US Elections: Day dawns on Trump.

[Shryke]

9 minutes ago, DunderMifflin said:

Obama is in pretty good shape actually.

$$$$ time for him if he wants it. He deserves it.He was a good President imo. I wish him a nice low stress life of giving speeches and getting paaaaaid. Climate change will be his big issue I'm thinking.

Please. He's probably angry and despondent as shit right now. The party and movement he helped rebuild, the movement he's been saying for a few months now he was gonna work to rebuild at the state and local level after the election after he left office, just suffered a crushing defeat that will last for years and at the hands of a man who rose to political prominence literally by hurling racism at him. A man who's administration will likely undo everything of his they can.

America just spit in Obama's face. There is basically no chance he is pleased or feeling in good shape right now.

[C Rutherford]

One of the countless bitter ironies is that many of those claiming to have cast their vote "to make America Great Again" did so by the pulling of their feelings and knee jerk reactions orchestrated in part by Assange and Vladimir Putin.  Two men who clearly do not want to make America Great Again.  The cognitive dissonance involved is staggering.  All that jingoistic ranting and they gave the Presidency to a Russian Dictator's candidate. 

Not to mention a man who has never once served even his community, let alone his nation, in any way is now in a position to actually implement the infantile  spite at anyone who dares ruffle his feelings. 

And people wonder how Kim Kardashian is still a thing.  They just elected her bloated trussed, tinier handed prototype to the Oval Office.

The petty part of me that tries to ignore the suffering in the years to come for just a second (as long as it can last) wants a full on Trump Presidency.  The ones that wanted to burn it to the ground with their vote?  For just a petty second I want it to burn too, now.  I want him to go the full extent of his arrogance. I want to see him try to brand the Executive Branch.  I want him to try to award his children with benefits and even powers they don't deserve or even should be the in same room as.  I want Sarah Palin to be called in to serve on his Cabinet.  I want Christie as his secretary of state and not just because I want to savor each time that rotund ball of bile has to get on and off a plane.  Often in tropic heat.  I want Ben Carson on the cabinet as well.  Not health though.  I'd say education so all those people who threw away their vote on a "principle" can forgo the second vacation because schools that don't teach the pyramids are grain silos don't come cheap anymore.

I want Pence to go full misogynistic glory on women.  Lock in that lower rate of pay.  Tell them how much a lesser creature they are if they miscarry and promise them that even if the fetus is already dead, no way medicine will be allowed to save them.  Save their daughters. 

I want to see where a nation goes that lets people of color be shot down because the color of their skin makes them a justifiable threat that allows a "too serve and protect" officer of the law be judge jury and executioner even as we have the first person of color serving as President.  I want to see people of color realize exactly what they have to lose with this man as President. 

I want to see rich people realize the markets they rely on are stagnant at best.  I want to see them find how low stock in America will be after this.  See it in their bank accounts.  See it in their dropping sales.  See it as other nations find themselves perhaps succumbing to the same idiotic nationalism that stunts growth and raises borders.

I want to see educated people realize their degrees mean nothing in this man's economy. 

For just a second I want all that and much much more.  Because apparently we need kicked in the balls, our faces slammed into what we have had looking us in the eye for more than a year; we need our collective pussy grabbed because we just don't get it truly give a shit to stopping racism, misogyny and hate.  We just voted in the candidate of Vladimir Putin, Julian Assange and the KKK.  I can already see the "greatness".

 

[DunderMifflin]

I bet Alec Baldwin is happy too.

 4 more years of relevancy for him.

[mormont]

3 minutes ago, Mr Fixit said:

Because party memebers isn't the same thing as general voting public?

So AA voters who aren't Democrats would have been significantly more enthusiastic about Sanders than AA voters who are, and there are enough of them to have swung the election? That's one enormous supposition, entirely unsupported by any evidence at all. It could reasonably be described as just something you're making up. 

[Altherion]

Here are some more international reactions from the Wall Street Journal:

Quote

National Front leader Marine Le Pen, a presidential contender in next year's French elections, tweeted shortly after 7 a.m. local time: "Congratulations to the new president of the United States Donald Trump and to the American people, free!"

Her father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, who founded the anti-Islam, anti-European party, also tweeted that "the Americans want from @realDonaldTrump to be their "president of the people". Today the U.S., tomorrow France. Bravo!"

...

Dutch anti-Islam politician Geert Wilders wrote on his official Twitter page after Mr. Trump won Florida and Utah: "The people are taking their country back. So will we."

 

[The Wolves]

GRRM should give us news on TWOW(let us know that the good guys get a win in the end)or give us another sample chapter, give us something for the dark days ahead. 

[Shryke]

5 minutes ago, Mudguard said:

And it's clear you have no idea why 538 added in the increased uncertainty.  He did so, as his blog explains, in part because of the large numbers of voters who were claiming that they were independent/undecided as compared to previous elections.  He didn't just randomly do it as in your absurd example.  

I know people who registered as Democrats for the primary to vote Sanders, but registered as independents for the general to vote Trump because of disgust at Clinton.  Sanders won a very large percentage of the primary votes, especially among whites.  If even a small percentage switched their votes to Trump, that could have been the difference in some of these states, which were decided on very small margins.

But is that actually the reason Trump won? That's my whole point. We don't know yet.

That Trump won and 538 had his chances at winning as the highest does not demonstrate that 538 was correct because it doesn't demonstrate that Silver was right about WHY he had a better chance at winning.

We will have to see as data from the election rolls in. He's guaranteed to have an interesting analysis on it all.

[Mr Fixit]

3 minutes ago, Shryke said:

Please. He's probably angry and despondent as shit right now. The party and movement he helped rebuild, the movement he's been saying for a few months now he was gonna work to rebuild at the state and local level after the election after he left office, just suffered a crushing defeat that will last for years and at the hands of a man who rose to political prominence literally by hurling racism at him. A man who's administration will likely undo everything of his they can.

America just spit in Obama's face. There is basically no chance he is pleased or feeling in good shape right now.

Well, what can I say? He could have endorsed Sanders for starters. Maybe in that case he wouldn't be angry and despondent now?

[butterbumps!]

21 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said:

I'm pretty sure they are ignorant about it.  Just look at where they get their news.  Most Trump voters I know literally think that he's going to make america great again for reasons.  They'll have jobs and all the good health insurance and college and no illegal aliens, queers or abortions.  

but will the inevitably disastrous path of a Trump presidency be like an enema that finally gets this god awful shit out of our system in a meaningful way?   Like, when people lose very tangible things from this, when people who are close to them are very hurt by this, do we get our shit together?   I don't want this leading to a more competent demagogue in 2020, or create a fucking LePen-esque dynasty with his awful spawn running on his coattails in future elections, or his own goddam reelection.  Like, are we capable of learning from this, and is there a silver lining?

[James Arryn]

Oh, and something else is about to happen; America is now going to be (rightfully) criticized and condemned throughout much of the developed world. That's not what I'm talking about, though. I'm talking about how America historically responds to that kind of thing; America, Fuck Yeah!! After the initial hangover of the election wears off and the USA/Trump are being criticized around the globe, people who have previously despised Trump will rally to his defence, because an attack on him is an attack on Exceptionalism. W/e conflict he gets us involved in will be more widely supported because A,FY!

This is going to happen, as surely as night follows day. 

[The Marquis de Leech]

(Still getting plastered on cheap cask wine).

Now thinking about how US Muslims (and Jews) must be feeling. To think that the Mormons in Utah toyed with the idea of actually rejecting a guy whose entire campaign was built on demonising minorities - but they all went right back to Donald. Party before Faith, clearly. 

[Mr Fixit]

18 minutes ago, mormont said:

So AA voters who aren't Democrats would have been significantly more enthusiastic about Sanders than AA voters who are, and there are enough of them to have swung the election? That's one enormous supposition, entirely unsupported by any evidence at all. It could reasonably be described as just something you're making up. 

Look guys, I don't know what's with this discussion. I'm not trying to sell you BS I concocted in my little kitchen. I know 3 things:

1. Sanders regularly polled much MUCH MUCH better than Clinton against Trump. Not a definite thing, sure, but to pretend it's irrelevant is silly. Every single poll had Sanders lead in the double digits, as opposed to Clinton who was always very close. To say that I'm making this up says more about you than it does about me.
2. Sanders didn't have the kind of baggage that Clinton had. I mean, she's had insane unfavorables for an eternity
3. Sanders wasn't part of Dem establishment and his message was actually hopeful, enthusiastic, and challenged the status quo of DC politics (need I remind you guys that Congress for instance has something like 7-8% approval rate)

Does all this translate to a definitive win for Sanders? Of course not. Nothing is certain, especially that far in advance. But I'd say we have solid evidence that the odds were in his favor. 

One other thing is also worth mentioning. It's not all about the presidential election. Obviously, there's House, Senate, and various local elections too. Bernie's high approval among independents and unaffiliated would certainly help to bring some of those voters over as well. That's how people vote. With hearts and minds, not only with the latter. Dem establishment wanted their promulgated candidate no matter what and it cost them dearly. 

[DMC]

10 minutes ago, Shryke said:

If their sole concern is reelection, then you are gonna have to explain how passing a GOP legislative agenda is gonna impact that for GOP congresspeople elected by GOP voters.

Very easy explanation.  Look up the amount of GOP Senators in blue states.  Then consider how happy they are when bills unpopular with their constituents fail cloture votes.

13 minutes ago, Shryke said:

They were already show-repealing the ACA on a fucking weekly basis to bump up their reelection credentials. Now there's nothing to stop that kind of shit from not being a show vote.

Completely repealing the ACA without a plan will be equally unpopular to many GOP members' constituents.  I await the GOP's comprehensive plan that somehow garners popularity among the majority of their constituents.  As I said, revising certain unpopular provisions is likely and something I'm personally not really against.

18 minutes ago, Shryke said:

And let's face it, the challenge most of them are worried about is the primary challenge from the right.

 

This is why the schism Trump has created has totally fucked many GOP members.  Getting primaried by Tea Partiers was certainly the primary concern under a Democratic president.  With unified government, the referendum vote (i.e. independents) is now centered on GOP MCs.  Balancing the primary and reelection constituencies for any MCs in competitive districts/states will be a worse headache than the one I will have in a few hours.

22 minutes ago, Shryke said:

The problem with your whole argument here is you haven't explained why the GOP would be worried about electoral consequences for enacting their agenda. They were elected to push that agenda in the first place.

Um, what?  Please describe to me the agenda the Republicans were elected on.  Beyond repealing Obamacare and the aforementioned immigration and trade policies that have the potential to tear the party apart, what is this agenda?  Seriously, I don't know what that is, and I guarantee you 99% of voters don't either.

[The Marquis de Leech]

On the Sanders front - I think we need more detailed analysis before jumping to conclusions. I actually preferred him over Clinton myself, but I'm not blind to his weaknesses (age, difficulties in winning over minorities, his stance on guns that puts him offside with many Democrats). It's a mistake to think he would have been a silver(-haired) bullet, and had he lost, everyone would be saying "why didn't we nominate Hillary?".

In hindsight, Joe Biden might have been the best bet - but that is purely hindsight.

[DunderMifflin]

22 minutes ago, Shryke said:

 

Dems might want to rethink the strategy of calling everyone but themselves a racist, I suspect it backfired hard this time.

Doubling down on it seems to be the current strategy, but theyre still upset over the election. Hopefully it will change with some time.

[Mr Fixit]

4 minutes ago, Roose Boltons Pet Leech said:

On the Sanders front - I think we need more detailed analysis before jumping to conclusions. I actually preferred him over Clinton myself, but I'm not blind to his weaknesses (age, difficulties in winning over minorities, his stance on guns that puts him offside with many Democrats). It's a mistake to think he would have been a silver(-haired) bullet, and had he lost, everyone would be saying "why didn't we nominate Hillary?".

Cmon. Would Latinos and especially African Americans suddenly vote for Trump and Republicans instead of for Bernie? His losses among the minorities would hardly be that pronounced compared to the likely gains he'd have had among whites, leftists, and people generally dissatisfied with the DC establishment.

[DMC]

1 minute ago, Roose Boltons Pet Leech said:

In hindsight, Joe Biden might have been the best bet - but that is purely hindsight.

Biden would have won.  Sanders would have done worse with uneducated white voters and minorities.  Haven't been following the Bernie discussion, but that's just sour grapes.  He would not have outperformed Hillary in the rust belt and would have posed problems in Colorado/Nevada/Virginia.

[James Arryn]

1 minute ago, Roose Boltons Pet Leech said:

On the Sanders front - I think we need more detailed analysis before jumping to conclusions. I actually preferred him over Clinton myself, but I'm not blind to his weaknesses (age, difficulties in winning over minorities, his stance on guns that puts him offside with many Democrats). It's a mistake to think he would have been a silver(-haired) bullet, and had he lost, everyone would be saying "why didn't we nominate Hillary?".

In hindsight, Joe Biden might have been the best bet - but that is purely hindsight.

It's funny, when Biden passed on running it seemed at the time to be not much of a big deal. Now, looking back, it might have been the moment we lost. As you say, we'll never know...but he's certainly better at debating than Clinton. Just never sure how much that means.

[Red Tiger]

2 hours ago, Free Northman Reborn said:

Consider for a moment Trump's achievement. He single handedly took on his own party, who did not want him, browbeat them into submission despite opposition every step of the way, and then did the same with the country as a whole, despite large sections of his own party not supporting him.

He did so against one of the savviest political operators in recent history, and with a massive spending deficit.

This might go down as the biggest political achievement in modern history. He deserves credit for that.

Achievement? He basically won by running on the principal that the overall American base was uneducated, resentful, shockingly naive, bigoted and incapable of introspection.

What a glorious achievement.

[The Marquis de Leech]

1 minute ago, DunderMifflin said:

Dems might want to rethink the strategy of calling everyone but themselves a racist, I suspect it backfired hard this time.

If you vote for a candidate who bases his entire campaign on bashing minorities, don't get offended by accusations of racism.