US Elections: Day dawns on Trump.

[White Walker Texas Ranger]

7 minutes ago, SerPaladin said:

The concession speech tempest in a teapot amuses me in the same way as the "pledge" that the other Republican candidates thought they were tricking Trump into signing back at the first primary debate. They try to civilize Trump and end up looking like a-holes when they have to live up to the same standard. I applaud Kasich for holding out all the way to the end, but he's still an a-hole for not saying "except Trump" back at the beginning.

So I got a text from my daughter at college at 4:00 AM "Who let this happen?". Being a dad, I had to find the silver linings and give her some thoughts to help her through her day.

She conceded last night. She just needed a little longer to come up with a concession speech. Yes, ina vacuum, that's not as classy as Romney was. But you try coming up with a ten minute speech sincere speech praising Donald Trump on short notice.

[DunderMifflin]

The phrase "I'm not racist, I have a black friend" shall henceforth be changed to "I'm not racist, I voted for Hillary"

[Larry of the Lawn]

1 minute ago, butterbumps! said:

For everyone who is appealing to curtailing accusations of sexism and racism and so forth-

are you saying that these issues did not exist and motivate tons of people 

or are you saying that these issues do exist and motivated tons of people BUT that the way we tend to address it is not effective.   That the goal of ending bigotry is necessary, but to do so we must alter the tactics? 

It's almost text book tone-policing, pointing out shitty behavior is somehow worse than the actual behavior.  

[baxus]

Just now, DunderMifflin said:

The phrase "I'm not racist, I have a black friend" shall henceforth be changed to "I'm not racist, I voted for Hillary"

It wouldn't be that big a step from "I'm not racist, I voted for Obama", right?

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

5 minutes ago, butterbumps! said:

For everyone who is appealing to curtailing accusations of sexism and racism and so forth-

are you saying that these issues did not exist and motivate tons of people 

or are you saying that these issues do exist and motivated tons of people BUT that the way we tend to address it is not effective.   That the goal of ending bigotry is necessary, but to do so we must alter the tactics? 

No.  I think they quite clearly do exist.  That said the tactic of shouting down those who disagree (not that you do this) as opposed to attempting to rationally engage them and change there minds may not be terribly helpful.

[Castel]

1 minute ago, butterbumps! said:

For everyone who is appealing to curtailing accusations of sexism and racism and so forth-

are you saying that these issues did not exist and motivate tons of people 

or are you saying that these issues do exist and motivated tons of people BUT that the way we tend to address it is not effective.   That the goal of ending bigotry is necessary, but to do so we must alter the tactics? 

It does in fact motivate a ton of people, likely Trump's core group of voters. But beyond that partisanship played the larger role imo. The GOP voters would rather bet on Trump than Clinton, and this is just the biggest sign of growing partisanship 

But...listen: fuck all this talk about "bigots" and calling people bigots and shit 

Put that aside for a moment.

Can any of the people talking about "villifying" the GOP's voters explain to me what the GOP as a party has been doing since Obama got in? Like, not just on things like racism but their actual stated policy? Who have they been voting for,what have the news stations they've been listening to saying? 

As always the knives come out on the left against each other. And maybe some of it is needed HOWEVER...anyone who convinces themselves that it's cause the liberals villified the GOP is not only wrong they are living in their own delusion. It is legitimately more comforting to them to believe that they had to be rude to cause this than to believe that 50% of the population is not theirs and doesn't give a shit about them.This is true "coastal liberal" arrogance made all the more pathetic given the loss and the way they're trying to sublimate that into (the wrong) teachable moments.

[sweetsunray]

I'm sorry for everyone who hoped or believed they would wake with Hillary Clinton for president and certainly did not want Trump in the office.

To the OP, I actually think Trump had a momentum going that would have ended in this uppercut surprise, regardless who ran against him. I'm not talking about polls, but actually his shocking campaign. When last year media began to write about his shocking statements and how absurd and hateful they were (and they are), I had a bad feeling about it, because I've seen it happen before in my own country. While the US had a positive change-figure in Obama in 2008, Belgium had an angry-hateful-anti-talk change-figure who made his little <10% party the N°1 party in the flemish part of Belgium. His rhetoric was never as outright bigoted as Trump, slightly smarter expressed with a sauce of "latin proverbs" once a day. But anyhow, whatever he said, was bigoted enough to please an angry crow that tended to vote for the racist party, strongly and charismathic (personally I think his charisma is zero, but many think he's got the charisma of a god almost) enough to appeal to those who do not believe themselves as bigoted but need someone to blame (and he blamed groups and parties and people you can't vote for or against anyway), went anti-establishment and "change!"

The problem was that he made everyone talk about him, as well as calls to vote against him. So, the opposition basically debated, wrote, argued how bad he'd be, and giving him free publicity. Because for some politicians, even bad publicity is publicity, and when other candidates talk about the other candidate instead of their own story, they begin to appear a "weak candidate" in the eyes of a large pool of moderate but consrvative voters. Meanwhile the politician everyon's talking about ends up appearing "strong" in the eyes of that same pool of voters, even though his mud slinging is worse and he started it, "the one who tells it like it is" (even if what he says is a bunch of factual horseshit).

Once such a candidate gets the momentum that everybody goes bananas each time he opens his mouth, they're either end up talking about him or whatever nonsense he says, instead of their message, and he has the initiative and holds the reigns. And though the opposition may be loud and vehement and plenty, the perception with voters is that he holds the reigns and dictates the battle field, and to a large amount of voters that is appealing.

Sad to say, almost 8 years later that Belgian politician still gets asked for his opinion on anything. He's not our PM. He could have been, but he chose not to, instead smartly remaining mayor of my city as well as get elected as chairman of his party a 3rd time (even though originally a chairman could only do 2 terms, but they changed it for him), and he's stil the major vote cannon. He just needed his party established inot government and administration and get rid of other peope imo. He'll be there for the next national elections, and imo will go for PM-ship then. But I've seen his bully strategy work astoundingly and surprisingly well (even if so many voters abslolutely loathe him) and still continue to work, even though he's basically the true power for the past 8 years.

So, when I saw the first signs of Trump's type of rhetoric and campaign and how much the media started to pick it up, I dreaded to see the same thing happen again on a bigger and more dangerous scale in the US, and fervently hoped to see the US find an answer to such a type of candidate. Unfortunately, a man who can embrace mud slinging and turn mud into Arbor Gold with a large enough following I fear is something our society has not yet found a strategy against.

 

 

[TheKitttenGuard]

For the victorious Party:

Being tolerant and supportive of policies that have Racist features may not mean you are Racist but you are clearly not bothered by it.

This is not a triumph of Conservatism that you are speaking for many components of Trump's Economic message goes against several long standing Principals of Conservative Economics.

My greatest fears and concerns with Trump are Trump himself than policies overall. Hell I truely think there are avenues for some policies and Trump has access to a large group that adore him that follow him and not Party.

Being hurt for no longer being able to say things about oher people who could not express their objections it for various reasons is not the best.  It got motivation but it is quite sad.  I do not see it as Anti-PC and more I want to say horrible stuff and not be called on it.  

[DunderMifflin]

4 minutes ago, baxus said:

It wouldn't be that big a step from "I'm not racist, I voted for Obama", right?

Idk, even Obama supporters didn't seem to be patting themselves on the back for being a bunch of Malcolm X's as much as Hillary supporters are doing now.

[Weeping Sore]

Need to get my Michelle Obama 2020 bumper sticker on the car right away... 

[Mr Fixit]

16 minutes ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

No doubt Putin is pushed as a supervillain. But he doesn't help himself. There is no doubt he is trying to increase Russia's sphere of influence in the world and acts in a way that only a dictator could. He did invade Ukraine, took a chunk of it and basically got away with it. He's made NATO look foolish and weak numerous times, which in turn makes the US look weak.

Well of course. I'm not saying Putin is a swell guy. Insinuations by certain posters aside (I was called a Kremlin bot on multiple occasions by our tolerant contributors here. Apparently, if one does not agree with the consensus, he is a troll, bot, bigot, or something else), I was actually opposed to Russian actions in Ukraine. I think Putin made a mistake in Crimea and especially in Donetsk. But I also believe he did those things as a reaction out of long-term fear of NATO containment and encroachment on the Russian borders, something many experts on Russia (George Kennan and others; look him up) have been warning about for the last 20 years. You can hardly expand a potentially hostile military organization to the borders of the largest country in the world and not expect a(n) (over)reaction in turn. Shit happens. The thing now is to see how to defuse the situation and form some sort of long-term partnership on mutually acceptable foundations. None of this unilateral foreign policy BS America has been peddling.

[Castel]

6 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

No.  I think they quite clearly do exist.  That said the tactic of shouting down those who disagree (not that you do this) as opposed to attempting to rationally engage them and change there minds may not be terribly helpful.

Scot, 

What makes you think that the Democratic party hasn't tried to engage Republicans? Obama was elected on changing Washington and they all ran out in droves in 2010 to make him a lame duck president and haven't stopped shouting at him.

What makes you think that the media hasn't tried to engage Republicans? Is Trump not a racist and sexist? What is the argument here? That, if enough people say the truth with proof and one group doesn't like it you're no longer trying to engage them rationally? If people choose to go to FOX and Limbaugh does that mean that there is no rational argument for Trump being a bigot? 

This to me strikes me as the same logic that castrated the media; consequence-based not process-based. If you call someone a bigot and some large percentage of the country disagrees then you were wrong, even if your process to get to that point was totally right. "Balanced coverage", aka cowardly, mealy-mouthed false neutrality. 

[DunderMifflin]

2 minutes ago, Weeping Sore said:

Need to get my Michelle Obama 2020 bumper sticker on the car right away... 

I'll commit my vote right now if this happens.

[DraculaAD1972]

Calling Trump fans bigots is kinda bigoted. You're labelling half a nation. It's a false narrative - Hillary good,Trump bad. 

[Channel4s-JonSnow]

Just now, Mr Fixit said:

Well of course. I'm not saying Putin is a swell guy. Insinuations by certain posters aside (I was called a Kremlin bot on multiple occasions by our tolerant contributors here. Apparently, if one does not agree with the consensus, he is a troll, bot, bigot, or something else), I was actually opposed to Russian actions in Ukraine. I think Putin made a mistake in Crimea and especially in Donetsk. But I also believe he did those things as a reaction out of long-term fear of NATO containment and encroachment on the Russian borders, something many experts on Russia (George Kennan and others; look him up) have been warning about for the last 20 years. You can hardly expand a potentially hostile military organization to the borders of the largest country in the world and not expect a(n) (over)reaction in turn. Shit happens. The thing now is to see how to defuse the situation and form some sort of long-term partnership on mutually acceptable foundations. None of this unilateral foreign policy BS America has been peddling.

No, thats true. Its the perception of NATO as the enemy however that I find difficult, cold war thinking. Putin was actually offered the chance of joining NATO (well he was asked to apply) but didn't do it out of pride. There is still the perception that the US is out to get Russia, when in fact I don't see that as true. So Russia wants to control the countries surrounding it, to act as a barrier. Ukraine was basically a puppet state before the EU offered it another solution. Not only did he invade the country when the election didn't go his way, but previous to that he pretty much tried to assassinate a candidate that didn't agree with him. 

[TheKitttenGuard]

10 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

Dems and progressives need to get their shit together.  Any candidate other than Trump would have won even more easily.  I am shocked this happened but I guess we should have seen it coming.  

I disagree on that.

Trump was free to really go after the despair of Working Class Whites that I do not think any other Republican Candidate would of for somethings really are anathema to what is considered Conservative Orthodoxy.  I also do not know if other Candidates will have that emotive connect Trump was able to get.

Clinton lost to other Republicans would of been more familar to past elections, and close.

[Red Tiger]

Just now, DraculaAD1972 said:

Calling Trump fans bigots is kinda bigoted. You're labelling half a nation. It's a false narrative - Hillary good,Trump bad. 

Ah, the good ol' false equivelance. He straight up hammered the idea in that Mexico was basically only bringing in it's murderers and rapists and his voters went with it, without even bothering to look at the actual numbers.

[Mr Fixit]

38 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Just say you want Europe within the Russian "Sphere of Influence" and have done.

Scot, will you please stop this incessant underhanded passive aggression towards anyone not agreeing with you? It's really wearying to read your endless insinuations on my state of mind when you don't know first thing about me. Anyone who knows me would laugh their asses off to read you constantly label me as Kremlin bot or some such. I am a firm believer in European unity and common identity. I want a strong European Union based on liberal values, social democracy, and respectful relations with others. I don't need your transatlantic jingoism telling me how I should think.

[James Arryn]

4 minutes ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

Something that gets dismissed is that 'the media' doesn't really reflect a large portion of the populations feelings, that people are sick of being called sexist or racist for being angered at things that are affecting them. Part of this is a reaction to the political correctness that controls our society, to the thought police who over react to misspoken words. We all thought that Trumps behaviour would turn people off him, but in reality it just caused him to become stronger because the Liberal Left Wing media did what it usually did and lost its mind. 

 

Eh, I think those people reacted to Trump pretty much as they ought to have. He's not just politically incorrect, he's a sincere bigot. And he's so open about his bigotry that his supporters must, by definition, be okay with bigotry if they feel it's in their interests. That, to me, is an unavoidable line of reasoning. That does not mean that those issues they prioritize above rubber-stamping bigotry are under serving or w/e, but the fact is that's the choice.

My issue is not with how Trump was portrayed, or even really how Clinton was portrayed...I think we mostly saw them for what they were. But there was a significant tendency amongst Clinton supporters...and this goes back to Obama's emergence, too...to claim that any criticism of her must be grounded in prejudice and/or trying to falsely suggest she's as bad as Trump. There are many who do/did both, but the knee-jerk reactionism to any criticism is just a bad way to politic.

The actual bigots/secret Trump supporters aren't going to have a road to Damascus moment and convert because you called them on it.

The people who think like you do aren't going to vote twice because you called something like they see it.

But the undecided voter or the iffy-Clinton supporter with genuine concerns is at best going to be nonplussed by seeing their concerns written off as sexism, at worst going to think the Clinton cause is just as dogmatic and closed-minded as Trump's. They might think 'fuck it'...thinking neither candidate is worth their support, even if they think Trump's worse. There's just no profit in it, beyond the fact that it's extraordinarily prejudicial to think that only prejudice could explain complaint. 

 

[Ice Queen]

5 hours ago, Boris the Blade said:

yay, now the US has the fascist corrupt criminal sexual predator racist misogynist  that will strip rights away from women, the lgbtqia community, muslims, people of color and the disabled. such a great thing to be happy about. what a simplistic fucking view as well as immature.

How can we look our gay, Muslim and African American friends in the eye? What do we say?

This morning I had a very upset teenage daughter wondering if she now has the right to fight back if a man touches or grabs her. I told her to rip off his balls and make him eat them. 

My heart is breaking for our country.