feel-good number, it doesn't win elections.


I would also caution those of us on the left here- the Republicans of the House Oversight Committee waged a two year character assassination campaign against Clinton. Before they started going crazy with literally dozens of investigations (massive abuse of power), Clinton had great approval ratings. Never forget that one billionaire was the largest donor to the SuperPAC that funded Trump's campaign, was the largest financial backer of Breibart, and was the one who financed the Clinton Cash book. An extraordinary amount of work went into spinning conspiracy theories and discrediting Clinton even before she started running.

I'm well aware of the character assassination attempted against her, and Benghazi and the email 'scandal' are largely witch hunts. The things I, and maybe others, were more concerned about were her constant military interventions (irrespective of the 'no-fly zone'), political insiderism, foreign aid/donations, and that Russian uranium deal (which yes, I'm aware was completely legal and she may not have been directly involved in).

[Parkbandit]

Here's the fundamental problem with Trump's juvenile argument (which is repeated here)-

Regardless of anything you say, the only way that this argument that Trump would've done better if he had tried (classic Trump), is that it implies that Clinton was focusing on popular vote more than the electoral college. Even if we accept your argument that people don't campaign for popular vote, then neither of them would have been, and she still got more votes than he did.

Can we both just agree... Clinton was a terrible candidate and she severely fucked up this election. She barely stopped in Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin.

YAY! SHE WON THE POPULAR VOTE! How is that working out for you at this moment?

That's because the popular vote doesn't determine the winner of the election.


So either way, it's a ridiculous talking point that no one over the age of "I'M THIS MANY!" should be using. Trump is pathologically incapable of admitting that he lost the popular vote because he was, in fact, less popular.

Is anyone really suggesting that Trump won the popular vote? You are the one with an absolutely ridiculous talking point. Again, I realize you are so upset over this life changing event.. and you need to grab onto any "win" you can.. but it honestly doesn't make a difference. Trump is your next President. No amount of crying on your part will change that.


The single most concerning part about this whole situation is that we have a President-elect whose ego is so fragile and whose behavior is so compulsive that he has to jump out on to Twitter to "defend" himself against facts. This in addition to his alarming tweets against Protesters and a media outlet that had unfavorable coverage of him. (You might notice both of those things are cornerstone citizen protections covered by the 1st Amendment that NO elected official should be trying to undermine).

The New York Times and the Washington Post got it almost as wrong as you did.

http://forum.gsplayers.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=8190&d=1477085211

[Taernath]

It wasn't until Trump's win that Democrats suddenly thought "Hey...everyone tries to get the most votes and Trump didn't get them so he really lost!!!"


November 8th, 2000 Never Forget

[Tgo01]

The New York Times and the Washington Post got it almost as wrong as you did.

http://forum.gsplayers.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=8190&d=1477085211

I think this is what gets me the most. Before the election everyone, and I do mean everyone, from time4fun, to 538, to CNN, to Fox news, were all focusing on the electoral college and how it would turn out. Most people were using the electoral college turnout to say "See? Trump is gonna lose. HAHA!" Whereas Fox was desperately trying to cling onto hope that Trump could still win by doing these long shot calculations that relied on 1 vote from Maine to put Trump at exactly 270.

But the point is everyone was focused on the electoral votes prior to the election because they realized that is how a winner is determined and therefore it's the only thing that mattered. Do people really think the candidates themselves didn't realize this and thus were trying to win the popular vote instead?

Of course, that is beyond stupid. The campaigns knew this better than anyone else and were trying to secure the electoral votes to win. Jesus, people. This isn't hard.


November 8th, 2000 Never Forget

To be fair I bet most of the people complaining either weren't alive in 2000 or were too young to vote at the time. That's what it looks like when I see pictures and videos of the riots at least.

[Taernath]

Trump's election isn't going to reverse the demographic trends that will make it harder and harder for a Republican to win the presidency. If you look at how young people voted, the map would look like this:

http://i.imgur.com/s2KRCMP.jpg

This image is polling data from before the election... from survey monkey.

https://www.surveymonkey.com/elections/map?poll=sm-lv-nonwhite-nocollege-cps

[time4fun]

I'm well aware of the character assassination attempted against her, and Benghazi and the email 'scandal' are largely witch hunts. The things I, and maybe others, were more concerned about were her constant military interventions (irrespective of the 'no-fly zone'), political insiderism, foreign aid/donations, and that Russian uranium deal (which yes, I'm aware was completely legal and she may not have been directly involved in).

Those of us who're more on the far-left obviously found Clinton lacking in her progressive street cred, but she did adopt the stances we wanted her to (for the most part), which is the most you can ask of someone campaigning.

She was a hawk, we all know it, and yes a lot of us were uncomfortable with it. But if that was the concern, a guy who was pro-nuclear proliferation and torture would've made that an easy decision. The Uranium deal started long before she was at the DoS, and 9 different agencies had to sign off of on it (as you mentioned). It's a weird thing to hold her accountable for. And the work done with Iran may make a lot of folks nervous, but it's gone a long way to getting them off of the imminent path to nuclear armament they were on.

Most people who hated Clinton, though, hated her for the fake "scandals"- all thoroughly investigated with never a shred of evidence of illegal activity. This forum has demonstrated how effective the campaigns of misinformation and distortion really were. It's difficult for anyone who didn't follow it all very closely to come to any conclusion other than, "There's no way they'd be investigating her so much if she weren't doing something wrong"- which was inaccurate yet powerful.

"She's a crook", "She's corrupt" was repeated so often that folks started to believe it. So even when evidence was mounting that Trump was actually doing most of the things Clinton was being accused of (destroying e-mails to evade justice, running an illegal foundation as a personal slush fund, lying under oath, ec), perceptions of her had become so entrenched that it didn't end up mattering.

Is it any wonder that a lot of people had a hard time getting excited about her?

[Parkbandit]

:rofl:

Thond, I like you, you're generally well-grounded and not an ideologue. Some of the left has had their bubble burst (and a certain segment of them are hysterical about it), but the stance you seem to be implying here isn't borne out of the facts. Time's correct, in that Trump won without even a bare majority of voters -- meaning that a Republican has won the popular vote in only 1 out of the last 7 elections, Dubya's re-election.

Trump's election isn't going to reverse the demographic trends that will make it harder and harder for a Republican to win the presidency. If you look at how young people voted, the map would look like this:

http://i.imgur.com/s2KRCMP.jpg

In order to stay relevant, the GOP is going to have to find a way to resonate with the minorities that are making an ever-increasing proportion of the population. Will Trump be the one to change the party into doing so? Well, stranger things have happened, but I don't see it.

So wait.. she won?

No.. still didn't win :(

Every single generation thinks this way.. until they get older and the smart ones realize the fantasy land that was their youth isn't reality... and their kids post a useless map like this thinking things will change in the future!

[Parkbandit]

Those of us who're more on the far-left obviously found Clinton lacking in her progressive street cred, but she did adopt the stances we wanted her to (for the most part), which is the most you can ask of someone campaigning.

She was a hawk, we all know it, and yes a lot of us were uncomfortable with it. But if that was the concern, a guy who was pro-nuclear proliferation and torture would've made that an easy decision. The Uranium deal started long before she was at the DoS, and 9 different agencies had to sign off of on it (as you mentioned). It's a weird thing to hold her accountable for. And the work done with Iran may make a lot of folks nervous, but it's gone a long way to getting them off of the imminent path to nuclear armament they were on.

Most people who hated Clinton, though, hated her for the fake "scandals"- all thoroughly investigated with never a shred of evidence of illegal activity. This forum has demonstrated how effective the campaigns of misinformation and distortion really were. It's difficult for anyone who didn't follow it all very closely to come to any conclusion other than, "There's no way they'd be investigating her so much if she weren't doing something wrong"- which was inaccurate yet powerful.

"She's a crook", "She's corrupt" was repeated so often that folks started to believe it. So even when evidence was mounting that Trump was actually doing most of the things Clinton was being accused of (destroying e-mails to evade justice, running an illegal foundation as a personal slush fund, lying under oath, ec), perceptions of her had become so entrenched that it didn't end up mattering.

Is it any wonder that a lot of people had a hard time getting excited about her?

Wait, wait, wait, wait... are you really suggesting that Hillary got a bum rap in the media and somehow Donald Trump didn't?

I could give you Fox News maybe... maybe the Wallstreet Journal? Wait, didn't they endorse Clinton as well?

You seriously have to live in a fantasy world to believe the stupidity you are posting.

[Tgo01]

"She's a crook", "She's corrupt" was repeated so often that folks started to believe it.

You mean like "Trump is a racist", "Trump wants to deport all Mexicans" was repeated so often that folks started to believe it?

You can't honestly be so dense as to believe Hillary was skewered more by the media, or hell ANYONE, more than Trump was. Hillary had the current president of the US singing her praises and joining in on the bashing of Trump for fuck's sake, to heights of which set a new precedent for a current US president to get this involved on who will replace them.

[Taernath]

Those of us who're more on the far-left obviously found Clinton lacking in her progressive street cred, but she did adopt the stances we wanted her to (for the most part), which is the most you can ask of someone campaigning.

It's hard to say. She talks the talk when it's politically expedient for her though she's more likely to keep her word than Trump is. I don't trust her on TPP at all.


She was a hawk, we all know it, and yes a lot of us were uncomfortable with it. But if that was the concern, a guy who was pro-nuclear proliferation and torture would've made that an easy decision.

People place different priorities on different things. We've been tooling around in the middle east for about 15 years now. Very soon we'll have kids enlisting and possibly getting sent over there that weren't even alive for September 11.



The Uranium deal started long before she was at the DoS, and 9 different agencies had to sign off of on it (as you mentioned). It's a weird thing to hold her accountable for.

Because it's something that looks bad no matter how you present it, and ties in with Trump's 'drain the swamp' rhetoric.

[time4fun]

It's hard to say. She talks the talk when it's politically expedient for her though she's more likely to keep her word than Trump is. I don't trust her on TPP at all.



People place different priorities on different things. We've been tooling around in the middle east for about 15 years now. Very soon we'll have kids enlisting and possibly getting sent over there that weren't even alive for September 11.




Because it's something that looks bad no matter how you present it, and ties in with Trump's 'drain the swamp' rhetoric.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmmBi4V7X1M

[Parkbandit]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmmBi4V7X1M

You should probably get your news from someone other than an ex-SNL writer and big time Hillary supporter.

Just sayin...

[Taernath]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gmmBi4V7X1M

Hey, you're preaching to the choir here. I'm just trying to give you some perspective on why people may not be fully behind Clinton besides "Benghazi" and "email".

[Candor]

lol @ believing Candor

go play with yourself

[drauz]

I think what you meant to say was:

Given the choice between a man who has been sued for racial discrimination three times (housing and employment), was quoted as being bothered by the fact that he had black accountants, put a prominent white nationalist in a key position in his campaign (and in the White House), and who spent years engaging in racially-charged harassment of the Central Park 5 vs a woman who has fought tirelessly for racial equality including going under cover to bust schools who were refusing to integrate...you'd take the latter.

I feel like you left off a lot for the Clinton side, and this is why you lost.

[Taernath]

go play with yourself

Done. Now what?

[drauz]

The single most concerning part about this whole situation is that we have a President-elect whose ego is so fragile and whose behavior is so compulsive that he has to jump out on to Twitter to "defend" himself against facts. This in addition to his alarming tweets against Protesters and a media outlet that had unfavorable coverage of him. (You might notice both of those things are cornerstone citizen protections covered by the 1st Amendment that NO elected official should be trying to undermine).

We would have had a President-elect with a fragile ego either way. Clinton couldn't speak to her audience because she lost..

[Gelston]

We would have had a President-elect with a fragile ego either way. Clinton couldn't speak to her audience because she lost..

There are rumours she got drunk and started throwing shit at people.

[drauz]

The single most concerning part about this whole situation is that we have a President-elect whose ego is so fragile and whose behavior is so compulsive that he has to jump out on to Twitter to "defend" himself against facts. This in addition to his alarming tweets against Protesters and a media outlet that had unfavorable coverage of him. (You might notice both of those things are cornerstone citizen protections covered by the 1st Amendment that NO elected official should be trying to undermine).

We would have had a President-elect with a fragile ego either way. Clinton couldn't speak to her audience after the election because she lost..

[drauz]

Is anyone really suggesting that Trump won the popular vote? You are the one with an absolutely ridiculous talking point. Again, I realize you are so upset over this life changing event.. and you need to grab onto any "win" you can.. but it honestly doesn't make a difference. Trump is your next President. No amount of crying on your part will change that.

I think Trump is secretly a genius (some what joking). If you try to kick him out, guess what, you get Pence as President.

[time4fun]

We would have had a President-elect with a fragile ego either way. Clinton couldn't speak to her audience because she lost..

That's a pretty ridiculous thing to say, but it does do a great job of illustrating the painfully obvious double standard Clinton had to deal with in the election.

[Androidpk]

There are rumours she got drunk and started throwing shit at people.

heard she started violently beating the shit out of robby mook. Podesta had to pull her off him..

[Tgo01]

That's a pretty ridiculous thing to say, but it does do a great job of illustrating the painfully obvious double standard Clinton had to deal with in the election.

Hillary had to deal with a double standard? lol

Let me guess, it's because she's a woman, right?

time4fun you are arguing with several Democrats now who all seem to disagree with you as well. You and people like you are the people dragging your party down, it's not the moderates in your party.

[Thondalar]

Hillary had to deal with a double standard? lol

Let me guess, it's because she's a woman, right?

time4fun you are arguing with several Democrats now who all seem to disagree with you as well. You and people like you are the people dragging your party down, it's not the moderates in your party.

Too bad to see the left falling apart like this. Our system works best with two strong parties.

[drauz]

That's a pretty ridiculous thing to say, but it does do a great job of illustrating the painfully obvious double standard Clinton had to deal with in the election.

Finish the thought please.

[Gelston]

I like that a mere 3 weeks ago, Time4emo was going on how about the Republican party was in collapse.

[Warriorbird]

I suspect Lindsey Graham's investigation is by Paul Ryan to keep Trump in line.

[time4fun]

Finish the thought please.

Let's acknowledge the fact that Trump has proven again and again that he is compulsively, pathologically incapable of taking any form of criticism- Megyn Kelly, the Khan family, the New York Times, Paul Ryan, etc. I mean the Times literally had a two page spread with all of the insane attacks he lodged against people many of whom had dared to be critical of him. At one point in time, he was starting to tear the GOP apart over perceived slights (he was livid when Paul Ryan hadn't called him up to congratulate him on a great debate performance...after a performance in which he was almost universally panned) He was constantly side-tracked in his own campaign by the destructive fragility of his ego

Then, on the other side- you have Clinton running late to her concession speech- which you are interpreting as a sign of a fragile ego without any real facts.

And then you treated the two candidates as though they both suffered from equally fragile egos.

That's honestly how a LOT of the campaign coverage went through the election cycle.

[Gelston]

Let's acknowledge the fact that Trump has proven again and again that he is compulsively, pathologically incapable of taking any form of criticism- Megyn Kelly, the Khan family, the New York Times, Paul Ryan, etc. I mean the Times literally had a two page spread with all of the insane attacks he lodged against people many of whom had dared to be critical of him. At one point in time, he was starting to tear the GOP apart over perceived slights (he was livid when Paul Ryan hadn't called him up to congratulate him on a great debate performance...after a performance in which he was almost universally panned) He was constantly side-tracked in his own campaign by the destructive fragility of his ego

Then, on the other side- you have Clinton running late to her concession speech- which you are interpreting as a sign of a fragile ego without any real facts.

And then you treated the two candidates as though they both suffered from equally fragile egos.

That's honestly how a LOT of the campaign coverage went through the election cycle.

Well, except you don't have to interpret shit. Her campaign straight said she was too emotional to make a speech.

[time4fun]

Too bad to see the left falling apart like this. Our system works best with two strong parties.

I wouldn't get ahead of myself on this point if I were you. Just 4 months of being the GOP nominee, and Trump was tearing the GOP apart from the inside over his "Loyal to me vs Not Loyal to me" outlook on the world. He's also got Bannon in a key strategy role, and Bannon wants nothing more than a GOP civil war (and has been very clear about this). Breibart is already back to attacking Ryan with gusto, and their Trump ties have never been stronger.

Yes after an extremely and unexpectedly successful election cycle, the GOP is back to loving each other. But the turmoil Trump caused in just a few months as a nominee, and given how incredibly tumultuous and overly politicized (even more so than usual) his transition work alone has been...I wouldn't be so certain that the GOP is going to be in a great place at the end of this presidency.

[time4fun]

Well, except you don't have to interpret shit. Her campaign straight said she was too emotional to make a speech.

That's not a fragile ego. That's someone going through a genuinely devastating situation. Had Trump been attacked to the extent Clinton was, he'd have been firebombing people. Clinton has demonstrated again and again that she is anything but fragile. Trump, on the other hand, has demonstrated again and again that he has a severe case of NPD and can be counted on to lash out at anyone whom he perceives to have slighted him with a rage that is grossly out of proportion with the slight.

I'll remind you that when Trump thought he was going to lose, he began sowing doubt about the legitimacy of the US Democratic process to save face. THAT'S pathologically fragile.

[Warriorbird]

I wouldn't get ahead of myself on this point if I were you. Just 4 months of being the GOP nominee, and Trump was tearing the GOP apart from the inside over his "Loyal to me vs Not Loyal to me" outlook on the world. He's also got Bannon in a key strategy role, and Bannon wants nothing more than a GOP civil war (and has been very clear about this). Breibart is already back to attacking Ryan with gusto, and their Trump ties have never been stronger.

Yes after an extremely and unexpectedly successful election cycle, the GOP is back to loving each other. But the turmoil Trump caused in just a few months as a nominee, and given how incredibly tumultuous and overly politicized (even more so than usual) his transition work alone has been...I wouldn't be so certain that the GOP is going to be in a great place at the end of this presidency.

I think Graham's investigation is Ryan's strike back.

[crb]

I'm just going to leave this here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLG9g7BcjKs

[Tgo01]

I wouldn't get ahead of myself on this point if I were you. Just 4 months of being the GOP nominee, and Trump was tearing the GOP apart from the inside over his "Loyal to me vs Not Loyal to me" outlook on the world. He's also got Bannon in a key strategy role, and Bannon wants nothing more than a GOP civil war (and has been very clear about this). Breibart is already back to attacking Ryan with gusto, and their Trump ties have never been stronger.

Yes after an extremely and unexpectedly successful election cycle, the GOP is back to loving each other. But the turmoil Trump caused in just a few months as a nominee, and given how incredibly tumultuous and overly politicized (even more so than usual) his transition work alone has been...I wouldn't be so certain that the GOP is going to be in a great place at the end of this presidency.

Seriously, I hope the person who hired you to teach a logic class was fired and beaten.

The Republicans are in the strongest position they have been in nationally in decades, Democrats meanwhile are in the worst position they have been in in decades...and yet the GOP is the one that needs to be worried?

Liberals sure are doing a lot of reaching after this election. Careful you don't pull a muscle, you might not have Obamacare to fall back on soon.

[drauz]

Let's acknowledge the fact that Trump has proven again and again that he is compulsively, pathologically incapable of taking any form of criticism- Megyn Kelly, the Khan family, the New York Times, Paul Ryan, etc. I mean the Times literally had a two page spread with all of the insane attacks he lodged against people many of whom had dared to be critical of him. At one point in time, he was starting to tear the GOP apart over perceived slights (he was livid when Paul Ryan hadn't called him up to congratulate him on a great debate performance...after a performance in which he was almost universally panned) He was constantly side-tracked in his own campaign by the destructive fragility of his ego

Then, on the other side- you have Clinton running late to her concession speech- which you are interpreting as a sign of a fragile ego without any real facts.

And then you treated the two candidates as though they both suffered from equally fragile egos.

That's honestly how a LOT of the campaign coverage went through the election cycle.

I never said equally fragile egos, you assumed that. So, she was running late and just decided, even though the place was still packed, that since she was late she would do it tomorrow?

[Tgo01]

That's not a fragile ego. That's someone going through a genuinely devastating situation.

She was running for president of the US, surely it occurred to her at some point she might lose, right? She didn't mentally prepare for that at all? Or is it just a "devastating situation" because she's a woman?


Had Trump been attacked to the extent Clinton was, he'd have been firebombing people.

IF Trump had been attacked as much as Clinton was? IF? IF?!?!?!??! Okay you seriously so fucking delusional I can see why you resorted to blocking/ignoring a lot of people on here. Gotta create your own personal echo chamber!

[Gelston]

She was running for president of the US, surely it occurred to her at some point she might lose, right? She didn't mentally prepare for that at all? Or is it just a "devastating situation" because she's a woman?

You know, I bet it never occurred to her that she was going to lose, although she did decide to cancel the fireworks. Good choice.

[drauz]

That's not a fragile ego. That's someone going through a genuinely devastating situation. Had Trump been attacked to the extent Clinton was, he'd have been firebombing people. Clinton has demonstrated again and again that she is anything but fragile. Trump, on the other hand, has demonstrated again and again that he has a severe case of NPD and can be counted on to lash out at anyone whom he perceives to have slighted him with a rage that is grossly out of proportion with the slight.

I'll remind you that when Trump thought he was going to lose, he began sowing doubt about the legitimacy of the US Democratic process to save face. THAT'S pathologically fragile.

She couldn't take losing so she couldn't make a speech, I don't think its unreasonable to assume its because she wouldn't be able to articulate herself well enough. If you can't handle even that, how can you be expected to handle truly devastating events?

[Tgo01]

You know, I bet it never occurred to her that she was going to lose, although she did decide to cancel the fireworks. Good choice.

It's funny because the day after the elections I saw a news article claiming that the Clinton campaign knew they had a low chance of winning going into election night and Hillary was prepared for it. Yeah, I don't buy that story. I bet Hillary Clinton really did feel she had the election in the bag and would be coasting to victory with 300 electoral votes.

[time4fun]

She couldn't take losing so she couldn't make a speech, I don't think its unreasonable to assume its because she wouldn't be able to articulate herself well enough. If you can't handle even that, how can you be expected to handle truly devastating events?

So again, you're filling in some major gaps here, and you're treating a single moment of devastation, a delay before she gave an extremely thoughtful and gracious speech as somehow on par with Trump. THAT'S a double standard.

And, for the record, saying that we'd have someone in office with a fragile ego either way was treating them as equivalent in a way that's just deeply inaccurate.

[Gelston]

So again, you're filling in some major gaps here, and you're treating a single moment of devastation, a delay before she gave an extremely thoughtful and gracious speech as somehow on par with Trump. THAT'S a double standard.

And, for the record, saying that we'd have someone in office with a fragile ego either way was treating them as equivalent in a way that's just deeply inaccurate.

What is the double standard? I'd be talking shit about Trump if he failed to speak to his followers who had been standing there for 20 hours after a loss too.

[time4fun]

I think Graham's investigation is Ryan's strike back.

It's possible. Though Graham hated Trump already, so it's tough to say. It's not a good start though- Trump isn't going to take that well, and he has a lot of opportunity to make that known.

The biggest issue is going to be the Freedom Caucus. Half of what Trump proposed isn't going to happen, and they'll fight like hell against it. Trump likely doesn't actually care much about whether or not the goals of the legislation are met, but he will very much care if he feels like his authority is being questioned. And neither the Freedom Caucus nor Trump back down from a confrontation. This could get very ugly.

[Warriorbird]

It's possible. Though Graham hated Trump already, so it's tough to say. It's not a good start though- Trump isn't going to take that well, and he has a lot of opportunity to make that known.

The biggest issue is going to be the Freedom Caucus. Half of what Trump proposed isn't going to happen, and they'll fight like hell against it. Trump likely doesn't actually care much about whether or not the goals of the legislation are met, but he will very much care if he feels like his authority is being questioned. This could get very ugly.

I think they might prefer Pence.

[time4fun]

I think they might prefer Pence.

Undoubtedly. So it'll be interesting to see what they do if Trump makes a serious misstep or two. If he ends up convicted of fraud, for example, there may very well be a wing of the party that is more than happy to join the Dems in impeachment and removal, just so they can Pence to the front.

[drauz]

So again, you're filling in some major gaps here, and you're treating a single moment of devastation, a delay before she gave an extremely thoughtful and gracious speech as somehow on par with Trump. THAT'S a double standard.

How is that a double standard? If the people were reversed I would say the same thing.

[Neveragain]

It's really sad to see the likes of time4fun miss this opportunity to change the Democrat party, their cult of ism will sink the Democrats beyond repair. Some of the conversations I have had over these past few days with like minds as Time4fun has been astounding. I honestly feel as if I'm trying to convince them the sky is blue at this point.

[Gelston]

How is that a double standard? If the people were reversed I would say the same thing.

She likes conspiracy theories and saying random words.

[drauz]

Uh.

So a few clarifying points here:

1) This guy says the majority of people didn't vote for Clinton- that's factually incorrect. Trump didn't win because more people saw him as a better candidate, he won because of the quirks of the Electoral College system.

2) Leave it to a straight white guy to fail to reflect on the fact that the difference between someone who is racist/sexist/Islamophobic/etc and someone who "just" votes for those things is rhetorical at best. While that certainly means you can't just call every Trump supporter a racist/sexist/homophobic/etc person, you do not get to vote for those things to happen and then get off the hook by saying "That wasn't my primary motivation, but it didn't bother me much either". Defining racism as the most extreme elements- the white hoods, the David Dukes, etc. only serves to normalize the infinitely more prevalent and downright mundane racism that does the most damage.

3) This whole "Clinton was a wall street shill" thing is fucking hysterical- given Trump WAS the exact kind of person everyone was mad at Clinton for pandering to. You don't get to vote a big business guy who has exploited every string and loophole and questionable bribery tactic and say it was because Clinton was too pro-wall street.

4) I love how your "Big point" video is a crazy straight white guy screaming into a camera saying you voted for a monster. If that's the best you've got- maybe you made a bad decision.

1) Quirks? Would you be saying the same thing if Clinton had won the college but lost the popular vote? Doubt it.

2) Clinton has been openly racist and homophobic... So you don't get to chastise people for something and then do that exact same thing. (let me guess, but shes changed!!!)

3) If you think Trump and Wall Street banks are even in the same ball park regarding money and lobbying power...

4) So, you missed the point he was trying to make?

[Gelston]

https://scontent-dft4-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/15107464_691892807635873_1529034407741932870_n.jpg ?oh=fde37b4f2d9c3a04f8c563a5100cc926&oe=58BBBB7E

what a difference 4 years makes.

[Warriorbird]

It's really sad to see the likes of time4fun miss this opportunity to change the Democrat party, their cult of ism will sink the Democrats beyond repair. Some of the conversations I have had over these past few days with like minds as Time4fun has been astounding. I honestly feel as if I'm trying to convince them the sky is blue at this point.

Hillary lost for a number of reasons apart from attacking her opponents. Her corrupt bargain with Tim Kaine and placing the inept DWS in charge of the DNC was another huge part of the issue. The Democrats's lack of ability to speak to their own longstanding constituents cost them dearly.

Now, if you're just trolling time4fun, I guess that makes sense.


https://scontent-dft4-2.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/15107464_691892807635873_1529034407741932870_n.jpg ?oh=fde37b4f2d9c3a04f8c563a5100cc926&oe=58BBBB7E

what a difference 4 years makes.

Both parties trade off complaining about it. They won't end it though. They don't want a many party system.

[Tgo01]

Both parties trade off complaining about it. They won't end it though. They don't want a many party system.

"Complaining" about the electoral college is one thing. Claiming the electoral college is all about white supremacy and sexism is just flat out absurd. But as per usual you are shoving your fingers far into your ears.

[Neveragain]

Hillary lost for a number of reasons apart from attacking her opponents. Her corrupt bargain with Tim Kaine and placing the inept DWS in charge of the DNC was another huge part of the issue. The Democrats's lack of ability to speak to their own longstanding constituents cost them dearly.

Now, if you're just trolling time4fun, I guess that makes sense.



Both parties trade off complaining about it. They won't end it though. They don't want a many party system.

You're not the like mind of time4fun, the word rational is at least part of your vocabulary (Of course you're a male so that makes sense). <<<<<<------ :pirate: And we have a winner :pirate:

Both parties also look like asses when they even mention mob rule governance.

[Warriorbird]

"Complaining" about the electoral college is one thing. Claiming the electoral college is all about white supremacy and sexism is just flat out absurd. But as per usual you are shoving your fingers far into your ears.

I'm curious as to where I said those things.

[Tgo01]

I'm curious as to where I said those things.

So how many blows to the head did you receive today?

[Thondalar]

"Complaining" about the electoral college is one thing. Claiming the electoral college is all about white supremacy and sexism is just flat out absurd. But as per usual you are shoving your fingers far into your ears.

Nah, I'd stop it at complaining about the electoral college. Considering the other options on the table, it was, by far, the best option. To complain about something that is such a cornerstone of our Constitutional Democracy because you don't like the results of one election is the pinnacle of entitled ignorance.

Clinton won the "popular vote" by less than 1%. That's true. However:

30 States voted for Trump, only 20 voted for Clinton.

148 million registered voters did not vote for Clinton.

[Tgo01]

Nah, I'd stop it at complaining about the electoral college. Considering the other options on the table, it was, by far, the best option. To complain about something that is such a cornerstone of our Constitutional Democracy because you don't like the results of one election is the pinnacle of entitled ignorance.

For sure, I personally like the electoral college and if the roles were reversed I would be telling Republicans to suck it up too.

Like I said earlier, I wonder how many people realize that many other western Democracies don't even allow voters to directly vote for their president/prime minister/etc? Most of them let the majority in their respective Congress decide who the leader is.

[Parkbandit]

I think Trump is secretly a genius (some what joking). If you try to kick him out, guess what, you get Pence as President.

Yea..

I'll be honest.. I don't think Trump is all that smart at all. Some of the stupid things that he says.. like a 10 year old would know better.

And Pence seems like a religious nutjob to me.

`

[drauz]

Yea..

I'll be honest.. I don't think Trump is all that smart at all. Some of the stupid things that he says.. like a 10 year old would know better.

And Pence seems like a religious nutjob to me.

`

I just meant if that was really why he chose him, it would be genius. Obviously he isn't the sharpest tool in the shed, but he isn't the dullest one either.

[Parkbandit]

Too bad to see the left falling apart like this. Our system works best with two strong parties.

And when you have 2 really weak parties.. you get Hillary and Trump.......

[drauz]

This image is polling data from before the election... from survey monkey.

https://www.surveymonkey.com/elections/map?poll=sm-lv-nonwhite-nocollege-cps

Polls are pretty reliable I hear, especially for this election cycle.

[time4fun]

And so it begins (http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN13B05C?feedType=RSS)...


An architect of anti-immigration efforts who says he is advising President-elect Donald Trump said the new administration could push ahead rapidly on construction of a U.S.-Mexico border wall without seeking immediate congressional approval.

Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who helped write tough immigration laws in Arizona and elsewhere, said in an interview that Trump's policy advisers had also discussed drafting a proposal for his consideration to reinstate a registry for immigrants from Muslim countries.

[Tgo01]

And so it begins (http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKBN13B05C?feedType=RSS)...

A wall and a registry!!!! Literally Hitler!!!!!!!

[Neveragain]

California trade deficit 2013: -273 billion

Iowa trade deficit 2013: + 4.3 billion

Things like this is why there must be an electoral college.

[Warriorbird]

California trade deficit 2013: -273 billion

Iowa trade deficit 2013: + 4.3 billion

Things like this is why there must be an electoral college.

Why might those two numbers be what they are that's entirely unrelated to politics?


A wall and a registry!!!! Literally Hitler!!!!!!!

In which we try to add words to to the conversation that we wish were there.

[Thondalar]

A wall and a registry!!!! Literally Hitler!!!!!!!

Yet she has no problem putting gun owners on a registry.

[Taernath]

Her corrupt bargain with Tim Kaine.

What's this about?

[Warriorbird]

Yet she has no problem putting gun owners on a registry.

And you have no problem with Muslims being on one?


What's this about?

Tim Kaine was an actually competent DNC chair who encouraged candidates to do shocking things like have real 50 state strategies. He agreed to step down to give his position to the staggeringly incompetent Debbie Wasserman Schultz (so she could then do her best to put Hillary over Bernie) if he were named Hillary's Vice President. This worked out not so well. None of this strictly violated the law or the DNC rules but it sure wasn't ethical or smart.

[Neveragain]

Why might those two numbers be what they are that's entirely unrelated to politics?

Wait..what? Trade has like everything to do with politics, government policy dictates trade.

(I have to admit I'm pretty stoned right now so I could be completely not understanding what you just wrote)

[time4fun]

Yet she has no problem putting gun owners on a registry.

Did you just suggest that being Muslim is analogous to owning a gun?

[Warriorbird]

Wait..what? Trade has like everything to do with politics, government policy dictates trade.

(I have to admit I'm pretty stoned right now so I could be completely not understanding what you just wrote)

It's a lot easier to purchase all sorts of goods with the greater economic power and port access of California. Size makes the comparison tough but you could show the relative budgets/budget deficits.

[Thondalar]

And you have no problem with Muslims being on one?

Immigrant Muslims? Nope, not a one. I would bring up the fact that the only thing being discussed is simply reinstating protocols that we already had at one point, but you wouldn't care about the facts.

[Thondalar]

Did you just suggest that being Muslim is analogous to owning a gun?

Yep. Both are guaranteed under the Constitution.

[Warriorbird]

Immigrant Muslims? Nope, not a one. I would bring up the fact that the only thing being discussed is simply reinstating protocols that we already had at one point, but you wouldn't care about the facts.

A strong purposeful choice of not posting the source to avoid discussing the problems with that claim because you wouldn't want to do that.

[Taernath]

Tim Kaine was an actually competent DNC chair who encouraged candidates to do shocking things like have real 50 state strategies. He agreed to step down to give his position to the staggeringly incompetent Debbie Wasserman Schultz (so she could then do her best to put Hillary over Bernie) if he were named Hillary's Vice President. This worked out not so well. None of this strictly violated the law or the DNC rules but it sure wasn't ethical or smart.

Ah yeah, that's pretty bad. I had never heard of him before, I just figured she created him as a homonculus in an alchemy lab somewhere.

[Tgo01]

And you have no problem with Muslims being on one?

Actually the wording from the article says a registry of people "from Muslim countries", as in it's not specifically targeting Muslims.

You're sounding awfully racist right now.

[Tgo01]

Did you just suggest that being Muslim is analogous to owning a gun?

Actually the wording from the article says a registry of people "from Muslim countries", as in it's not specifically targeting Muslims.

You're sounding awfully racist right now.

[Warriorbird]

Actually the wording from the article says a registry of people "from Muslim countries", as in it's not specifically targeting Muslims.

You're sounding awfully racist right now.

Because we wouldn't want to actually discuss the issue or research the program. Straight political football. Let me know when you get back down to Earth.

[Tgo01]

A strong purposeful choice of not posting the source to avoid discussing the problems with that claim because you wouldn't want to do that.

It's talked about in the article time4fun posted that you clearly didn't read:


To implement Trump's call for "extreme vetting" of some Muslim immigrants, Kobach said the immigration policy group could recommend the reinstatement of a national registry of immigrants and visitors who enter the United States on visas from countries where extremist organizations are active.

Strawman to WB, Strawman to WB, come in WB.

[Tgo01]

Because we wouldn't want to actually discuss the issue or research the program. Straight political football. Let me know when you get back down to Earth.

Oh...kay?

Nonsensical Ranting WB is on the field.

[Warriorbird]

Oh...kay?

Nonsensical Ranting WB is on the field.

It's a specific program which you clearly don't know anything about so are just throwing down your standard nonsense. It's right up there with where with your new "make up liberal claims to feel reverse racism/globalism" routine.


It's talked about in the article time4fun posted that you clearly didn't read:

Strawman to WB, Strawman to WB, come in WB.

Except nowhere near completely.

[Tgo01]

It's a specific program which you clearly don't know anything about

Educate me then, because according to the article we all read what is being talked about is reinstating an old program, not proposing a new and racist program.


Except nowhere near completely.

Come on WB, stop beating around the bush and tell us how the program being discussed is racist or xenophobic or Islamaphobic. Vague WB is the worst of the WB personas.

[Warriorbird]

Educate me then, because according to the article we all read what is being talked about is reinstating an old program, not proposing a new and racist program.

Come on WB, stop beating around the bush and tell us how the program being discussed is racist or xenophobic or Islamaphobic. Vague WB is the worst of the WB personas.

I've not said any of the above. It's a program designed to avoid judicial scrutiny and bad PR by targeting a vast series of Muslim countries (and one Asian country) rather than quite all of them. In its original format it didn't so much stop terrorists as visa violators and didn't produce much information we didn't get elsewhere so it was eventually scrapped. It represents far more of a betrayal of Trump's promises to his voters than anything else.

It doesn't target actual immigrant visas at all, hilariously enough.

[Tgo01]

It's a program designed to avoid judicial scrutiny and bad PR by targeting a vast series of Muslim countries (and one Asian country) rather than quite all of them. In its original format it didn't so much stop terrorists as visa violators and didn't produce much information we didn't get elsewhere so it was eventually scrapped. It represents far more of a betrayal of Trump's promises to his voters than anything else.

It doesn't target actual immigrant visas at all, hilariously enough.

So you're really making the argument that by proposing this Trump is breaking his promise and it doesn't do enough? wut?

And time4fun's position is Trump is the next coming of Hitler? Yeah, I know she didn't specifically say that WB, but do you really need these obvious things pointed out to you? What do you think she meant when she said "And so it begins"?

Amazing how two staunch liberals can read the same news article and arrive at vastly different conclusions.

[Warriorbird]

So you're really making the argument that by proposing this Trump is breaking his promise and it doesn't do enough? wut?

And time4fun's position is Trump is the next coming of Hitler? Yeah, I know she didn't specifically say that WB, but do you really need these obvious things pointed out to you? What do you think she meant when she said "And so it begins"?

Amazing how two staunch liberals can read the same news article and arrive at vastly different conclusions.

I doubt she's read what I have. I thought that Thondalar had, however.

I think we all have more than enough to discuss without you "interpreting" her.

[Tgo01]

I think we all have more than enough to discuss without you "interpreting" her.

Sure WB. Sure. With time4fun's latest rantings and fear mongering she wasn't using this an example to paint Trump as literally Hitler. Whatever makes you feel better about sharing the same political party as her.

[drauz]

I doubt she's read what I have. I thought that Thondalar had, however.

I think we all have more than enough to discuss without you "interpreting" her.


Do you actually think Hitler ran on a platform of doing those things?

Like Trump, Hitler ran as a political outsider who spoke to the disenfranchised working class often with minority scapegoating. Both also showed exasperation with core elements of democracy, and both were biting in their criticism of the media.

Not shocking. According to his ex wife, Trump kept a book of translated Hitler speeches on his night stand. Consistent with a man who is appointing a major white nationalist, anti-Semitic figurehead to a high profile post in the White House.

But as far as I know, even Hitler didn't originally talk about putting Jews on lists. That's a Trump special.

its pretty obvious that she thinks Trump is the next coming of Hitler.

[Warriorbird]

Sure WB. Sure. With time4fun's latest rantings and fear mongering she wasn't using this an example to paint Trump as literally Hitler. Whatever makes you feel better about sharing the same political party as her.

Maybe because of justifications like this for what's essentially not even an immigrant visa program?

https://twitter.com/bad_takes/status/799079032499343360?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

One wonders if its to convince his voters that the program is "real"?


its pretty obvious that she thinks Trump is the next coming of Hitler.

I suppose she does at that. Me, I'm still more on "the next coming of Silvio Berlusconi."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2016/11/16/is-trump-a-berlusconi-let-a-berlusconi-expert-explain/

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/20/donald-trump-silvio-berlusconi-italy-prime-minister

[time4fun]

its pretty obvious that she thinks Trump is the next coming of Hitler.

My argument isn't that Trump is destined to become the next Hitler, it's that we are playing with fire here. We have opened the door to an authoritarian who has little respect for Democratic institutions (that he can't control) and who has made it a point to scapegoat minorities in ways that we haven't seen since McGovern. Meanwhile we have a population that has become alarmingly receptive to authoritarianism and disregard for constitutional rights/pillars of democracy. These are the circumstances under which a Hitler can happen. Truthfully, you can mix all of these elements together without it exploding in your face (i.e. Hitler), but you are absolutely running the risk of said explosion every time you do it.

So the fact that we are taking the chance at all is the problem. For the long-term stability and viability of our Democracy, there are lines that should never be crossed and people who should never be invited into power. You invite in enough Trumps, and eventually one of them does turn into the terrifying fascist/demagogue that we've seen take over otherwise reasonable countries before.

[time4fun]

I doubt she's read what I have. I thought that Thondalar had, however.

Did you feel how hard I just rolled my eyes?

[drauz]

Meanwhile we have a population that has become alarmingly receptive to authoritarianism and disregard for constitutional rights/pillars of democracy.

Are... you actually critiquing liberals. I never thought I'd see it. Good for you.


My argument isn't that Trump is destined to become the next Hitler, it's that we are playing with fire here. We have opened the door to an authoritarian who has little respect for Democratic institutions (that he can't control) and who has made it a point to scapegoat minorities in ways that we haven't seen since McGovern. Meanwhile we have a population that has become alarmingly receptive to authoritarianism and disregard for constitutional rights/pillars of democracy. You can mix all of these elements together without it exploding in your face (i.e. Hitler), but you are absolutely running the risk of said explosion every time you do it.

But the fact that we are taking the chance at all is the problem. For the long-term stability and viability of our Democracy, there are lines that should never be crossed and people who should never be invited into power. You invite in enough Trumps, and eventually one of them does turn into the terrifying fascist/demagogue that we've seen take over otherwise reasonable countries before.

To me you basically are though. That it how I interpret what you are saying. You try to draw all these parallels to Hitler and then right before you call him literally Hitler you pull away. What you meant doesn't matter its how people perceive what you are saying.

[Seizer]

Did you feel how hard I just rolled my eyes?

http://www.benstich.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/charliebrown.jpg

[drauz]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7LWJaBFIFw

[drauz]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ud_MQi79VwU

[time4fun]

To me you basically are though. That it how I interpret what you are saying. You try to draw all these parallels to Hitler and then right before you call him literally Hitler you pull away. What you meant doesn't matter its how people perceive what you are saying.

So "you are drawing parallels but pull back just shy of saying he's going to be Hitler" is precisely what I just described.

This is a moment in US political reality where we have all of the necessary ingredients for a Stalin/Hitler/Mussolini to emerge. As it turns out, the script that led to these horrible people/moments looked pretty damn similar every single time. You had large-scale frustration with the government, you had a normalization of authoritarianism, you had political scapegoating of specific groups of people, you had a working class suffering under large scale income inequality, and you had a person who was driven to absolute power and void of basic empathy in a way that was not just deeply troubling but which was pathological to the point of meeting the criteria for Narcissistic Personality Disorder. (It is generally accepted, for example, that Stalin and Hitler suffered from severe cases of NPD).

These moments don't always lead to such extreme situations, but they do create an environment where we are uniquely vulnerable to the worst-case scenario. And a lot of other dangerous exist in this specific (but by no means new) blend of social and political forces. You don't need a Hitler to put Japanese people into internment camps. You don't need a Stalin to have a state-sponsored media outlet manipulating the populace.

Most of the horrible people and horrible things that we all shudder at in our history were ushered in by cheering and adoring fans who only later realized what they had enabled. My entire point is that once you start crossing these lines- which we are VERY much crossing right now- you're tempting fate in a dangerous way.

[Tgo01]

My entire point is that once you start crossing these lines- which we are VERY much crossing right now- you're tempting fate in a dangerous way.

The man isn't even president yet but we're already "VERY much crossing" these lines right now?

Pull your head out of your fucking asshole already.

[Gelston]

You must gather your party before venturing forth.

[Tgo01]

You had large-scale frustration with the government

This is true whether Hillary or Trump won.


you had a normalization of authoritarianism

This is bullshit and you know it.


you had political scapegoating of specific groups of people

You mean like Hillary and the left scapegoating "the rich" and white men?



you had a working class suffering under large scale income inequality

This is happening (according to you) whether Trump or Hillary won.


and you had a person who was driven to absolute power and void of basic empathy

Becoming US president is not "driven to absolute power", and Trump being void of basic empathy is an opinion on your part. Personally of the two I think Hillary has shown time and time again she lacks any sort of empathy, she only seems to care about herself. Her campaign slogan was "I'm with her" for fuck's sake, whereas Trump's pledge was "I'm with you, the American people."

So I guess going by your own "logic" (and I can't put enough quotes around that word) we were going to get the next Hitler no matter who won.

[drauz]

So "you are drawing parallels but pull back just shy of saying he's going to be Hitler" is precisely what I just described.

This is a moment in US political reality where we have all of the necessary ingredients for a Stalin/Hitler/Mussolini to emerge. As it turns out, the script that led to these horrible people/moments looked pretty damn similar every single time. You had large-scale frustration with the government, you had a normalization of authoritarianism (1), you had political scapegoating of specific groups of people (2), you had a working class suffering under large scale income inequality (3), and you had a person who was driven to absolute power and void of basic empathy (4) in a way that was not just deeply troubling but which was pathological to the point of meeting the criteria for Narcissistic Personality Disorder. (It is generally accepted, for example, that Stalin and Hitler suffered from severe cases of NPD).

1) This would be the liberals doing this, look at college campuses around the country.

2) Liberals do the exact same thing, but its ok for them because they're "right".

3) This is a tough one because there is almost zero way in a democratic capitalist society to solve this. There will always be winners and there will always be losers. As long as people have relatively the same opportunity, I don't see a problem. I actually think large corporations are a huge problem in this and they are a large factor in it.

4) I doubt she is much different than Trump in this. She has just been a politician for so long, she is just better at hiding it.

[kutter]

The single most concerning part about this whole situation is that we have a President-elect whose ego is so fragile and whose behavior is so compulsive that he has to jump out on to Twitter to "defend" himself against facts. This in addition to his alarming tweets against Protesters and a media outlet that had unfavorable coverage of him. (You might notice both of those things are cornerstone citizen protections covered by the 1st Amendment that NO elected official should be trying to undermine).

As opposed to the one who completely collapsed in her hotel room sobbing uncontrollably for hours when she realized she had lost, and could not even muster the class to come down and thank all the people that had worked for her.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

Pretty much everyone at my work despises Donald Trump (I'm at a credit union) so I got funny looks when the day after the election I said in the break room, "Welp at least he only paid like 45 cents to every one of Clinton's dollars for each vote, one way or another that's a victory for the American people!"... since usually whoever pays the most wins. I stand by it though, LOL! Looking back, what Trump did was pretty fucking masterful social engineering. He suppressed the liberal turn out by "acting crazy" to the point that lots of Dems DIDN'T vote for Hillary because they simply assumed "crazy" Donald Trump wouldn't make it. He got fuck tons of free publicity, he turned out a ton of swing voters and solidified his own base using anger as a catalyst (which is precisely what Obama did, even if Obama couched it in hope), and he used a strategy to flip states that literally no one else has used before so Clinton just didn't even factor it in to her own strategy. Regardless of how I personally feel about Trump, all of that shit shows someone who is a lot more competent than he's been acting like, and IMO that's a good thing. Above all of the petty politics, I want what's best for the United States so I am hopeful he shocks me in a good way and we have a nice next 4 years.

I understand WHY people voted for Donald Trump. If someone doesn't, they probably need to listen better. I'm also more than a little bit pissed off at the DNC and in a really fucked up way I'm almost gleeful that they got bent over and fucked in the ass, especially after all of the stuff emerged about how the primaries were handled. You don't alienate one of your most powerful voting demographics (Millennials) then expect to win the election. We are the generation of apathy for good reason, and speaking for myself when Bernie lost I just couldn't wait for this shit show to be over.

I woke up after the election to some gloating texts from friends and family who know I'm a liberal pinko commie... my response was "It's not who I wanted, but congratulations on the win!". This is how democracy works and functions. I'm embarrassed as fuck about the protests, frankly. That ship has sailed, he won, it's done. Act like fucking adults about it. Have enough faith in your country and its Constitution and systems to not throw a tantrum because you lost. The sky is not falling. The USA is going to survive.

To be frank, I think the media does a bang up job making everyone think that if you're not in the same party or not voting for the same people, you're violently opposed to each other. If you just TALK to people and put aside political labeling, a lot of us actually agree on the same shit even if we don't see precisely eye to eye on how to solve it. Calling Republicans and Independents racists, sexists, bigots, and other shit is not helpful. It just raises hackles and widens the divide. Look for the common ground and build on it.

Also holy fuck, President Elect Trump is not going to become the next Hitler. He's been a Democrat most of his life and his tone completely shifted once he became President Elect. When anyone calls him that, do you realize that you're calling basically half of the country, who voted for him, Nazis? Trump may have said some fucked up stuff (including stuff on a shock jock radio show) but that is no where remotely NEAR committing genocide. I'm super unhappy with his VP because I think gay conversion therapy is a human rights violation, but Trump isn't going to be stuffing Muslims and Mexicans into cattle cars and sending them to American Treblinka's. This kind of angry rhetoric doesn't help shit. I get being upset we lost but holy shit, take a chill pill and wait and see what happens.

[Parkbandit]

Come on WB, stop beating around the bush and tell us how the program being discussed is racist or xenophobic or Islamaphobic. Vague WB is the worst of the WB personas.

He's better than the "I'm taking the high road" WB. That guy is a joke.

[Parkbandit]

Pretty much everyone at my work despises Donald Trump (I'm at a credit union) so I got funny looks when the day after the election I said in the break room, "Welp at least he only paid like 45 cents to every one of Clinton's dollars for each vote, one way or another that's a victory for the American people!"... since usually whoever pays the most wins. I stand by it though, LOL! Looking back, what Trump did was pretty fucking masterful social engineering. He suppressed the liberal turn out by "acting crazy" to the point that lots of Dems DIDN'T vote for Hillary because they simply assumed "crazy" Donald Trump wouldn't make it. He got fuck tons of free publicity, he turned out a ton of swing voters and solidified his own base using anger as a catalyst (which is precisely what Obama did, even if Obama couched it in hope), and he used a strategy to flip states that literally no one else has used before so Clinton just didn't even factor it in to her own strategy. Regardless of how I personally feel about Trump, all of that shit shows someone who is a lot more competent than he's been acting like, and IMO that's a good thing. Above all of the petty politics, I want what's best for the United States so I am hopeful he shocks me in a good way and we have a nice next 4 years.

I understand WHY people voted for Donald Trump. If someone doesn't, they probably need to listen better. I'm also more than a little bit pissed off at the DNC and in a really fucked up way I'm almost gleeful that they got bent over and fucked in the ass, especially after all of the stuff emerged about how the primaries were handled. You don't alienate one of your most powerful voting demographics (Millennials) then expect to win the election. We are the generation of apathy for good reason, and speaking for myself when Bernie lost I just couldn't wait for this shit show to be over.

I woke up after the election to some gloating texts from friends and family who know I'm a liberal pinko commie... my response was "It's not who I wanted, but congratulations on the win!". This is how democracy works and functions. I'm embarrassed as fuck about the protests, frankly. That ship has sailed, he won, it's done. Act like fucking adults about it. Have enough faith in your country and its Constitution and systems to not throw a tantrum because you lost. The sky is not falling. The USA is going to survive.

To be frank, I think the media does a bang up job making everyone think that if you're not in the same party or not voting for the same people, you're violently opposed to each other. If you just TALK to people and put aside political labeling, a lot of us actually agree on the same shit even if we don't see precisely eye to eye on how to solve it. Calling Republicans and Independents racists, sexists, bigots, and other shit is not helpful. It just raises hackles and widens the divide. Look for the common ground and build on it.

Also holy fuck, President Elect Trump is not going to become the next Hitler. He's been a Democrat most of his life and his tone completely shifted once he became President Elect. When anyone calls him that, do you realize that you're calling basically half of the country, who voted for him, Nazis? Trump may have said some fucked up stuff (including stuff on a shock jock radio show) but that is no where remotely NEAR committing genocide. I'm super unhappy with his VP because I think gay conversion therapy is a human rights violation, but Trump isn't going to be stuffing Muslims and Mexicans into cattle cars and sending them to American Treblinka's. This kind of angry rhetoric doesn't help shit. I get being upset we lost but holy shit, take a chill pill and wait and see what happens.

We miss you. :(

[Tgo01]

Pretty much everyone at my work despises Donald Trump (I'm at a credit union) so I got funny looks when the day after the election I said in the break room, "Welp at least he only paid like 45 cents to every one of Clinton's dollars for each vote, one way or another that's a victory for the American people!"... since usually whoever pays the most wins. I stand by it though, LOL! Looking back, what Trump did was pretty fucking masterful social engineering. He suppressed the liberal turn out by "acting crazy" to the point that lots of Dems DIDN'T vote for Hillary because they simply assumed "crazy" Donald Trump wouldn't make it. He got fuck tons of free publicity, he turned out a ton of swing voters and solidified his own base using anger as a catalyst (which is precisely what Obama did, even if Obama couched it in hope), and he used a strategy to flip states that literally no one else has used before so Clinton just didn't even factor it in to her own strategy. Regardless of how I personally feel about Trump, all of that shit shows someone who is a lot more competent than he's been acting like, and IMO that's a good thing. Above all of the petty politics, I want what's best for the United States so I am hopeful he shocks me in a good way and we have a nice next 4 years.

I understand WHY people voted for Donald Trump. If someone doesn't, they probably need to listen better. I'm also more than a little bit pissed off at the DNC and in a really fucked up way I'm almost gleeful that they got bent over and fucked in the ass, especially after all of the stuff emerged about how the primaries were handled. You don't alienate one of your most powerful voting demographics (Millennials) then expect to win the election. We are the generation of apathy for good reason, and speaking for myself when Bernie lost I just couldn't wait for this shit show to be over.

I woke up after the election to some gloating texts from friends and family who know I'm a liberal pinko commie... my response was "It's not who I wanted, but congratulations on the win!". This is how democracy works and functions. I'm embarrassed as fuck about the protests, frankly. That ship has sailed, he won, it's done. Act like fucking adults about it. Have enough faith in your country and its Constitution and systems to not throw a tantrum because you lost. The sky is not falling. The USA is going to survive.

To be frank, I think the media does a bang up job making everyone think that if you're not in the same party or not voting for the same people, you're violently opposed to each other. If you just TALK to people and put aside political labeling, a lot of us actually agree on the same shit even if we don't see precisely eye to eye on how to solve it. Calling Republicans and Independents racists, sexists, bigots, and other shit is not helpful. It just raises hackles and widens the divide. Look for the common ground and build on it.

Also holy fuck, President Elect Trump is not going to become the next Hitler. He's been a Democrat most of his life and his tone completely shifted once he became President Elect. When anyone calls him that, do you realize that you're calling basically half of the country, who voted for him, Nazis? Trump may have said some fucked up stuff (including stuff on a shock jock radio show) but that is no where remotely NEAR committing genocide. I'm super unhappy with his VP because I think gay conversion therapy is a human rights violation, but Trump isn't going to be stuffing Muslims and Mexicans into cattle cars and sending them to American Treblinka's. This kind of angry rhetoric doesn't help shit. I get being upset we lost but holy shit, take a chill pill and wait and see what happens.

Very awesome post.

The thing about Pence has been blown out of proportion by the left as well though. While I agree that supporting conversion therapy is pretty bad, all Pence said was he felt money should go towards such institutions that would "help" people seeking such help, in other words he wanted it to be voluntary.

It has been played up that Pence wanted gays to be forced into therapy and that he supported electro shock therapy, something he has never specifically said he supports.

But overall he isn't a very good VP pick anyways.

[Methais]

So "you are drawing parallels but pull back just shy of saying he's going to be Hitler" is precisely what I just described.

This is a moment in US political reality where we have all of the necessary ingredients for a Stalin/Hitler/Mussolini to emerge. As it turns out, the script that led to these horrible people/moments looked pretty damn similar every single time. You had large-scale frustration with the government, you had a normalization of authoritarianism, you had political scapegoating of specific groups of people, you had a working class suffering under large scale income inequality, and you had a person who was driven to absolute power and void of basic empathy in a way that was not just deeply troubling but which was pathological to the point of meeting the criteria for Narcissistic Personality Disorder. (It is generally accepted, for example, that Stalin and Hitler suffered from severe cases of NPD).

These moments don't always lead to such extreme situations, but they do create an environment where we are uniquely vulnerable to the worst-case scenario. And a lot of other dangerous exist in this specific (but by no means new) blend of social and political forces. You don't need a Hitler to put Japanese people into internment camps. You don't need a Stalin to have a state-sponsored media outlet manipulating the populace.

Most of the horrible people and horrible things that we all shudder at in our history were ushered in by cheering and adoring fans who only later realized what they had enabled. My entire point is that once you start crossing these lines- which we are VERY much crossing right now- you're tempting fate in a dangerous way.

https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/15134586_10154365196562535_6688968544591333372_n.j pg?oh=3580fa0aeeec5fe2af237081b9502f6f&oe=588C6427

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

Very awesome post.

The thing about Pence has been blown out of proportion by the left as well though. While I agree that supporting conversion therapy is pretty bad, all Pence said was he felt money should go towards such institutions that would "help" people seeking such help, in other words he wanted it to be voluntary.

It has been played up that Pence wanted gays to be forced into therapy and that he supported electro shock therapy, something he has never specifically said he supports.

But overall he isn't a very good VP pick anyways.

The VP picks blew this cycle, both sides!


We miss you. :(

I'm too busy taking butt selfies at the gym and triggering anti yoga pants people to post more :P

[Parkbandit]

The VP picks blew this cycle, both sides!

Both candidates had to pick shitty VPs so they didn't look even worse.

[Jeril]

The VP picks blew this cycle, both sides!



I'm too busy taking butt selfies at the gym and triggering anti yoga pants people to post more :P

Just link us to these selfies and I think we'll all be good ;)

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

Both candidates had to pick shitty VPs so they didn't look even worse.

A shitty VP is basically anti assassination insurance haha

[Methais]

A shitty VP is basically anti assassination insurance haha

And who says Trump and Hillary weren't thinking ahead?

[Shaps]

So "you are drawing parallels but pull back just shy of saying he's going to be Hitler" is precisely what I just described.

This is a moment in US political reality where we have all of the necessary ingredients for a Stalin/Hitler/Mussolini to emerge. As it turns out, the script that led to these horrible people/moments looked pretty damn similar every single time. You had large-scale frustration with the government, you had a normalization of authoritarianism, you had political scapegoating of specific groups of people, you had a working class suffering under large scale income inequality, and you had a person who was driven to absolute power and void of basic empathy in a way that was not just deeply troubling but which was pathological to the point of meeting the criteria for Narcissistic Personality Disorder. (It is generally accepted, for example, that Stalin and Hitler suffered from severe cases of NPD).

These moments don't always lead to such extreme situations, but they do create an environment where we are uniquely vulnerable to the worst-case scenario. And a lot of other dangerous exist in this specific (but by no means new) blend of social and political forces. You don't need a Hitler to put Japanese people into internment camps. You don't need a Stalin to have a state-sponsored media outlet manipulating the populace.

Most of the horrible people and horrible things that we all shudder at in our history were ushered in by cheering and adoring fans who only later realized what they had enabled. My entire point is that once you start crossing these lines- which we are VERY much crossing right now- you're tempting fate in a dangerous way.

If I didn't know you were talking about this election... you just described the 2008 campaign to a tee.

[Neveragain]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=973J7DqPTFo

[Latrinsorm]

To be frank, I think the media does a bang up job making everyone think that if you're not in the same party or not voting for the same people, you're violently opposed to each other. If you just TALK to people and put aside political labeling, a lot of us actually agree on the same shit even if we don't see precisely eye to eye on how to solve it. Calling Republicans and Independents racists, sexists, bigots, and other shit is not helpful. It just raises hackles and widens the divide. Look for the common ground and build on it. What do you think of the First Amendment Defense Act, and President Trump's pledge to sign it if passed by Congress?

[drauz]

What do you think of the First Amendment Defense Act, and President Trump's pledge to sign it if passed by Congress?

I assume you are for it, unless you were just stating facts before. Since it seems to just confirm the 1st amendment.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/2802

[Latrinsorm]

I assume you are for it, unless you were just stating facts before. Since it seems to just confirm the 1st amendment. https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/2802I always state facts. This bill is the opposite of confirming the First Amendment, it is an express violation of it in the same way that "Prohibits the federal government from taking discriminatory action against a person on the basis that such person believes or acts in accordance with a religious belief or moral conviction that homosexuals should be put to death by private citizens." would be. The only way to actually separate church and state is to have laws that don't make religion the reason for going to or staying out of jail, and the only way to do that is not have religion be the reason in any law. Religion is expressly so in this law, so it is expressly unconstitutional.

I recognize that you all actually do understand the basic English of the First Amendment, and so my next statement will be pointless, but that's never stopped me before so here goes anyway. The Supreme Court made it even easier by devising a three pronged test, the first prong of which is "The statute must have a secular legislative purpose." This bill is explicitly not secular. It is explicitly the opposite of that.

[jumbodog]

From the text of the first amendments defense. To me, this is the dangerous part:

"Defines "person" as any person regardless of religious affiliation, including corporations and other entities regardless of for-profit or nonprofit status."

It writes Citizens United into law. Which is somewhat different from the supreme court ruling. Corporations are not people.

[time4fun]

I assume you are for it, unless you were just stating facts before. Since it seems to just confirm the 1st amendment.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/2802

this bill legalizes discrimination

[drauz]

this bill legalizes discrimination

Discrimination is currently allowed based on sexuality.

[time4fun]

Discrimination is currently allowed based on sexuality.

I'm not really sure how to begin to engage with the deficiencies in legal and moral reasoning inherent in that statement.

[Whirlin]

Discrimination is currently allowed based on sexuality.
This bill is basically saying acting like Kim Davis is ok.
It also has further reaching implications due to it's corporation inclusion, thus allowing corporations the religious freedom to prevent recognition of same-sex marriage for benefits, or enabling them the religious freedom to not cover birth control, which could directly conflict with the rulings of the supreme court.

[drauz]

I'm not really sure how to begin to engage with the deficiencies in legal and moral reasoning inherent in that statement.

You could start with proving it wrong? There is no Federal law that disallows discrimination based on sexuality. Many states have made it illegal, but the Federal gov't hasn't except for Federal employment.

Title VII prohibits discrimination because of race, color, religion, sex, and national original. The EEOC has said that sex part covers same-sex people but that isn't binding to anything but Federal employees. That is a case that COULD be made but hasn't been successful as of yet.

Oh, you are assuming I am against same-sex marriage I assume. Let me get that out of the way. I don't give two shits who you are having sex with or married to. I just enjoy playing devil's advocate, it helps me view situations from both sides.

[drauz]

This bill is basically saying acting like Kim Davis is ok.
It also has further reaching implications due to it's corporation inclusion, thus allowing corporations the religious freedom to prevent recognition of same-sex marriage for benefits, or enabling them the religious freedom to not cover birth control, which could directly conflict with the rulings of the supreme court.

Sadly, that doesn't change the fact that in the private sector discrimination based of sexual orientation is allowed.