U.S. Politics

[Ikantcpell]

 

[Jarpie]

Time to drop some truthbombs.

For Hillary supporters (or anti-Trump), are you really surprised that demonizing half of the voters and their candidate as racist, misogynistic and all other buzzwords which are now "in" didn't work? Especially when many of you come across as smug and self-important. People who are struggling to make ends meet, and who's cities/communities have been going worse might not really care about your buzzwords, which you sling from your ivory towers. That's how people sees you, and for a good reason.

Gee, I wonder if attacking people without college-degrees as being dumb and with the above-mentioned buzzwords might cause backlash...especially if your elitist candidate comes across as smug, entitled, self-centered, arrogant and has been mired in scandals for three decades now...also don't be surprised if they decide to vote for the other guy instead just for the spite of it.

Also for those who might be whining about "MUH POPULISM!", ALL politics is populism, Hillary tried to pander to the blacks, latinos and women with the populism they thought would work for them, but exit polls shows that it didn't work. 54% of the white women voters didn't vote for Hillary and that should tell you something. IIRC more latinos voted for Trump than for Romney four years ago, same with asians and blacks.

[snowychap]

1 hour ago, BOF said:

It's brilliant and it's bang on.  A lot of people would do well to listen to it very carefully.

It's very good but it isn't bang on in my view and he would do well to listen to himself very carefully in parts.

I don't think you can put forward an argument that condemns people for forming a stereotypical viewpoint of 'the right' as a homogeneous group at the same time as you're characterizing, in a stereotypical way as a homogeneous group, the people that are supposedly doing this, i.e. 'the left'.

I think the problem with the thrust of his argument is that it lacks the required nuance and it mashes up too many strands in to one collective pronouncement, i.e. that it is the fault of 'the left'.

Why is Trump's election not also the fault of 'the centre' (surely a much bigger constituency than the actual 'left' especially in US politics?) or also the fault of the Republican 'right' that distanced itself, pre-election, to Trump (but now is largely falling in line, see Paul Ryan et al.)?

Why is the disenchantment of groups of people being left behind by globalization the fault of immigration rather than the fault of this route that capitalism has taken us down?

Why is the answer to the issues being foisted upon people by free movement of capital to rein in the free movement of people?

I know the last two lines aren't anything that he's said in that piece they're just me thinking out loud having heard various comments in the last five months in the aftermath of the referendum and the Trump victory.

Edited November 11, 2016 by snowychap

[BOF]

Snowy I'm not on about left, right or centre and I think it's counter-productive to the entire conversation to try and make it about that.  I'm on about anyone who doesn't identify with what has currently won the election in America or voted against the referendum in the UK.  Even after both have happened, it's still **** staggeringly arrogant and self-righteous to hear people refusing to acknowledge that there's a discussion to be had and that it's still somehow acceptable to call all Trump supporters racists and all or most Brexiters at best xenophobic.  The media have been telling the haves of the world that everything's OK in your own backyard.  So it's of little surprise now that people are absolutely amazed that this has happened, as they had little to no warning from said media.  But now that it HAS happened, they'd do well to get their heads out of the sand and stop pretending the 'other people' don't exist.  Because that's the impression I'm still getting in the aftermath of this election.  It's blood-boiling to read the reactions lashing out at others instead of taking a look in the mirror.

But I get it.  An awful lot of people have so much pride that they would rather do damage to another person than entertain the notion that they might have to adjust their staunch, ignorant and inaccurate views on something like the breakdown of opinion within their own country.

As I've said before.  Humanity in many facets is **** disgusting.

[Keyblade]

18 minutes ago, Jarpie said:

Time to drop some truthbombs.

For Hillary supporters (or anti-Trump), are you really surprised that demonizing half of the voters and their candidate as racist, misogynistic and all other buzzwords which are now "in" didn't work? Especially when many of you come across as smug and self-important. People who are struggling to make ends meet, and who's cities/communities have been going worse might not really care about your buzzwords, which you sling from your ivory towers. That's how people sees you, and for a good reason.

Gee, I wonder if attacking people without college-degrees as being dumb and with the above-mentioned buzzwords might cause backlash...especially if your elitist candidate comes across as smug, entitled, self-centered, arrogant and has been mired in scandals for three decades now...also don't be surprised if they decide to vote for the other guy instead just for the spite of it.

Also for those who might be whining about "MUH POPULISM!", ALL politics is populism, Hillary tried to pander to the blacks, latinos and women with the populism they thought would work for them, but exit polls shows that it didn't work. 54% of the white women voters didn't vote for Hillary and that should tell you something. IIRC more latinos voted for Trump than for Romney four years ago, same with asians and blacks.

Racism, misogyny etc are not buzzwords and relegating them to such speaks volumes about this movement and people who sympathize with it. For people who are supposedly tired of political correctness and being silenced, they certainly love to do so whenever they are called out on their rhetoric or somebody says or does something they don't agree with. God forbid for example a football player decides to kneel during the national anthem in protest...sack him! Get out of the country! Gee, I wonder what happened to MUH FREEZE PEACH.

What does one have to do to be called out on bigotry short of dressing up in a white hood and cross and lynching people? Whatever it is, Donald Trump has ticked almost every box and a very good chunk of his supporters do as well. The whole 'we're struggling' line doesn't wash and is quite frankly a weak excuse from people who routinely demonize African Americans who are doing just as bad if not worse. Are they yelling from ivory towers too? When they complain and protest about racism in the form of BLM and others it's met with vehement opposition from the right. Maybe if they were compassionate and were active in the fight against oppression of all kinds instead of the chief opponents of it, people could be sympathetic to them. As it is, it sounds like a bunch of weak excuses to justify a horrible choice.

[snowychap]

6 minutes ago, BOF said:

Snowy I'm not on about left, right or centre and I think it's counter-productive to the entire conversation to try and make it about that. 

But we were commenting on that bloke's 6 minute video where he keeps on repeating that it was 'the left' wot did it.

I agree with you about mostly disregarding the 'left' and 'right' labeling but until we convince everyone else we're going to find ourselves largely talking at the bar just between the two of us.
 

Whilst I see and recognize the staunch and inaccurate views on the breakdown of opinion within people's own country (and other countries) displayed by those who did not vote for Brexit or for Trump, I also see it and recognize it being displayed by those who did vote for those things and in those that identify with the people who did.

It's in the comments in the post a couple above with words and phrases such as 'truthbombs' and 'buzzwords' and 'your elitist candidate' as much as it's in the comments of those that are trying to suggest that all Trump supporters are racists and Brexiteers xenophobes.

All political parties are broad churches and, I think, all constituencies (even when voting for the same thing) are even broader ones. Those broad churches will contain strains of illiberalism, authoritarianism, racism, xenophobia, protectionism and much more. That these strains may not represent the view of the majority of the congregation does not mean we should ignore it when the sermon(s) references any of those things.

 

[NoelVilla]

Well so Clinton won the popular vote and should be the President?                                                 
First of all I have to admit that I don't think the US should change the system to a popular vote. It's a coalition of 50 states and that should reflect the system.                                                
                                                
The problem with the system is the absolute majority. Most votes in a state gives you all the electoral votes.                                                
What if we use relative majority? 33% of the votes in a state give you a 3rd of the electors.                                                
I checked this numbers and got 271 - 267 in advantage to Clinton.                                                 
Pennsylvania would be tied 10-10 with this system and that result better reflect what Pennsylvania votes.                                                
                                                
So Trump won but I know how I will view his win. No I don't like Hillary Clinton and I don't think Trump will be as bad as some think.

[chrisp65]

They both knew the rules before the game started.

Extrapolating other results is fun, but meaningless.

Between 120,000,000 and 135,000,000 people voted. If half of them are thick inbred racists and the other half are gay bedwetting liberals we should have no problem retaking the colony.

Way too early to look at the voting data and think there's an accurate 140 character summary to be had.

 

[BOF]

Well I've lost count of the reports of attacks on predominantly white people i.e. Trump voters, since the results came in. Including kids in schools doing 'pretend elections'.  Not to mention the damage being done to property and the unpostable (on VT) pictures of racist messages left behind.  Sounds like quite the tinderbox.

 

Here's what was left behind after an anti-Trump rally in Nawleans.

 

[peterms]

I don't know what to say.

Quote

While some pundits are declaring the Clinton political dynasty dead, sources tell us that it is far from over. Chelsea Clinton is being groomed for the New York seat held by Rep. Nita Lowey.

Chelsea could run for the seat in NYC’s 17th Congressional District once Lowey, a 79-year-old respected career politician with nearly 30 years in office, decides to retire, we have exclusively learned.

Lowey’s district includes parts of Rockland and Westchester counties and, conveniently, Chappaqua, the Clinton family home base.

In August, Hillary and Bill Clinton purchased a home next door to their primary residence in Chappaqua for $1.16 million, which is intended for Chelsea, her husband, Marc Mezvinsky, and their two children, Charlotte and Aidan.

While Chelsea currently lives, and is registered to vote, in Manhattan, she could easily make Chappaqua her legal residence in order to run for Lowey’s seat when it becomes vacant.

Clintons shell out $1.16M to buy house next door in Chappaqua

A source told us, “While it is true the Clintons need some time to regroup after Hillary’s crushing loss, they will not give up. Chelsea would be the next extension of the Clinton brand. In the past few years, she has taken a very visible role in the Clinton Foundation and on the campaign trail. While politics isn’t the life Hillary wanted for Chelsea, she chose to go on the campaign trail for her mother and has turned out to be very poised, articulate and comfortable with the visibility.”

The source continued, “There has been a lot of speculation within New York Democratic circles about Lowey’s retirement and Chelsea running for the seat. There is a belief that Chappaqua is a logical place for Chelsea to run, because it would be straightforward for her to raise money and build a powerful base.”

A spokesperson for Lowey — who is serving her 14th term in Congress and was first elected to the US House of Representatives in 1988 — declined to comment. A spokesperson for Chelsea didn’t get back to us.

“While it is true the Clintons need some time to regroup after Hillary’s crushing loss..."

About a day, then.

Or is it a windup?

[snowychap]

Other election news (apologies if postd already):

Quote

Marijuana legislation

It was a big night for marijuana legalization. Voters in five states decided whether to legalize recreational use of marijuana: California, Maine, Massachusetts and Nevada voted in favour. Only Arizona rejected the ballot initiative. Voters in Arkansas, Florida and North Dakota passed measures making the drug available for medical use. And in Montana, a measure was approved that removes provider restrictions on the drug for medicinal use.

More than 20% of Americans will now live in states where marijuana use for adults is legal, up from 5% before election day.

Colorado and Washington became the first states to legalize recreational marijuana in 2012, paving the way for Oregon and Alaska to follow suit.

Minimum wage

Arizona, Colorado, Maine and Washington voted to raise the minimum wage to at least $12 an hour by 2020. South Dakota’s attempt to pass an initiative that would have lowered the minimum wage for non-tipped employees younger than 18 was widely rejected.

Gun control measures

A handful of states elected to impose stricter controls on guns and ammunition purchases. In California, voters approved a multi-pronged referendum that requires background checks for ammunition purchases and bans on ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds, adds penalties for not reporting lost or stolen guns, and enables law enforcement to confiscate guns from convicted felons.

In Nevada, voters approved universal background checks on private gun sales, with the exception of sales between family members. A similar proposal was narrowly rejected in Maine.

In Washington state, voters backed a measure that allows judges to keep individuals they consider a threat, such as domestic abusers, from possessing weapons.

Gender barriers broken

While women failed to shatter the highest gender barrier in US politics, women of color did achieve major milestones in Congress. Nevada elected the nation’s first Latina senator when it voted for Catherine Cortez Masto. The granddaughter of a Mexican immigrant, Masto is also the first female senator the state has sent to Washington.

California elected Attorney General Kamala Harris, the daughter of an Indian mother and a Jamaican-American father, to the Senate in a race that would have broken barriers regardless of the outcome. Harris’s opponent, Loretta Sanchez, would have been the first Latina.

Harris is the first biracial woman and first Indian-American to serve in the Senate. The first and only black female senator was Carol Moseley Braun, whose term ended in 1999.

Congresswoman Tammy Duckworth, a Democrat from Illinois born to a Thai mother of Chinese descent, will be the first woman in the Senate to have served in combat. She lost both of her legs in a grenade attack during the Iraq war.

Florida sent Stephanie Murphy to the House of Representatives, making her the first Vietnamese-American woman ever elected to Congress.

In Minnesota, voters elected Ilhan Omar, the first Somali American legislator, who came to the US as a refugee almost 20 years ago.

Sheriff Joe Arpaio booted – North Carolina’s bathroom ban governor to follow?

After 24 controversial years, Arizona voted out the self-styled toughest sheriff in America, Joe Arpaio.

A surge in Latino voter turnout helped thwart Arpaio’s attempt to win a seventh term as sheriff of Maricopa County. Arpaio gained national prominence for his hardline stance on immigration and a mandate that prisoners wear pink underwear and live in tents in Arizona’s unforgiving desert.

A week before election day, federal prosecutors charged the lawman with criminal contempt of court for allegedly violating an order by continuing to arrest immigrants with no evidence they had broken any state law. That came on top of a 2007 civil lawsuit that found against him in a claim that he racially profiled Latinos.

In North Carolina, Republican Governor Pat McCrory inspired a wave of revulsion and a damaging boycott of the state by high-profile businesses and entertainment stars with his anti-transgender “bathroom bill”. He appears to have lost his re-election, with Democratic rival Rory Cooper leading by less than than 5,000 votes.

Cooper claimed victory, but McCrory insisted “the election is not over” and will not concede until counties finish an audit of votes by 18 November.

 

[Rodders]

Can't be a huge surprise if you're non white and the country has voted in someone who's words were a symbolic declaration of war on all of the other. Not to mention that even prior to the election there''s been a heck of a lot of police on black violence. Non whites have perceived a xenophobia endorsed towards them and are preparing for war. Not condoning it obviously, violence begats violence and get's you nowhere, but I'll be damned if I don't have some sympathy with them

[TheStagMan]

34 minutes ago, NoelVilla said:

The problem with the system is the absolute majority. Most votes in a state gives you all the electoral votes.                                                
What if we use relative majority? 33% of the votes in a state give you a 3rd of the electors.                                                

I agree with this, the current system means that if you are not on the "winning" side you have no representation - even if the winning side is 50% + 1 vote.

never understood the winner takes all nature of that vote

[Brumerican]

30 minutes ago, BOF said:

Well I've lost count of the reports of attacks on predominantly white people i.e. Trump voters, since the results came in. Including kids in schools doing 'pretend elections'.  Not to mention the damage being done to property and the unpostable (on VT) pictures of racist messages left behind.  Sounds like quite the tinderbox.

 

Here's what was left behind after an anti-Trump rally in Nawleans.

 

 

You sure that this isn't just a fan of interracial porn ?

[Keyblade]

4 minutes ago, TheStagMan said:

I agree with this, the current system means that if you are not on the "winning" side you have no representation - even if the winning side is 50% + 1 vote.

never understood the winner takes all nature of that vote

This was the first time I ever really paid close attention to the election, and it baffled me that that's how it works. Probably was a very good system when it was first made but right now it's looking very flawed.

[TheStagMan]

33 minutes ago, BOF said:

Well I've lost count of the reports of attacks on predominantly white people i.e. Trump voters, since the results came in. Including kids in schools doing 'pretend elections'.  Not to mention the damage being done to property and the unpostable (on VT) pictures of racist messages left behind.  Sounds like quite the tinderbox.

 

Here's what was left behind after an anti-Trump rally in Nawleans.

 

Riiiiiggghhhttt... all Trumps fault. Not one of these innocent, lovely law-abiding people held views like this last week.

Disagree with someone's policies, fine, dislike someone as a person, fine. Protest your dislike, fine, vote against them, fine. This. No. when this has been the other way round, it has been rightly condemned and people arrested and jailed. And for this people have sympathy???? Holy crap! You don't suddenly go out and riot and say things like this without an underlying hatred of white people. what about white people who voted for Hillary? Should they die too?

America has big problems. Maybe Trump's election is the catalyst for the ruling class to start doing something meaningful about it.

[Dante_Lockhart]

Day 1 in Trumps America

[TrentVilla]

1 minute ago, TheStagMan said:

America has big problems. Maybe Trump's election is the catalyst for the ruling class to start doing something meaningful about it.

Ha.... yeah sure it is, that's a good one.

 

[StefanAVFC]

 

[peterms]

13 minutes ago, TheStagMan said:

America has big problems. Maybe Trump's election is the catalyst for the ruling class to start doing something meaningful about it.

Well it seems the firms whose share price jumped after the result were private prisons, and weapons manufacturers.  I suppose that tells us about the "something meaningful" the markets think will be happening.