US Elections: If you experience a painful election...

[Fez]

7 minutes ago, Ariadne23 said:

What's your guess on whether they'd approve Carson to head HHS?

I think they approve him. If he was white, I think they wouldn't, he's crazy. But the appeal of a black Republican to try to boost the party's image will be too much. Maybe they can convince the transition team to put his name in for Surgeon General instead though and get someone with at least a bit of experience to take HHS.

[mormont]

15 minutes ago, Swordfish said:

I am implying nothing.  I'm specifically saying men. I'm not talking about trans folks at all.  But you are simply making my point for me.

Make up your mind. If it's your point I'm making, own it, don't deny you were ever talking about it.

[The Anti-Targ]

3 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

I hear Arpaio is out of a job (one good thing to come out of this clusterf*ck), hopefully he doesn't get a position as head of Homeland Security or what have you).

Just as a history lesson, I think in 2008 people were asking if the Republican party was doomed, as it was destined to be exclusively a Southern party. And now they seemed to have made strides in the Rust Belt.

I think talking about the demise of the Democratic party is also premature. Demographic changes will continue to keep it competitive, and hopefully it can grow in the Southwest and claw back in the Rust belt. Lets see how the next 2 years go.

Trump convinced at least some of the rust belt vote to vote for him because of his assurances of bringing manufacturing back to America. And the coal belt vote heard reassuring things about not being decimated due to the reversal of climate change policies. In the short term, the rust belt voter is going to be expecting to see a return of manufacturing jobs within this first term, and if that does not eventuate I think the rust belt vote probably swings back to the Democrats. 

The coal belt vote is more nuanced. Part of the problem for the coal industry is that coal prices have fallen a lot. And Trump can't manufacture demand for coal to get that coal price up because the global demand for coal, assuming the majority of industrial countries continue to implement policies to reduce consumption of fossil fuels, should continue to fall and thus it will be difficult to see the prospect of more job security or job growth in coal mining. But if Trump reverses a lot of climate change policy, he may create a lot of good will and slow the decline in coal jobs all while Democrats continue to push for a continuing to move away from fossil fuel use. So I can see a possibility of PA staying red in 2020 but WI and MI going back to blue.

[Rhom]

10 minutes ago, Jaxom 1974 said:

Soooooo...is anyone else concerned that the press and media have essentially been neutralized as a watchdog for the people?  Even before he undermines, and he will, the Freedom of the Press, Trump has already pulled the teeth of the press and media.  Nixon was taken down by the press.  If there is something to take Trump down, should there be something, they'll be nothing more than shouting to the wind. 

The press pulled their own teeth.  Clinton engaged in political fraud of a sort that the country hadn't seen since Watergate and the press remained silent and allowed an exiled foreign national be our only source of information.  The press cast off any illusion of neutrality during the election cycle and never treated Trump with the deference generally given to a major party candidate.  Then last night as I flipped through the channels watching various news crews, the panic and genuine shock and despair evident on their "unbiased" faces was palpable. 

The people of this country stopped trusting the media years ago.  All that's happened is that the media stopped pretending like they were even trying to be objective.

4 minutes ago, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

 

Saw that this morning.  Had a hearty laugh.

What's not funny is that some voters cast their ballot for Harambe.  The good news is that the 11K figure floating around earlier was just an internet rumor.  (It is embarrassing to me that the first picture in that link is a Kentucky ballot.)

Maybe we do need to implement a civics test of some sort to allow voting...

[PetyrPunkinhead]

30 minutes ago, mormont said:

(A)Overlooked.

Seriously, I can see Christie not getting anything worth mentioning. It's as sad as that.

(B) If you're calling trans women men, then yes, you are a bigot. If you're implying that trans women might harm little girls, then yes, you are a bigot. I'm glad that you agree.

(A) Oh God, I so hope he's overlooked. He's just struck me as such a sleazeball politician from Day One. The only thing better than him not getting a cabinet position will be him getting a position and then having to resign it because he's convicted in a "Bridge Gate" trial. 

(B) Yeah, that kind of one-sided, myopic view of people is just the kind of liberal hypocrisy that helped get Trump elected. Since the dawn of time if you were born with a cock you=man and if you were born with a vagina you=woman. And in the past decade or so a growing number of people, who are still in a minority, started to think differently about gender. So now everyone who's having trouble completely adhering to a minority viewpoint which has been around comparatively for a VERY short time in the history of Western civilization much less recorded time, are now automatically labeled as bigots. Geez, and ultra liberal and SJW types wonder where Trump's support came from? Damn, talk about a cause in need of lessons in self awareness.

A mom* not wanting her daughter to go into a public restroom with a grown adult who has a penis does not make that mom  a bigot. It makes her a scared and concerned mother. It's not the same as racial discrimination at all. It's a fear of rape thing, not a racist, bigoted thing. Try meeting that mom on that level and maybe you'll actually make some progress in transgender rights. Call her a "Redneck!" or "Bigot!" and you get an eight year Trump presidency. 

*Disclaimer: the same goes for a dad. I'm not trying to show gender bias-- just using one gender for sake of brevity to illustrate a point. /disclaimer

[The Anti-Targ]

If California allocated ECVs proportionally, then Johnson would have got 1 ECV (close to 2), and Stein would have missed out on 1 ECV by 0.1%.

If Texas allocated ECVs proportionally Johnson would have got 1 ECV.

If Utah allocated ECVs proportionally McMullin would have got 1 ECV

I don't think 3rd parties would have picked up any other ECVs. But I wonder if in larger states more people might vote 3rd party if they knew there was a chance a third party could get a ECV due to proportional allocation.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

2 minutes ago, Rhom said:

 The press cast off any illusion of neutrality during the election cycle and never treated Trump with the deference generally given to a major party candidate. 

He kicked off his campaign with this...

"When Mexico sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're bringing drugs. They're bringing crime. They're rapists. And some, I assume, are good people." 

 

Followed closely by this...

"He's not a war hero," Trump said of Arizona Sen. John McCain, a Republican. "He is a war hero because he was captured. I like people who weren't captured." 

 

 and then about 3 weeks later this...

   "You could see there was blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her, wherever." 

 

He clearly had no intention of adopting the sort of tact that a major party candidate typically displays. He had no deference towards anyone else. Not sure how the press was supposed to act towards him, given his speech and actions. 

[mormont]

7 minutes ago, PetyrPunkinhead said:

Since the dawn of time if you were born with a cock you=man and if you were born with a vagina you=woman.

You understand that isn't actually true, right? That intersex people and nonconforming gender identities have been and are part of many, many cultures and societies?

Really, if you genuinely believe the above it's because you've been told that the way society was ordered when you grew up is the One True Way, that prejudices are facts. And that's sad.

ps 'fear of rape' has a long, unpleasant history of being used to justify racism. Transphobia and racism are not as different as you think.

[SkynJay]

No worries Rhom.  Soon enough TrumpTV will be giving you nothing but the news you want to hear, including all of America's great victories!  You won't have to worry about that pesky partisan press anymore.

[IheartIheartTesla]

12 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

But if Trump reverses a lot of climate change policy, he may create a lot of good will and slow the decline in coal jobs all while Democrats continue to push for a continuing to move away from fossil fuel use. So I can see a possibility of PA staying red in 2020 but WI and MI going back to blue.

His climate change policy is indeed my biggest concern for the next 4 years (that and the threat of nuclear armageddon), everything else is reversible.

Oh, and I just remembered that he is anti-vaccinations too, but maybe thats just stream of consciousness and he has had his children vaccinated. It'll probably take a few weeks to unpack all the awfulness he has spouted, and which ones are real threats and which one's random garbage.

But yes, some of those voters will return, some maybe not for a generation. Who knows.

[Corvinus85]

Speaking of potential cabinet members, lets not forget his kids. A lot of people are speculating on Ivanka's role, and his sons are ambitious fellows.

Most people who voted for him may have done it because they truly wanted to shake up Washington and deliver a blow to the establishment. But looking at his family, I fear that this will just enable the start of another political dynasty. 

[Rhom]

6 minutes ago, SkynJay said:

No worries Rhom.  Soon enough TrumpTV will be giving you nothing but the news you want to hear, including all of America's great victories!  You won't have to worry about that pesky partisan press anymore.

Were you able to watch Martha Raddich and Charlie Gibson practically in tears last night and not recognize the blatant bias?

I still prefer the MSM (as evidenced by the fact that I watched ABC last night obviously...) and won't be consuming any sort of TrumpTV; but to pretend that the media is providing the unbiased watchdog service that we once relied upon them for is naïve.

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

1 minute ago, Rhom said:

Were you able to watch Martha Raddich and Charlie Gibson practically in tears last night and not recognize the blatant bias?

I still prefer the MSM (as evidenced by the fact that I watched ABC last night obviously...) and won't be consuming any sort of TrumpTV; but to pretend that the media is providing the unbiased watchdog service that we once relied upon them for is naïve.

But how did that bias effect their reporting (specifically in this case). Did they give out bad information? Not call a state for Donald that was clearly in the Red? That they had a visceral, emotional reaction doesn't speak well to their professionalism and their craft, but did it translate to biased reporting?

[Jaxom 1974]

2 minutes ago, Rhom said:

Were you able to watch Martha Raddich and Charlie Gibson practically in tears last night and not recognize the blatant bias?

I still prefer the MSM (as evidenced by the fact that I watched ABC last night obviously...) and won't be consuming any sort of TrumpTV; but to pretend that the media is providing the unbiased watchdog service that we once relied upon them for is naïve.

And yet, now they can never be again.  They won't be given a chance to redeem themselves...be it for a Trump scandal, and there will be scandals, or another situation in the Dakotas or Flint...investigative journalism is dead and we are going to be the poorer for it.

[Maester Drew]

5 minutes ago, mormont said:

You understand that isn't actually true, right? That intersex people and nonconforming gender identities have been and are part of many, many cultures and societies?

Biologically speaking, Petyr is right. There are only two genders, male and female. As for intersex, that isn't a gender. And other gender identities? Well, anyone can identify however they want, but that doesn't change the fact they'll either have an XX chromosome or an XY.

[Rhom]

Just now, Manhole Eunuchsbane said:

But how did that bias effect their reporting (specifically in this case). Did they give out bad information? Not call a state for Donald that was clearly in the Red? That they had a visceral, emotional reaction doesn't speak well to their professionalism and their craft, but did it translate to biased reporting?

Not necessarily last night, but over the course of the last two years yes.  I believe their bias lead to the same sort of echo chamber that we are hearing so much about today.  The fact that they only saw the world the way they think it should be instead of how it is lead to this on some level.

I also think that they took an active role in setting up Trump as the winner of the Republican primary with their coverage of him with the prevailing wisdom that he'd be a more favorable match up for Hillary than Rubio or Jeb.

[Fez]

Fascinating tweetstorm here about the post-election call with the RNC data folks.

Turns out the rumor last night was true, their own model had Trump losing; but it was actually a very close thing. They thought 13 states were within 3 points and had Trump at 246 EVs. By contrast, the first week of October, they only had 2 states within 3 points and Trump was completely dead-in-the-water. Things were breaking quickly Trump's way, but the data folks thought it just wasn't happening quick enough. Supports the theory that Comey's letter really did change the election.

Also, worth noting: Their model had Trump winning Michigan by 0.2% and he ended up winning it by 0.3%, so they basically nailed that, and explains all their focus their last weekend. They had Trump losing Florida by 2%, but it seems that nearly all the undecided voters there ended up going Trump. Really surprisingly, they had Trump losing Iowa too. And it sounds like he could've. He only got the turnout that they were expecting there; but Clinton's turnout completely failed.

All in all, it also suggests that there's no longer a data gap between the parties; if anything Republicans have the advantage now. Both had Clinton winning, but Republicans correctly identified that the race had gotten very close in the final days.

[The Anti-Targ]

4 minutes ago, Corvinus said:

Speaking of potential cabinet members, lets not forget his kids. A lot of people are speculating on Ivanka's role, and his sons are ambitious fellows.

Most people who voted for him may have done it because they truly wanted to shake up Washington and deliver a blow to the establishment. But looking at his family, I fear that this will just enable the start of another political dynasty. 

Shaking up Washington by sending it a [alleged] billionaire who inherited his wealth and who merely played the game on a different side is the biggest joke that's been played on people who thought they were shaking things up for the betterment of ordinary people. Washington is either not going to be shaken up at all, or it will be a shake down.

I believe in Trump shaking things up, for the better, about as much as I believed Obama would actually bring hope and change, for the better. After 8 years of Obama, which is an extremely short span of time in a country's socio-political life, you brought in Trump, who in a very short 4 years with a completely compliant congress (most likely) and Supreme coury appointment(s?) can easily, and probably will, reverse whatever small amount of hope and change Obama managed achieve.

[Ariadne23]

Doesn't Trump himself not care about the stupid bathroom objection thing?

[The guy from the Vale]

Just now, Maester Drew said:

Biologically speaking, Petyr is right. There are only two genders, male and female. As for intersex, that isn't a gender. And other gender identities? Well, anyone can identify however they want, but that doesn't change the fact they'll either have an XX chromosome or an XY.

There are XXY, XYY, and all matter of other polysomies of the sex chromosomes around.