US Politics: There's No Morning After Pill

[Fez]

8 hours ago, Roose Boltons Pet Leech said:

If there is one lesson to take out of 2016, it is that the Base is all. Hillary made an honest attempt to win over moderate Republicans and it got her absolutely nowhere.

I disagree. If you look at the sub-state maps, Clinton did win quite a few moderate Republicans. That's why early in election night things were looking good, she was hitting or beating targets in key suburban counties in the important swing states. And by the end of the night, there were all sorts of previously unseen results that mean we need to adjust our understanding of election targets going forward. For example even though she lost Wisconsin, she kept Trump's margin in Waukesha County (high pip, suburban, Republican) down to the level that previously had always meant the Democrat would win. And one of the key reasons she held onto the Virginia when so many other swing states went to Trump was because Republicans in the exurbs of DC voted for her.

Problem was, she lost so many rural Democratic voters, who aren't exactly "the base" but are still necessary to reach winning margins in the Midwest and other states. And she did also lose some base voters, which proves that the base is not an immovable object, it can be flipped with the right conditions. There's an awful lot of counties that flipped from Obama to Trump.

[OldGimletEye]

Just now, Arakan said:

Of course. It's a discussion forum after all. I just provided a hypothesis. Nothing more. Obviously I am not a member of any relevant government. 

Well a couple things.

1) The people that supported Trump, I'd say tend to believe that China's economic and military rise can be reversed. That's not going to happen, even if we were to impose the tariffs that Trump was suggesting.

2) That many of US's problems are the doing of China, rather than being self-inflicted.

I'd hope the complexity and reality of US-Chinese relations would hit Trump in the face. But, his rhetoric, along with his policy advisers hasn't been one suggesting a friendly relation with China.

[Chaircat Meow]

2 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

Well a couple things.

1) The people that supported Trump, I'd say tend to believe that China's economic and military rise can be reversed. That's not going to happen, even if we were to impose the tariffs that Trump was suggesting.

2) That many of problems are the doing of China, rather than being self-inflicted.

I'd hope the complexity and reality of US-Chinese relations would hit Trump in the face. But, his rhetoric, along with his policy advisers hasn't been one suggesting a friendly relation with China.

Is that true? One of the weird things is that Trump has not, as far as I know, said much about China's geopolitical ambitions and the US's desire to contain them. He sees rivalry between the US and China as purely mercantile. He's even suggested in the past Japan should get nukes, thus obviating to a degree (presumably) the American need to protect Japan from China.

[Mindwalker]

9 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

I'd hope the complexity and reality of US-Chinese relations would hit Trump in the face. But, his rhetoric, along with his policy advisers hasn't been one suggesting a friendly relation with China.

And yet, haven't several Chinese corporations indicated consent (building factories in the US and such)? I find that disturbing... not the factories, but that his hostile rhetoric would yield such success.

Throughout his speeches and debate contributions, I heard a LOT of hostility. His favorite enemy is China, but basically in his opinion, the whole world has screwed the US over, are "winning" while the US is "losing",etc.

[Dr. Pepper]

Crowd estimates for the US ranges from the low end at 3.7 million to the high end at 4.6 million. 

[Mindwalker]

OK, I'm out of this particular sub topic. (Btw, I did allude to Hitler in my original post. Not to merkel, of course.)

[OldGimletEye]

Just now, Chaircat Meow said:

Is that true? One of the weird things is that Trump has not, as far as I know, said much about China's geopolitical ambitions and the US's desire to contain them. He sees rivalry between the US and China as purely mercantile. He's even suggested in the past Japan should get nukes, thus obviating to a degree (presumably) the American need to protect Japan from China.

Well take "Make America Great Again". Now just what in the hell does that mean? I think a lot of Trump supporters view that as the United States achieving the same kind of military and economic dominance that it did in the 20th Century.

And of course, we know that is not remotely realistic.

And by the way, Trump has talked about "Peace Through Strength" regard to China. So it doesn't seem that he seem the rivalry as being purely "mercantile" as you say, although it would seem "mercantile rivalries" would seem to form the basis of Trump's foreign policy thinking. For instance, according to Trump, we should have taken Iraq's oil by force. 

[Chaircat Meow]

13 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

Well take "Make America Great Again". Now just what in the hell does that mean? I think a lot of Trump supporters view that as the United States achieving the same kind of military and economic dominance that it did in the 20th Century.

And of course, we know that is not remotely realistic.

And by the way, Trump has talked about "Peace Through Strength" regard to China. So it doesn't seem that he seem the rivalry as being purely "mercantile".

Well you will know more than me but Trump has said a lot of contradictory things. The overall impression I get (based on what he usually says) is that his opponents, Obama and Hillary, were the ones focused on maintaining US power in the Pacific, while Trump himself is primarily interested in the commercial challenge from China.

MAGA, like many good political slogans, can mean different things to different people, surely? I think most people voting for Trump are more invested in domestic concerns than the balance of world power. Tbh the USA is actually getting more powerful compared to all of its old European peers/rivals. India is a possible competitor, but only China actually challenges US dominance.

[Jaxom 1974]

49 minutes ago, Crazy Cat Lady in Training said:

The press is growing a pair at long last. They've been threatened, and we all know that the first step to authoritarianism is silencing a free press. I think they also finally realize that they're responsible for Mango Mussolini getting elected. Maybe now they will finally start doing their jobs and holding Trump's feet to the fire.

They need to come together...fast...and they need to do follow up after follow up after follow up...

[LongRider]

29 minutes ago, Mindwalker said:

And yet, haven't several Chinese corporations indicated consent (building factories in the US and such)? I find that disturbing... not the factories, but that his hostile rhetoric would yield such success.

Keep something in mind, if a business says it's creating jobs, Trump will claim all the new job creation is because of him even though the plan for building new factories or expansion of some has been in the works for years.  HE LIES!  So be careful of his rhetoric about how many jobs he has 'brought back' to America.

[Ice Queen]

Just now, Jaxom 1974 said:

They need to come together...fast...and they need to do follow up after follow up after follow up...

Kellyanne Conway just threatened Chuck Todd, too. And he's hitting back and not letting her off the hook.

[LongRider]

A little pep talk from one of our new best friends.....

 

[Jaxom 1974]

How are people combating Trumpinista ignorance over what those Marches yesterday meant?  

I'm seeing too many cries of ignorance on what they were about because, "women already have privileges..."

and the other one I see on social media is from someone dismissing the Marches overall because they're centered in cities where there are "millions who didn't vote for Trump", so of course there were crowds...I want to point out to him that he's in Cleveland in Red Ohio and they had a pretty decent crowd...but he's also so stubbornly obstinate, he never let's facts get in his way...

[Mexal]

This interview between Chuck Todd and Kellyanne Conway is worth watching.

[Xray the Enforcer]

8 minutes ago, Jaxom 1974 said:

How are people combating Trumpinista ignorance over what those Marches yesterday meant?  

I'm seeing too many cries of ignorance on what they were about because, "women already have privileges..."

and the other one I see on social media is from someone dismissing the Marches overall because they're centered in cities where there are "millions who didn't vote for Trump", so of course there were crowds...I want to point out to him that he's in Cleveland in Red Ohio and they had a pretty decent crowd...but he's also so stubbornly obstinate, he never let's facts get in his way...

You have to pick your battles, Jax. Some people will never reevaluate or concede, no matter how many discussions you have with them. I just prompted someone unfriend Baitac because I kept asking this woman to explain how it's inaccurate to say that 500,000 is larger than 250,000. Apparently math is a commie plot.  Focus on your friends who don't have their heads implanted in their asses. As for what the marches meant -- I think it's best to take that discussion to the feminism thread.

[Martell Spy]

Quote

 

McCain: I'll vote for Tillerson

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/mccain-tillerson-senate-confirm-233989

Trump lashes out at protesters, boasts about inauguration ratings

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/donald-trump-protesters-inauguration-233986

 

 

 

Looks like Tillerson will be confirmed. No shock there that the so called Russia hawks are rolling over.

Also, yep the protesters really got to the thin skinned Trump. He was of course unable to hide it.

[Lany Freelove Cassandra]

14 minutes ago, Jaxom 1974 said:

How are people combating Trumpinista ignorance over what those Marches yesterday meant?  

I'm seeing too many cries of ignorance on what they were about because, "women already have privileges..."

and the other one I see on social media is from someone dismissing the Marches overall because they're centered in cities where there are "millions who didn't vote for Trump", so of course there were crowds...I want to point out to him that he's in Cleveland in Red Ohio and they had a pretty decent crowd...but he's also so stubbornly obstinate, he never let's facts get in his way...

My favorite so far is a comment on an NBC article about how there wasn't any violence at the marches "There is no way there were that many people there and nothing happened, either the police were looking the other way or just ignoring the problems." 

My response was "I was there, but I'm sure your opinion is more accurate than the witnesses." 

[Jaxom 1974]

11 minutes ago, Xray the Enforcer said:

You have to pick your battles, Jax. Some people will never reevaluate or concede, no matter how many discussions you have with them. I just prompted someone unfriend Baitac because I kept asking this woman to explain how it's inaccurate to say that 500,000 is larger than 250,000. Apparently math is a commie plot.  Focus on your friends who don't have their heads implanted in their asses. As for what the marches meant -- I think it's best to take that discussion to the feminism thread.

Yeah I know.  And I'm not looking to drive a discussion of the meaning the Marches. I get it.

 

As a sidebar, I'm now watching Conway not being challenged at all by the guy on Facebook the Nation.  Ugh.  Giving her a chance to continue with the rhetoric of doom and gloom.

[kairparavel]

1 minute ago, Lany Freelove Cassandra said:

My favorite so far is a comment on an NBC article about how there wasn't any violence at the marches "There is no way there were that many people there and nothing happened, either the police were looking the other way or just ignoring the problems." 

My response was "I was there, but I'm sure your opinion is more accurate than the witnesses." 

Seriously. We were all jammed together unable to move but inches at a time for some of it, and I heard nary an ill word or complaint. I did have one woman trying to get around me to her friend but trying to get around me to my right where there was maybe an inch gap (poor plan) instead of to my left where there was a foot of space (better plan). So after I tired of her jamming into my right shoulder I politely suggested she go to the left. Which she did. That was probably the most irritated I was and in the end it was NBD. And I'm sure many people experienced things like that. A slight inconvenience in the bigger picture.

[Ormond]

Here's the World Herald story about the rallies in Omaha and Lincoln yesterday. Even in Nebraska far more people that expected turned out:

http://www.omaha.com/news/politics/at-least-people-fill-the-streets-in-women-s-march/article_5de6469e-58ff-5e39-b4de-290a99e01a26.html#utm_source=omaha.com&utm_campaign=%2Fnewsletter%2Fdaily%2F&utm_medium=email&utm_content=read mor

Now the task is to keep this up and transfer the enthusiasm to other actions such as contacting congresspeople and voting in elections at all levels. Trump's personality itself will help this -- his kneejerk narcissistic reactions will keep people energized who wouldn't be by a Republican president with a less inflammatory style, even one with policies similar to his.