US Elections: Day dawns on Trump.

[butterbumps!]

1 minute ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Butterbumps,

People mock me for peppering others with questions.  The reason I do is that, in my experience, it is easier to be convinced you are wrong about something if you figure it out for yourself rather than being told "you're wrong and here's why". The Socratic (however bad I am at it) has the advantage of allowing the person in a Socratic dialouge to figure out for themselves, their error.

I think that's respectable, but am curious--  did you convince anyone to change their vote with this method?

[James Arryn]

Just now, Crazy Cat Lady in Training said:

At some point you have to pick a side and call a spade a spade. Being nice be damned. One of my friends, who I've known since childhood, is on FB right now calling for people to unite and to give Trump a chance. I posted "Like you gave Obama a chance?"

Ultimate thread killer and the discussion ended right there. 

IF it's a spade.

But calling anyone who has reservations about Clinton a spade is bad politics. And it happened all the time in here alone. People would actually say things like 'the only reason she's criticized is mysogeny'...and mean it. And therefore anyone with any criticism was therefore a mysoginist. I'm not talking about how you treat Trump supporters; I'm talking about treating anyone with concerns about Clinton as if they're the same as Trump supporters. 

What's the upside if you're right? How many votes have you potentially gained? And what's the downside if you're wrong? How many votes have you potentially lost?

 

[DunderMifflin]

4 minutes ago, SerPaladin said:

And you think nominating another first lady is the answer? You've got competent governors and senators.

Answer to what?

I don't know who competent governers and senators is.

I wouldn't vote for my state governer or any of my senators. They are beyond terrible.

 

[Mr Fixit]

37 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

How will Russia react if these European countries takes steps to free themselves of dependence upon Russia for Oil and Natural Gas?  Putin doesn't want a new European Empire but he does want Hegemonic control.

There's only one country that wants hegemonic control of the Eurasian space and it's not Russia. For Christ's sake, it literally says so in the US foreign policy papers. They are publicly available; just go and read them.

[TheKitttenGuard]

23 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. 

 

It happens a good amount that I sometime wonders if overreacting is deliberate to get people have those sort of reactions.

The largest problem with the type of Anti-PC mentality is that it is derived from a place of security and it is threaten.  Listen to people who are not part of the dominate socio-economic or Political position and they tell you how much they need to be careful in words, thoughts, and deed.  The people who rail against PC do not want to act as other minorities do or are ignorant of how PC the minorities need to be for that is how it is suppose to be.

[Weeping Sore]

While I think misogyny was an element in people's objection to Clinton, I think on a very simple level this was an "Outsider" over "Insider" election. Dunno if Clinton could have done better in WI and MI with Bernie as VP to seem more credible on fair trade reform and economic populism...certainly Tim Kaine didn't do much for her with that squeaker in VA.

[Larry of the Lawn]

1 minute ago, James Arryn said:

IF it's a spade.

But calling anyone who has reservations about Clinton a spade is bad politics. And it happened all the time in here alone. People would actually say things like 'the only reason she's criticized is mysogeny'...and mean it. And therefore anyone with any criticism was therefore a mysoginist. I'm not talking about how you treat Trump supporters; I'm talking about treating anyone with concerns about Clinton as if they're the same as Trump supporters. 

What's the upside if you're right? How many votes have you potentially gained? And what's the downside if you're wrong? How many votes have you potentially lost?

 

I didn't really see that here.  I mean most of the people on here who have backed Clinton seem to have major reservations about her.  There are maybe a handful of hardcore Clinton supporters on here who defend her no matter what, but I feel like I've seen tons of criticism of her bellicose tendencies abroad.  And I don't remember anyone being called a misogynist for it.  

But that's different than "Killary Benghazi blah blah blah" getting the same label.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

14 minutes ago, SeanF said:

Good advocacy is about persuading the undecided, and even some of the more moderate of your opponents.  It's not about getting high-fives from your partisans.

Exactly.

[Dr. Pepper]

38 minutes ago, Boris the Blade said:

Ah and the white nationalists show on up here.

They'll be out in full force, now.  They've just been validated.  They've been told that their views are worthy of a place in public life. 

The Trump campaign had said that people were afraid to admit voting for him.  The reason why is because they'd have to openly say they are bigots.  They now know they don't have to be afraid any longer.  That's nauseating, terrifying, outrageous.  

[Red Tiger]

14 minutes ago, Mr Fixit said:

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.

Speaking as one European (Dutch) to another, this is just not gonna happen, my friend.

[White Walker Texas Ranger]

13 minutes ago, DraculaAD1972 said:

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

If half the nation is bigoted, then half the nation is bigoted.

The half the nation that supported Trump was ok with his blatant racism and sexism, and not the traditional Republican dogwhistle kind of bigotry, but in your face, explicit bigotry. Even if they thought other things were more important, they still supported a bigot.

Now that doesn't actually mean half the nation is bigoted, but for a large percentage of Trump's support, his bigotry was part of the appeal, if if hidden behind things like "hating the PC SJW elite."

[Fez]

9 minutes ago, larrytheimp said:

Sorry, to be clear, I think Trump fans are fans of a bigot.  That may not make them bigots themselves, they just want one in charge of stuff.

In hindsight, Clinton should've run less ads about how bad Trump was and more ads about what the hell Democrats stand for and how it can help working class voters. Less talk about bigoted remarks and more talk about the auto-bailout.

[SeanF]

5 minutes ago, IheartIheartTesla said:

First, a mea culpa. I probably placed too much emphasis on polls, thinking it established science and that even with somewhat higher uncertainty this year, the risk of systematic error would be minimized. I probably underestimated the depth of anger in this country and the magnitude of 'shy Trump supporters'. Then again, I have many blue collar workers in my extended family and this shouldnt have been that much of a surprise. I did mention that Michigan might be an unpleasant surprise, but Wisconsin threw me. Pennsylvania, in hindsight, not so much. There were many articles about blue collar Democrats switching their votes, but I thought it wouldnt be enough.

Second, the Democrat model of letting the Republicans run high margins in rural/semi-rural areas and hoping urban areas to compensate, again in hindsight, appears to me to be high risk because of geographic localization. Things can happen locally that have a more profound effect than over a larger, more diffuse area. Not sure if this mattered at all this time around, but something to think about.

Finally, as Nate Silver pointed out, this country (the people) is fundamentally the same, give or take 1-2% whether Clinton won or Trump won. Its not much solace, but something I'm holding on to this morning.

Nationally, the polling wasn't that far out.  Some of the State-level polling was rubbish though/

[Larry of the Lawn]

Just now, Dr. Pepper said:

They'll be out in full force, now.  They've just been validated.  They've been told that their views are worthy of a place in public life. 

The Trump campaign had said that people were afraid to admit voting for him.  The reason why is because they'd have to openly say they are bigots.  They now know they don't have to be afraid any longer.  That's nauseating, terrifying, outrageous.  

Whoa whoa whoa, hold now, they aren't bigots, they just support one.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

8 minutes ago, butterbumps! said:

I think that's respectable, but am curious--  did you convince anyone to change their vote with this method?

A few from time to time.  It's the water's method as opposed to attempting to use dynamite.

[James Arryn]

9 minutes ago, butterbumps! said:

how do you get them to challenge-- truly, genuinely reflect-- on whether that's the case?    because, honestly, I do believe that a TON of this final tally has a lot to do with discomfort with a Lady Pres, even and perhaps especially in cases where people aren't truly aware of it.

But what if, for example, their issues with her aggressive foreign policy nod/or neo-conservatism have nothing to do with her gender. What does treating it as though it must do? How do you get Clinton supporters to challenge--truly genuinely reflect--on all the ways she's imperfect even to a perfectly objective eye if any criticism is chalked up to prejudice? Is this not a formula for being blindsided by reality as per what happened?

[Rhom]

3 minutes ago, James Arryn said:

IF it's a spade.

But calling anyone who has reservations about Clinton a spade is bad politics. And it happened all the time in here alone. People would actually say things like 'the only reason she's criticized is mysogeny'...and mean it. And therefore anyone with any criticism was therefore a mysoginist. I'm not talking about how you treat Trump supporters; I'm talking about treating anyone with concerns about Clinton as if they're the same as Trump supporters. 

What's the upside if you're right? How many votes have you potentially gained? And what's the downside if you're wrong? How many votes have you potentially lost?

 

I think this nails it.  There is a large swath of the country that felt left behind.  Hillary herself nailed it in her much lamented "Basket of Deplorables" speech.

Quote

You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump's supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic -- you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up. He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 11,000 people -- now 11 million. He tweets and retweets their offensive hateful mean-spirited rhetoric. Now, some of those folks -- they are irredeemable, but thankfully they are not America."

"But the other basket -- and I know this because I see friends from all over America here -- I see friends from Florida and Georgia and South Carolina and Texas -- as well as, you know, New York and California -- but that other basket of people are people who feel that the government has let them down, the economy has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures, and they're just desperate for change. It doesn't really even matter where it comes from. They don't buy everything he says, but he seems to hold out some hope that their lives will be different. They won't wake up and see their jobs disappear, lose a kid to heroin, feel like they're in a dead-end. Those are people we have to understand and empathize with as well."

The first paragraph got all the attention... but she was spot on with the second paragraph, and that's where the election was lost.

[Fez]

Also, based on what happened, I think Clinton would've easily beaten Cruz and probably most of the other Republicans not named Kasich. Trump really did have a special appeal to a lot of working class voters.

[James Arryn]

2 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said:

They'll be out in full force, now.  They've just been validated.  They've been told that their views are worthy of a place in public life. 

The Trump campaign had said that people were afraid to admit voting for him.  The reason why is because they'd have to openly say they are bigots.  They now know they don't have to be afraid any longer.  That's nauseating, terrifying, outrageous.  

This is what we saw post-Brexit, and what I therefore saw coming. Validation! We don't have to hide anymore, afraid of the PC police! We can say it Ike it really is!

[Channel4s-JonSnow]

3 minutes ago, TheKitttenGuard said:

It happens a good amount that I sometime wonders if overreacting is deliberate to get people have those sort of reactions.

The largest problem with the type of Anti-PC mentality is that it is derived from a place of security and it is threaten.  Listen to people who are not part of the dominate socio-economic or Political position and they tell you how much they need to be careful in words, thoughts, and deed.  The people who rail against PC do not want to act as other minorities do or are ignorant of how PC the minorities need to be for that is how it is suppose to be.

I think its more that they now feel that they ARE a minority now, that their wishes are not being listened to or followed. I think they see a correlation between the weakening of their own position and the 'apologetic' way they feel they are being forced to behave. The anti PC thing might not be a cause of their troubles, but its the one thing stopping them from speaking up about their issues.