2016 US Presidential Election

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby morriswalters » Wed Nov 16, 2016 11:00 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:It's just more false-equivalence nonsense if you think the protests are the same, or if you think the threat of a Trump presidency is no more real than the "he'll take our guns" nonsense people believed about Obama.
Protests are protests. An American privilege. And those protests aren't going to topple Trump.

Funny story about Trump. Went out to dinner with his family last night. I wonder how he'll do when he has been seated, and off the cuff dinners are a thing of the past. I hope no fools take a run at him. And evidently the Press Pool is in the Doghouse. He left them at Trump Tower.

In the absence of any real news I wonder if he'll live in the White House? Will he have Putin in for a State dinner? Bolton As Secretary State is an interesting possibility, possibly bright nasty fireworks. Does the Family get Top Secret Clearance?

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6801
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby sardia » Wed Nov 16, 2016 11:23 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:It's just more false-equivalence nonsense if you think the protests are the same, or if you think the threat of a Trump presidency is no more real than the "he'll take our guns" nonsense people believed about Obama.
Protests are protests. An American privilege. And those protests aren't going to topple Trump.

Funny story about Trump. Went out to dinner with his family last night. I wonder how he'll do when he has been seated, and off the cuff dinners are a thing of the past. I hope no fools take a run at him. And evidently the Press Pool is in the Doghouse. He left them at Trump Tower.

In the absence of any real news I wonder if he'll live in the White House? Will he have Putin in for a State dinner? Bolton As Secretary State is an interesting possibility, possibly bright nasty fireworks. Does the Family get Top Secret Clearance?

Nobody knows. The GOP wants him to rubber stamp shit, which he said he would. Take that with a grain of salt, but you would die of dehydration. The key thing about protests is making sure it happens during decision time. Like when the school board demands abstinence only education or try to teach creationism. That's when protests are most effective. Or at least, that's true during the tea party days. Now things are so polarized, the GOP controlled boards/councils/etc etc may press on regardless. Will those protesters still be there a few months in? Doubtful.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby KnightExemplar » Wed Nov 16, 2016 11:42 pm UTC

Izawwlgood wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:And the difference is, Trump changed his language as soon as people at his rallies began to get violent.
This is a fascinating thing to say. I don't mean this to be combative, but my understanding is that literally the opposite happened - Trump not only encouraged violence at his rallies from the get go, but it was like 4-5d after the election results came in that he said "Stop the violence", vaguely, not specifically to his supporters.

There is an enormous divide in what realities we all live in based on our media consumption, and I don't mean that to imply that you aren't living in reality.


I disagree.

I watched Trump's rallies. Early on, Trump would say he'd punch a guy, or if someone would punch someone, that Trump would pay for the lawyer's bills.

* Then a dude actually punched someone at a rally.
* Then another dude did the same.

Trump's language remained inflammatory and racist mind you. But the above events visibly changed him. Trump would now say "We're all having a good time yes?" as well as "Its those Bernie Supporters who are attacking us".

I'm talking March through June, earlier this year. Its something you had to be listening into as Trump spoke at his rallies. Trump's strategy was always changing, but this particular strategy shift always demonstrated to me (anyway) that Trump was a naive buffoon. He talks a big talk and barks a mean bark... but he's just a showman.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
Soupspoon
You have done something you shouldn't. Or are about to.
Posts: 4060
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2016 7:00 pm UTC
Location: 53-1

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Soupspoon » Wed Nov 16, 2016 11:45 pm UTC

To paraphrase, "Trump means Trump".

And, as with Brexit, it's becoming obvious that this thing has happened without anyone really knowing what they ought to expect from it happening, everyone disagreeing with each other about what their vote for Trump meant and the main pushers of Trump (including Trump) never actually had any plans for what to do if Trump won (whilst Clinton definitely will have had a viable list of staff and appointments at hand, barring particularly unforseen adjustments).

Anyway the "man of the people" won, as evidenced by this picture of him in front of the everyday artisan golden elevator doors that can be found in every hard-working American's home...
Spoiler:
Image

Yes, Donald, very Presidential.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6801
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby sardia » Thu Nov 17, 2016 12:28 am UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:
Izawwlgood wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:And the difference is, Trump changed his language as soon as people at his rallies began to get violent.
This is a fascinating thing to say. I don't mean this to be combative, but my understanding is that literally the opposite happened - Trump not only encouraged violence at his rallies from the get go, but it was like 4-5d after the election results came in that he said "Stop the violence", vaguely, not specifically to his supporters.

There is an enormous divide in what realities we all live in based on our media consumption, and I don't mean that to imply that you aren't living in reality.


I disagree.

I watched Trump's rallies. Early on, Trump would say he'd punch a guy, or if someone would punch someone, that Trump would pay for the lawyer's bills.

* Then a dude actually punched someone at a rally.
* Then another dude did the same.

Trump's language remained inflammatory and racist mind you. But the above events visibly changed him. Trump would now say "We're all having a good time yes?" as well as "Its those Bernie Supporters who are attacking us".

I'm talking March through June, earlier this year. Its something you had to be listening into as Trump spoke at his rallies. Trump's strategy was always changing, but this particular strategy shift always demonstrated to me (anyway) that Trump was a naive buffoon. He talks a big talk and barks a mean bark... but he's just a showman.

I disagree that Trump is a harmless showman. One, his showman tactics are incredibly dangerous. And two, he's actually corrupt. And three, he has a dark side. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/16/busin ... trump.html

What happens when someone whistle blows on Trump or questions one of his political deals that somehow makes Trump money. He's gonna go after them.

User avatar
zmic
Posts: 427
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:38 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby zmic » Thu Nov 17, 2016 12:33 am UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:I'm talking March through June, earlier this year. Its something you had to be listening into as Trump spoke at his rallies. Trump's strategy was always changing, but this particular strategy shift always demonstrated to me (anyway) that Trump was a naive buffoon. He talks a big talk and barks a mean bark... but he's just a showman.


Judging from what he's accomplished in the last 12 months I'd say that Trump is a political genius.

Seriously, how can anyone doubt that the ablest man has been elected? Trump defeated the Republican party AND the Democratic party. On his own.
Last edited by zmic on Thu Nov 17, 2016 12:36 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Nov 17, 2016 12:34 am UTC

zmic wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:I'm talking March through June, earlier this year. Its something you had to be listening into as Trump spoke at his rallies. Trump's strategy was always changing, but this particular strategy shift always demonstrated to me (anyway) that Trump was a naive buffoon. He talks a big talk and barks a mean bark... but he's just a showman.


Judging from what he's accomplished in the last 12 months I'd say that Trump is a political genius.


I disagree. Politicians were tied by unspoken rules and morals, Trump was not.

"Winning" is not sufficient for me, even if Trump manages to get things done for the Republican party that I'm registered to. I want Trump to advance conservative values and conservative morals, both of which he has shown nothing but utter incompetence and ignorance.

Alas, that's not what America wants. They want Trump, whatever that means. People are deeply distrustful of Washington, to unnecessarily levels, and believe that only by fucking up the capital will good things happen. Very few Trump supporters I know of care about the finer points of policy or governance. That's one thing that definitely unites Trump supporters: their irrational hate for "focus groups", "meetings" and "bureaucrats".

Trump was willing to rise the tide of anti-government distrust. Mind you, Trump's job hasn't even started yet. We'll only be able to judge whether or not Trump is a good President 4 years from now. How much will Trump really be able to do, politically, based on his campaign? And how much will he piss off the opposition party in the next four years?

The anti-government "rebels" so to speak have decided to consume Eric Cantor just a few years ago, utterly destroying his bid for Speaker of the House. Trump is playing with a dangerous group of supporters.

Seriously, how can anyone doubt that the ablest man has been elected? Trump defeated the Republican party AND the Democratic party. On his own.


Not on his own. Trump did it by tearing down the shared trust in the US People have in their government... the trust which allows the US Government to fundamentally function. The US Constitution is just a piece of paper, it can only function if people trust in it. The trust in our country however is at all time lows, no doubt in part because of Trump's actions the past few years. (Yes, I'm including the "Obama is a Muslim" comments).

In essence, Trump is a symptom of the problem. He's simply the only politician who was willing to ride this wave of distrust which is beginning to engulf this country. I thought it'd end with the Tea Party's failures the past couple of years... but it hasn't ended. Its only gotten worse.

Sanders was the other candidate who was going for this "distrust" vote, and I also despise him for it.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
zmic
Posts: 427
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:38 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby zmic » Thu Nov 17, 2016 1:03 am UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:Trump was willing to rise the tide of anti-government distrust. Mind you, Trump's job hasn't even started yet. We'll only be able to judge whether or not Trump is a good President 4 years from now. How much will Trump really be able to do, politically, based on his campaign? And how much will he piss off the opposition party in the next four years?


You shouldn't overestimate the importance of a president. The body of politicians is just a layer of foam on top of the collective political consciousness of the people. This really IS little more than an opinion poll.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Nov 17, 2016 1:30 am UTC

zmic wrote:You shouldn't overestimate the importance of a president.


This singular phrase describes literally every Trump supporter I've talked to. ABSOLUTELY. EVERY. SINGLE. ONE.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
zmic
Posts: 427
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:38 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby zmic » Thu Nov 17, 2016 2:08 am UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:
zmic wrote:You shouldn't overestimate the importance of a president.


This singular phrase describes literally every Trump supporter I've talked to. ABSOLUTELY. EVERY. SINGLE. ONE.


Well that's one thing that every Trump supporter understands, but you don't. Who can be in any doubt about this after the insipid presidency of Obama, the photo-op president? It's funny that people think Trump is out of his depth, but it was Obama who was out of his depth and ended up being presidented, rather than being the president.

I disagree. Politicians were tied by unspoken rules and morals, Trump was not.


Politicians were mainly tied by a disgusting degree of hypocrisy and holier-than-thou fakeness. Donald Trump has a ball just being Donald Trump. Compare that to Clinton who could not hide that she hates every single second of campaigning.

Alas, that's not what America wants. They want Trump, whatever that means. People are deeply distrustful of Washington, to unnecessarily levels, and believe that only by fucking up the capital will good things happen. Very few Trump supporters I know of care about the finer points of policy or governance. That's one thing that definitely unites Trump supporters: their irrational hate for "focus groups", "meetings" and "bureaucrats".


If you don't believe that democracy works, you should propose something better. Maybe people with a grasp of the finer points of policy or governance should get more votes?

In essence, Trump is a symptom of the problem. He's simply the only politician who was willing to ride this wave of distrust which is beginning to engulf this country. I thought it'd end with the Tea Party's failures the past couple of years... but it hasn't ended. Its only gotten worse.


Riding the wave rather than struggling against the water has been described as a high level of wisdom by the Zen masters. How odd that macho Trump is able to display this touch of femaleness.

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7368
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby The Great Hippo » Thu Nov 17, 2016 2:31 am UTC

zmic wrote:Seriously, how can anyone doubt that the ablest man has been elected? Trump defeated the Republican party AND the Democratic party. On his own.
Winning an election is not quite the same as running a government.

Donald Trump's victory is to sound leadership as Honey Boo Boo's popularity is to exceptional media savvy.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby KnightExemplar » Thu Nov 17, 2016 2:44 am UTC

zmic wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:
zmic wrote:You shouldn't overestimate the importance of a president.


This singular phrase describes literally every Trump supporter I've talked to. ABSOLUTELY. EVERY. SINGLE. ONE.


Well that's one thing that every Trump supporter understands, but you don't.


I understand it. I just disagree with it.

Which is why I'm not arguing against you. But I felt like it was important to point this out to the rest of the forum, since they are talking about racism and stuff that really doesn't strike the heart of the issue.

I'm relying on a bit of history here. I do believe this is my first sweeping generalization of Trump supporters in this thread, and I have been in this discussion since the first page over a year ago. So I take this accusation seriously. I wish to stay on neutral terms with you specifically zmic, so I'm not necessarily saying if its good or bad... aside from the simple fact that I disagree with this sentiment.

But yes. The above phrase you uttered is the heart of the Trump supporter issue, and I again wish to highlight it. Do you not agree with me?
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6801
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby sardia » Thu Nov 17, 2016 2:57 am UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:
zmic wrote:You shouldn't overestimate the importance of a president.


This singular phrase describes literally every Trump supporter I've talked to. ABSOLUTELY. EVERY. SINGLE. ONE.

While this is sorta true, in the "well he probably didn't mean all muslims, or well he didn't mean a real wall", they do expect him to do shit for them. Like that infrastructure bill(good stuff) or start protectionist policies(bad for jobs) or be more anti-immigration (bad for the economy). Actually, they just care about their bottom line in particular. Trump could grow the economy like crazy, but if those uneducated whites don't get their jobs back, they'll vote him out. (or more likely) if Trump tanks the economy, but subsidizes uneducated whites to pump out overpriced manufactured goods that nobody wants, they'll vote for him again.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10498
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Nov 17, 2016 3:02 am UTC

Stop insisting that only "uneducated" people voted for Trump. The majority of college educated white people voted Trump, even if the ratio of uneducated white people voting for him was (much) greater.

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Lucrece » Thu Nov 17, 2016 3:21 am UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Stop insisting that only "uneducated" people voted for Trump. The majority of college educated white people voted Trump, even if the ratio of uneducated white people voting for him was (much) greater.



It's just a stealth attempt to undermine voting decisions by implying that people without college degrees are rubes/less intelligent. The problem with that is that while everybody was happy to break down white educated vs white uneducated, the other minorities hardly received any attention on how much of uneducated minorities voted for Hillary under the same implication that if minorities without college degrees voted for Hillary, then their votes are worth less than people with degrees.

It's classist bullshit either way, and all the more ironic coming from leftwing pundits although not at all surprising considering the economic class focus of the old left has been supplanted by identity politics where minority status can trump economic status, which is how you end with the John Legends and Beyonce and Van Jones talking down to white people who make a tiny fraction of what they earn.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

User avatar
Isaac Hill
Systems Analyst????
Posts: 543
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 9:35 pm UTC
Location: Middletown, RI

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Isaac Hill » Thu Nov 17, 2016 3:43 am UTC

The Affordable Care Act could make it through OK. The Rs have said "repeal and replace" for years now, without going into what they'd replace it with, and it's not like Trump has a detailed plan. They'll probably pass a few minor changes, but it'll be enough that they stop calling it "0bamacare" and start calling it "Trumpcare". Then, the R governors who thought "0bamacare" was terrible, wouldn't set up state exchanges, and declined its Medicaid expansion will decide that "Trumpcare" is awesome, set up state exchanges, and accept its Medicaid expansion. Governors welcoming ACA provisions, instead of fighting them tooth and nail, should make the ACA provisions work better. Trump will claim (and quite possibly receive) all of the credit.
Alleged "poems"
that don't follow a rhyme scheme
are not poetry

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6580
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Thesh » Thu Nov 17, 2016 3:55 am UTC

They'll get rid of the individual mandate for sure, which pretty much breaks the whole thing. You can't guarantee anything with regards to coverage if you can't mandate people get a conforming plan.
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10498
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Nov 17, 2016 4:54 am UTC

Any chance we'd see the age rating restrictions removed?

Basically, the ACA sets limits on how much more or less you can rate by age (and does away with rating on gender). This has... interesting effects on who pays too much and too little for health insurance.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6801
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby sardia » Thu Nov 17, 2016 6:21 am UTC

Spoiler:
Lucrece wrote:
CorruptUser wrote:Stop insisting that only "uneducated" people voted for Trump. The majority of college educated white people voted Trump, even if the ratio of uneducated white people voting for him was (much) greater.



It's just a stealth attempt to undermine voting decisions by implying that people without college degrees are rubes/less intelligent. The problem with that is that while everybody was happy to break down white educated vs white uneducated, the other minorities hardly received any attention on how much of uneducated minorities voted for Hillary under the same implication that if minorities without college degrees voted for Hillary, then their votes are worth less than people with degrees.

It's classist bullshit either way, and all the more ironic coming from leftwing pundits although not at all surprising considering the economic class focus of the old left has been supplanted by identity politics where minority status can trump economic status, which is how you end with the John Legends and Beyonce and Van Jones talking down to white people who make a tiny fraction of what they earn.

Do you have any data to back up your shit talk? Or are you just a pundit too? And btw, any group of whites will vote more often than any similar group of minorities.

@CorruptUser
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the ... sters-why/
While the errors were nationwide, they were spread unevenly. The more whites without college degrees were in a state, the more Trump outperformed his FiveThirtyEight polls-only adjusted polling average,xr=0.76.

Party affiliation ate up the rest of the error bars on the polling. The reason "uneducated" white voters matter is because they are more likely to change their minds come 2018/2020. Given their higher propensity to vote, their swing state geography, and the hardiness of party Identity politics, it's probably the only game in town right now.
Do you have any data on why college educated voters voted Trump? Most of ones I read think most of the variation is explained by party affiliation.

CorruptUser wrote:Any chance we'd see the age rating restrictions removed?

Basically, the ACA sets limits on how much more or less you can rate by age (and does away with rating on gender). This has... interesting effects on who pays too much and too little for health insurance.
Who's even running the show? Are Ryan, McConnel, and whatever lobbyist Trump finds gonna get together and hash it out?
What are the age restrictions? I thought older people get charged more as they age.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10498
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Nov 17, 2016 8:24 am UTC

People do get charged more as they age, but part of the ACA regulations was a cap on how much more as they grow older. Currently it can be no more than 3x. This is a problem if certain age brackets are much more expensive than others. I don't know exactly what the story is now; I haven't worked with the exchanges in a while, mostly on Medicare.

As for why most college educated whites voted Trump, I honestly don't know why. I could ask my immediate family members who voted Trump (everyone but me) and has a graduate degree or higher (everyone), but mostly they are fed up with Obama on both domestic (I'm not) and foreign issues (I am) and Clinton is seen as the living embodiment of Obama's foreign policy failures (me too).
Last edited by CorruptUser on Thu Nov 17, 2016 8:32 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Jumble
Posts: 1184
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 6:48 am UTC
Location: London(ish), UK.
Contact:

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Jumble » Thu Nov 17, 2016 8:32 am UTC

Soupspoon wrote:To paraphrase, "Trump means Trump"
.....
Anyway the "man of the people" won, as evidenced by this picture of him in front of the everyday artisan golden elevator doors that can be found in every hard-working American's home...
Spoiler:
Image

Yes, Donald, very Presidential.


Loathe the man as I do I have to give him that's clever. Are you known as a borish, arrogant , racist half-wit? Then look good by finding an even bigger borish, arrogant, racist half-wit to stand next to, such as Nigel Farage. BTW, if you guys want to keep him you're welcome to him.
Spoiler:
Giant Speck wrote:You're a demon! DEMON!!!!

Oregonaut wrote:CURSE YOU VILLAIN!!
PhoenixEnigma wrote:Jumble is either the best or worst Santa ever, and I can't figure out which. Possibly both.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10498
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby CorruptUser » Thu Nov 17, 2016 8:33 am UTC

Alright, but if we adopt Nigel Farage, you have to take Andrew Wakefield back.

User avatar
zmic
Posts: 427
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:38 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby zmic » Thu Nov 17, 2016 9:26 am UTC

Jumble wrote:Loathe the man as I do I have to give him that's clever. Are you known as a borish, arrogant , racist half-wit? Then look good by finding an even bigger borish, arrogant, racist half-wit to stand next to, such as Nigel Farage. BTW, if you guys want to keep him you're welcome to him.


I see no reason to believe that Trump is a racist. I just don't see it.

If you listen to his victory speech, what was so racist about it?

User avatar
Felstaff
Occam's Taser
Posts: 5175
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 7:10 pm UTC
Location: ¢ ₪ ¿ ¶ § ∴ ® © ™ ؟ ¡ ‽ æ Þ ° ₰ ₤ ಡಢ

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Felstaff » Thu Nov 17, 2016 9:47 am UTC

I'm sorry that you judge a man's character on one public speech, but it turns out, he's actually spoken words before.
Away, you scullion! you rampallion! You fustilarian! I'll tickle your catastrophe.

elasto
Posts: 3757
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby elasto » Thu Nov 17, 2016 10:31 am UTC

Here's one simple example you may have missed:

Condemnation of comments made by Donald Trump about a federal judge reached the heights of the national Republican leadership when U.S. House Speaker Paul Ryan rebuked the GOP's presumptive presidential nominee on June 7, 2016.

"I disavow these comments," the Wisconsin Republican said. "Claiming a person can’t do the job because of their race is sort of like the textbook definition of a racist comment. I think that should be absolutely disavowed. It’s absolutely unacceptable."

Trump has been roundly denounced, by the left and right, for saying U.S. District Judge Gonzalo Curiel may be biased against him because of his Mexican heritage.

User avatar
zmic
Posts: 427
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:38 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby zmic » Thu Nov 17, 2016 10:36 am UTC

We've seen a few examples of this. Trump shoots of his mouth, gets burned, and then never does it again. He is a fast learner.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby morriswalters » Thu Nov 17, 2016 10:59 am UTC

That doesn't make him less a racist if he is indeed one.

elasto
Posts: 3757
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby elasto » Thu Nov 17, 2016 11:45 am UTC

He's either a racist, or he's faking it to pander to racists - which in some ways is worse - or, as you seem to be implying, he doesn't know what he's saying, which makes for awful leadership.

What makes you think he's a fast learner? He's making the same sort of mistakes post election that he was pre.

User avatar
The Great Hippo
Swans ARE SHARP
Posts: 7368
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2007 4:43 am UTC
Location: behind you

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby The Great Hippo » Thu Nov 17, 2016 12:13 pm UTC

zmic wrote:We've seen a few examples of this. Trump shoots of his mouth, gets burned, and then never does it again. He is a fast learner.
Nothing we've seen from Trump implies he's learning, nevermind learning "fast".

Are you familiar with Mark Twain's short story, "Luck"? Trump seems like a good candidate for that, except far more malevolent, and more an implication of the system that protected and rewarded his incompetence than a bizarre confluence of coincidences.

Trump's victory says very little about Trump; it says a *lot* about American politics.

JudeMorrigan
Posts: 1266
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2010 1:26 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby JudeMorrigan » Thu Nov 17, 2016 12:21 pm UTC

And there's the whole "naming Bannon chief strategist and senior counselor" thing. I see very little practical difference between "is definitely personally racist" and "fosters a culture of racism".


Chen
Posts: 5577
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Chen » Thu Nov 17, 2016 12:42 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Stop insisting that only "uneducated" people voted for Trump. The majority of college educated white people voted Trump, even if the ratio of uneducated white people voting for him was (much) greater.


I don't think anyone is insisting "only" uneducated people voted for him, but it seems a they were a significant factor in him winning. The college educated white vote was basically the same as you get in any election, with regards to the Republicans, as your link states. The 39 point margin he had for whites without a college education, is the highest since 1980 (again what your link says). If the rest of the demographics remained roughly the same, it makes sense to focus on the uneducated white vote, since it is one of the primary things that won him the election.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7594
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Zamfir » Thu Nov 17, 2016 1:03 pm UTC

There is a "dog that didn't bark" effect here. It's hardly surprising that Trump did well among a group that targeted most directly. He promised to be their champion, many believed him. Or at the least, they were willing to give him a chance. Not much of a mystery there.

The surprising part was how this didn't cost him much votes among other groups. That's the crucial part, I think.

User avatar
Liri
Healthy non-floating pooper reporting for doodie.
Posts: 1113
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2014 8:11 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Liri » Thu Nov 17, 2016 1:34 pm UTC

Sanders ended up being a spoiler for the youth vote. Not by getting tons of write-ins, but by driving away disillusioned young people. Clinton's share of the youth vote dropped twelve percent from 2008 Obama, not because Trump won a larger raw number than previous Republicans, but because liberal youth just didn't show up to vote at all in the numbers they had for the past two elections.

Does it still make me queasy that people voted for Trump at all? Yes.
There's a certain amount of freedom involved in cycling: you're self-propelled and decide exactly where to go. If you see something that catches your eye to the left, you can veer off there, which isn't so easy in a car, and you can't cover as much ground walking.

iamspen
Posts: 485
Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 2:23 pm UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby iamspen » Thu Nov 17, 2016 1:46 pm UTC

zmic wrote:We've seen a few examples of this. Trump shoots of his mouth, gets burned, and then never does it again. He is a fast learner.


He's fucking 70, dude. Clearly there was nothing fast about him learning that being a boorish asshole is bad.

Furthermore, how many times does he have to be a boorish asshole before we can end your narrative that he's learning not to be a boorish asshole?

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby morriswalters » Thu Nov 17, 2016 1:59 pm UTC

elasto wrote:He's either a racist, or he's faking it to pander to racists
I'll wait on a whatever policies he exposes to make a final decision on if he's just more unfiltered or a real racist. I sometimes think that Trump sounds worse because other politicians filter so hard so as not to offend anyone. That he has surrounded himself with people who supported him isn't surprising. That they aren't upper tier technocrats isn't surprising either since the Republicans as a whole ran away from him.

User avatar
Yakk
Poster with most posts but no title.
Posts: 11128
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 7:27 pm UTC
Location: E pur si muove

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Yakk » Thu Nov 17, 2016 2:06 pm UTC

Felstaff wrote:I'm sorry that you judge a man's character on one public speech, but it turns out, he's actually spoken words before.

Look, on Tuesday last, the person said "hello".

What is racist about "hello"?? Nothing at all. If the person was racist before Tuesday last, they clearly have learned their lesson. They said a non-racist thing.

Why do people not understand? He said "hello". That is not racist.
One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision - BR

Last edited by JHVH on Fri Oct 23, 4004 BCE 6:17 pm, edited 6 times in total.

User avatar
natraj
Posts: 1895
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:13 pm UTC
Location: away from Omelas

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby natraj » Thu Nov 17, 2016 2:22 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:I'll wait on a whatever policies he exposes to make a final decision on if he's just more unfiltered or a real racist. I sometimes think that Trump sounds worse because other politicians filter so hard so as not to offend anyone.


you know this doesn't mean trump isn't racist, right, it just means other politicians are also often racist.

but trump does get special bonus points for deciding that racism was the kind of thing he wanted to sell openly to his base and gladly play on.
You want to know the future, love? Then wait:
I'll answer your impatient questions. Still --
They'll call it chance, or luck, or call it Fate,
The cards and stars that tumble as they will.

pronouns: they or he

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby Izawwlgood » Thu Nov 17, 2016 2:49 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:
elasto wrote:He's either a racist, or he's faking it to pander to racists
I'll wait on a whatever policies he exposes to make a final decision on if he's just more unfiltered or a real racist. I sometimes think that Trump sounds worse because other politicians filter so hard so as not to offend anyone. That he has surrounded himself with people who supported him isn't surprising. That they aren't upper tier technocrats isn't surprising either since the Republicans as a whole ran away from him.

It seems odd to me that people keep saying this. Stephen Bannon was just the most recent decision Trump has made that indicates he's racist. At what point will people call a spade a spade?
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6801
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: 2016 US Presidential Election

Postby sardia » Thu Nov 17, 2016 3:41 pm UTC

Izawwlgood wrote:
morriswalters wrote:
elasto wrote:He's either a racist, or he's faking it to pander to racists
I'll wait on a whatever policies he exposes to make a final decision on if he's just more unfiltered or a real racist. I sometimes think that Trump sounds worse because other politicians filter so hard so as not to offend anyone. That he has surrounded himself with people who supported him isn't surprising. That they aren't upper tier technocrats isn't surprising either since the Republicans as a whole ran away from him.

It seems odd to me that people keep saying this. Stephen Bannon was just the most recent decision Trump has made that indicates he's racist. At what point will people call a spade a spade?

The biggest cover they can claim is that racist/xenophobic/stereotyping afflicts two thirds of the population. Since everybody has said awful beliefs, then it normalizes the talk.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests