Sure, Trump won... but he is not the only one celebrating the historic event. Here are some other Americans who felt they won big last night...The list is getting too long, so I will just leave this link here.http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/09/trump-supporters-neo-nazis-white-nationalists-kkk-militias-racism-hate
The KKK...(http://www.buzzfanzine.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/2-11.jpg)QuoteIn her own words: "White people are realizing they are becoming strangers in their own country and they do not have a major political voice speaking for them," Pendergraft wrote in an email responding to questions for this article. "Trump is one example of the alternative-right candidate Knights Party members and supporters have been looking for."
Neo-Nazis...(http://www.motherjones.com/files/imagecache/top-of-content-image/ap_16179690902064-2000px.jpg)http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/8/13565566/neo-nazis-explain-support-donald-trumpQuoteEndorsement: "We have a wonderful OPPORTUNITY here folks, that may never come again, at the RIGHT time," Suhayda wrote to Nazi party members in September 2015. "Donald Trump's campaign statements, if nothing else, have SHOWN that 'our views' are NOT so 'unpopular' as the Political Correctness crowd have told everyone they are!"
Endorsement: "Only Trump can turn back the brown tide, and thinking Whites know this," stated a VNN post in February 2016. "Is Trump the ideal man? Nope, but he'll do until the ideal man gets here." VNN has also described Trump as "the Last Hope for Whites Before America Turns Brown and Non-Western."
Quote "ALL that dance to the tune of the jew [sic] should and will be exterminated with the jew!" Kreis once wrote on the Aryan Nations website.
Anti-Islamists...http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/09/trump-supporters-neo-nazis-white-nationalists-kkk-militias-racism-hateQuoteJon Ritzheimer
Anti-Islam activist, awaiting sentencing on a federal felony charge related to involvement in the Oregon occupation
Endorsement: Last December, Ritzheimer showed up with a bullhorn at a Trump rally in Arizona, where he expressed strong support for the candidate's proposal "to stop Islamic immigration for a while." He also referred to anti-Trump protesters as "Muslims" and thanked them "for not blowing us up."
In his own words: Ritzheimer said in an online video (since removed), "Just know that we three percent, we militiamen, are standing at the ready across our nation. And when you strike, we will strike back. We will level and demolish every mosque across this country."
This is what 5/6th of America thinks is okay.
So you want a recount on all the successful MJ law changes too? Sour grapes, and not willing to play with the big boys.
I'm just gonna leave this here. I'm so thankful for Alexander Hamilton for this historical irony from Federalist No. 68, even if it took 228 years to prove him wholly wrong:
QuoteThe process of election affords a moral certainty, that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications. Talents for low intrigue, and the little arts of popularity, may alone suffice to elevate a man to the first honors in a single State; but it will require other talents, and a different kind of merit, to establish him in the esteem and confidence of the whole Union, or of so considerable a portion of it as would be necessary to make him a successful candidate for the distinguished office of President of the United States.
https://www.congress.gov/resources/display/content/The+Federalist+Papers#TheFederalistPapers-68
Trump won. I'm certain of that. Others may feel victory. Some may actually achieve an advantage, but I doubt the rewards of winning will be much greater than just a sense of validation. The political structure in the US is a well guarded enterprise, and no politician is going to change the basic structure. No president does. And I doubt that Trump is an exception.
If the plurality of the vote holds up for Hillary ... then we can draw a different conclusion. And it isn't so much the Electoral College itself, as it is the gerrymandering of small precincts that keep giving excess power to the Republicans ... in Congressional Elections. I would say that the Electoral College structure doesn't create that, but that it magnifies that.
It may be of scant solace, but a non-plurailty win for Trump, plus a weak Republican control of the Senate and House ... means they don't have much of a mandate to do anything.
Quote from: SGOS on November 10, 2016, 06:49:07 AM
Trump won. I'm certain of that. Others may feel victory. Some may actually achieve an advantage, but I doubt the rewards of winning will be much greater than just a sense of validation. The political structure in the US is a well guarded enterprise, and no politician is going to change the basic structure. No president does. And I doubt that Trump is an exception.
This.
The only people who ever win these "elections" are the billionaires. They, and they alone, decide who will occupy the Oval Office.
Quote from: SGOS on November 10, 2016, 06:49:07 AM
Trump won. I'm certain of that. Others may feel victory. Some may actually achieve an advantage, but I doubt the rewards of winning will be much greater than just a sense of validation. The political structure in the US is a well guarded enterprise, and no politician is going to change the basic structure. No president does. And I doubt that Trump is an exception.
I hope you are correct. That is just about the only hope I have left.
Quote from: Unbeliever on November 10, 2016, 03:56:55 PM
The only people who ever win these "elections" are the billionaires. They, and they alone, decide who will occupy the Oval Office.
They should, they own the place, and all the people in it. Silly voters thinking that Lincoln ended slavery ... bwahaha
No, slavery didn't end, it just changed form.
Quote from: Unbeliever on November 10, 2016, 05:20:22 PM
No, slavery didn't end, it just changed form.
You are too smart to be an American ... Canadian perhaps?
Frankly i think this is a lot more about window dressing. Everyone that I have talked to over the last months have nothing against people of color or sexual identity…they hate the established core and want to go outside of it and view Trump as a valid outsider. This is far more about hating a government that has ignored you than hating other people.
Quote from: aitm on November 10, 2016, 07:18:09 PM
Frankly i think this is a lot more about window dressing. Everyone that I have talked to over the last months have nothing against people of color or sexual identity…they hate the established core and want to go outside of it and view Trump as a valid outsider. This is far more about hating a government that has ignored you than hating other people.
Hating the corrupt politicians and the system that put them where they are. Trump spoke against it, like Sanders did. People want the government to obey them and address their needs.
Quote from: Hurt on November 10, 2016, 07:44:47 PM
People want the government to obey them and address their needs.
that is indeed the real purpose of the government. Hence the new outright indignation, and where we are today.
Quote from: aitm on November 10, 2016, 09:33:12 PM
that is indeed the real purpose of the government. Hence the new outright indignation, and where we are today.
The voters have made a choice. Mostly, they do a pretty good job. We will have to see about this one.
Quote from: Cavebear on November 11, 2016, 12:14:17 AM
The voters have made a choice. Mostly, they do a pretty good job. We will have to see about this one.
The voters didn't do well in the Primaries. As an independent I can't participate in the un-Constitutional two-party system ... and if I did I would burn down both the DNC and RNC.
Quote from: aitm on November 10, 2016, 09:33:12 PM
that is indeed the real purpose of the government. Hence the new outright indignation, and where we are today.
Politicians would prefer to keep as much power out of the hands of voters as possible. It's how the infrastructure of the system has been tilted over the years. I think it irritated Republican voters more and it's why Republican voters rejected the leadership in favor of Trump. Democrats decided on the "more of the same" option, which tends to take the enthusiasm and fire of participation out of the constituency.
It seems odd to me that the conservatives were the ones to revolt against the system, rather than the liberals, because it has always seemed to me that the GOP is better at delivering the goods to their side. I'm not saying they do it to a great extent or all the time. No, they still have a greater agenda that comes first, the same as the Democrats, but they do seem to do a better job of delivering to their rank and file. Democrats tend to talk about and endorse more real and important issues. Their rhetoric is most certainly softer and kinder, but they don't seem to have the fire it takes to effect actual change in the system, and the constituency seems less bothered by that. I don't see any serious populist rebellion down the road for them.
Quote from: SGOS on November 11, 2016, 01:53:35 AM
Politicians would prefer to keep as much power out of the hands of voters as possible. It's how the infrastructure of the system has been tilted over the years. I think it irritated Republican voters more and it's why Republican voters rejected the leadership in favor of Trump. Democrats decided on the "more of the same" option, which tends to take the enthusiasm and fire of participation out of the constituency.
It seems odd to me that the conservatives were the ones to revolt against the system, rather than the liberals, because it has always seemed to me that the GOP is better at delivering the goods to their side. I'm not saying they do it to a great extent or all the time. No, they still have a greater agenda that comes first, the same as the Democrats, but they do seem to do a better job of delivering to their rank and file. Democrats tend to talk about and endorse more real and important issues. Their rhetoric is most certainly softer and kinder, but they don't seem to have the fire it takes to effect actual change in the system, and the constituency seems less bothered by that. I don't see any serious populist rebellion down the road for them.
Sometimes people want to burn down the house to rebuild it. I prefer gradual renovations. Most of the house is worth keeping.
Quote from: Cavebear on November 11, 2016, 02:10:31 AM
Sometimes people want to burn down the house to rebuild it. I prefer gradual renovations. Most of the house is worth keeping.
This appears to be a gradual renovation. The Republicans didn't burn down any structures. There was a peaceful transfer of power from the professional power brokers to an outsider. The transfer was done willingly under established rules, although with some hand wringing, oppositional rhetoric, and talk of changing the normal procedures midstream. Talk of assassinations seem to come mostly from the left. Gradual renovations, like any change can include an amount of anxiety, and is to be expected. The house is still there, with the furniture rearranged slightly. Whether it's permanent is not known yet.
Quote from: SGOS on November 11, 2016, 07:22:07 AM
This appears to be a gradual renovation. The Republicans didn't burn down any structures. There was a peaceful transfer of power from the professional power brokers to an outsider. The transfer was done willingly under established rules, although with some hand wringing, oppositional rhetoric, and talk of changing the normal procedures midstream. Talk of assassinations seem to come mostly from the left. Gradual renovations, like any change can include an amount of anxiety, and is to be expected. The house is still there, with the furniture rearranged slightly. Whether it's permanent is not known yet.
You might want to try that again. The only assassination threats were from Trump gun fanatics if Clinton won loud vocal "2nd amendment" solutions... The most a Democrat could do is throw a golf ball or lawn dart. Are you regularly so disinformational?
Quote from: aitm on November 10, 2016, 07:18:09 PM
Frankly i think this is a lot more about window dressing. Everyone that I have talked to over the last months have nothing against people of color or sexual identity…they hate the established core and want to go outside of it and view Trump as a valid outsider. This is far more about hating a government that has ignored you than hating other people.
The exact same arguments were made about Erdogan when he first came to power. Democrats here have voted for him with exact same reasons yours have . They hated all the other parties and the governments.
Erdogan is not a religious leader, his 'muslimship' is exactly like the window dressing of Trump's racist-sexist identity politics. What's more Erdogan actually corrected the economy in the first period and won more votes. Rest is down the hill, BECAUSE THAT GAVE HIM THE POWER TO FUCK EVERYTHING UP.
This is not a sudden process, it is gradual and that is how people get used to it. How it becomes the normal. Then comes down the crashing realisation.
Do NOT make the mistake of thinking you are different than Turkey now. You are just at the beginning of the story.
So those people you talk about, like the ones over here are stupid and ignorant and it will be too late when they realised what they have served for. If they ever realise that is...
Quote from: drunkenshoe on November 11, 2016, 07:44:44 AM
The exact same arguments were made about Erdogan when he first came to power. Democrats here have voted for him with exact same reasons yours have . They hated all the other parties and the governments.
Erdogan is not a religious leader, his 'muslimship' is exactly like the window dressing of Trump's racist-sexist identity politics. What's more Erdogan actually corrected the economy in the first period and won more votes. Rest is down the hill, BECAUSE THAT GAVE HIM THE POWER TO FUCK EVERYTHING UP.
This is not a sudden process, it is gradual and that is how people get used to it. How it becomes the nomal. Then comes down the crashing realisation.
Do NOT make the mistake of thinking you are different than Turkey now. You are just at the beginning of the story.
So those people you talk about, like the ones over here are stupid and ignorant and it will be too late when they realised what they have served for. If they ever realise that is...
I gather you have some personal concerns with Turkish politics?
Quote from: Cavebear on November 11, 2016, 07:47:46 AM
I gather you have some personal concerns with Turkish politics?
No shit.
Quote from: drunkenshoe on November 11, 2016, 08:10:28 AM
No shit.
You are in the wrong place, dude... Turkey is just a governmentally secular place full of crazy theists trying to make it a sectarian one.
Quote from: Cavebear on November 11, 2016, 08:18:09 AM
You are in the wrong place, dude... Turkey is just a governmentally secular place full of crazy theists trying to make it a sectarian one.
I am a woman and I don't like to be called 'dude'. For some reason, I always hated that word. Call me 'Shoe'.
And please, if you are going to tell me about my own country, try to make more sense? Turkey is a governmentally religious country full of with secular people who dropped class to the religious half a decade after the local Trump -aka Erdogan- came to power. 13 years ago.
Present day Turkey is a muslim version of America's future after Trump.
Quote from: drunkenshoe on November 11, 2016, 08:24:51 AM
I am a woman and I don't like to be called 'dude'. For some reason, I always hated that word. Call me 'Shoe'.
And please, if you are going to tell me about my own country, try to make more sense? Turkey is a governmentally religious country full of with secular people who dropped class to the religious half a decade after the local Trump -aka Erdogan- came to power. 13 years ago.
Present day Turkey is a muslim version of America's future after Trump.
My sincerest apologies for "dude". I thought I saw a reference to "he" once. My complete error.
I did think that Turkey was officially secular but culturally religious though. Did it change while I wasn't looking? Not that I focus on Turkey much (much to your annoyance).
But, you think Trump is a theist?
Quote from: Cavebear on November 11, 2016, 12:14:17 AM
The voters have made a choice. Mostly, they do a pretty good job. We will have to see about this one.
Is that a joke? I come from a state that elected Jesse Helms to US Senate five times. Five times.
If you don't know who that is, let me give you a quick brief about him (http://www.latimes.com/news/la-me-helms5-2008jul05-story.html).
Quote from: articleFrom the beginning, Helms was schooled in the political device of using race to propel white conservatives to the polls. As news director for WRAL radio, Helms supported Willis Smith in his 1950 Senate campaign against Frank Porter Graham, the former president of the University of North Carolina. The campaign theme was that Graham favored interracial marriages. "White people, wake up before it is too late," said one ad. "Do you want Negroes working beside you, your wife and your daughters, in your mills and factories? Frank Graham favors mingling of the races."
The campaign's further contribution to political notoriety was a handbill that showed Graham's wife dancing with a black man.
QuoteBecause of Helms, several major treaties never became law: The Kyoto Protocol against global warming, the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, the proposed land mine treaty -- all were stopped at his insistence.
Helms' demagoguery was a lightning rod for liberals. He called homosexuals "weak, morally sick wretches." During debate on a 1988 AIDS bill sponsored by Sens. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah), Helms said, "There is not one single case of AIDS in this country that cannot be traced in origin to sodomy."
Quote from: Hydra009 on November 11, 2016, 09:07:45 AM
Is that a joke? I come from a state that elected Jesse Helms to US Senate five times. Five times.
If you don't know who that is, let me give you a quick brief about him (http://www.latimes.com/news/la-me-helms5-2008jul05-story.html).
I was referring the the whole US. Your State is entirely YOUR embarrassment.
Quote from: Cavebear on November 11, 2016, 08:32:58 AM
My sincerest apologies for "dude". I thought I saw a reference to "he" once. My complete error.
I did think that Turkey was officially secular but culturally religious though. Did it change while I wasn't looking? Not that I focus on Turkey much (much to your annoyance).
But, you think Trump is a theist?
I am not annoyed at all, my feelings are the same.
Yes it has changed.
I think Trump is an Erdogan is a Putin...etc.
Quote from: drunkenshoe on November 11, 2016, 09:22:20 AM
I am not annoyed at all, my feelings are the same.
Yes it has changed.
I think Trump is an Erdogan is a Putin...etc.
Then I am sorry for the change. I can't keep up with every change everywhere. There are just too many nations.
I might well agree with you about Trump. But we have power balances hard to overcome.
Quote from: Cavebear on November 11, 2016, 09:18:40 AM
Your State is entirely YOUR embarrassment.
No, it is not.
Quote from: Cavebear on November 11, 2016, 09:18:40 AM
I was referring the the whole US. Your State is entirely YOUR embarrassment.
Oh, so there aren't similarly idiotic and reprehensible people in the rest of the US?
Do you honestly have the naivete to believe that national elections are somehow immune from stunning displays of poor judgment?
Quote from: Hydra009 on November 11, 2016, 09:31:04 AM
Oh, so there aren't similarly idiotic and reprehensible people in the rest of the US?
Never. In MY State, we are utterly perfect.
Quote from: Cavebear on November 11, 2016, 09:34:03 AM
Never. In MY State, we are utterly perfect.
You live in Bikini Bottom?
Quote from: drunkenshoe on November 11, 2016, 09:34:50 AM
You live in Bikini Bottom?
Oh much better place than that.
Quote from: Cavebear on November 11, 2016, 09:37:36 AM
Oh much better place than that.
You think Bikini Bottom is a good place to live?!
Quote from: drunkenshoe on November 11, 2016, 09:39:20 AM
You think Bikini Bottom is a good place to live?!
Seems to be good if you are Sandy the Squirrel... But that's not where I mean.
Bikini bottom got nuked twice bro
Quote from: GrinningYMIR on November 11, 2016, 09:41:25 AM
Bikini bottom got nuked twice bro
I don't watch it often enough to know.
Quote from: Cavebear on November 11, 2016, 09:45:32 AM
I don't watch it often enough to know.
You are Patrick.
Quote from: drunkenshoe on November 11, 2016, 09:46:05 AM
You are Patrick.
And I am Squidward ... cynical yet artistic.
Quote from: Cavebear on November 11, 2016, 09:45:32 AM
I don't watch it often enough to know.
The prior poster was referring to US nuclear testing in the 50s ... do keep up!
Quote from: Baruch on November 11, 2016, 09:49:33 AM
The prior poster was referring to US nuclear testing in the 50s ... do keep up!
I know, but it was the Spongebob place under discussion. I hope.
Quote from: Cavebear on November 11, 2016, 07:34:50 AM
You might want to try that again. The only assassination threats were from Trump gun fanatics if Clinton won loud vocal "2nd amendment" solutions... The most a Democrat could do is throw a golf ball or lawn dart. Are you regularly so disinformational?
In point of fact, I have not heard any such talk from conservatives. This is not to say it never happened. No doubt it has. I just haven't heard it. I was referring to my circle of friends, all of them liberal. Conservatives are not part of that close circle. I don't have enough in common with conservatives to make close ties with them. While such a remark is an exception rather than the rule, I ask, "Are these people being serious?" I don't think so. It's most likely trash talk born of frustration. Unfortunately, it is often backhandedly legitimized with the addendum, "...but I can understand why people would." I find that offensive in liberal circles as much as it is from Rush Limbaugh. It paints a suggestive ugly attitude of which I want no part, yet I risk being associated with the likes of it.
Quote from: Cavebear on November 11, 2016, 09:26:19 AM
Then I am sorry for the change. I can't keep up with every change everywhere. There are just too many nations.
I might well agree with you about Trump. But we have power balances hard to overcome.
I really, really, deep down, really, want that to be correct. I am not so sure any more. I have a feeling many of the people of Germany, in the late 1920's said much the same. The Supreme Court is already in the process of turning back the social clock several hundred years. Congress is less than a joke; they do nothing other than insure they get paid. And now the presidency is in the hands of some sort of hate monger; and one who cares only about his own personal finances. I don't feel good about our chances as a nation.
Quote from: Mike Cl on November 11, 2016, 04:26:12 PM
I really, really, deep down, really, want that to be correct. I am not so sure any more. I have a feeling many of the people of Germany, in the late 1920's said much the same. The Supreme Court is already in the process of turning back the social clock several hundred years. Congress is less than a joke; they do nothing other than insure they get paid. And now the presidency is in the hands of some sort of hate monger; and one who cares only about his own personal finances. I don't feel good about our chances as a nation.
I feel the same about Hillary. Y'all could have voted for Gary Johnson instead ;-)
Quote from: Baruch on November 12, 2016, 05:37:20 AM
I feel the same about Hillary. Y'all could have voted for Gary Johnson instead ;-)
I voted HRC and would do so again. And I voted for her with the knowledge that it would not make one whit of a difference in the outcome because of the electoral college. While I like some of what Johnson stands for, I think he is dolt and would have written in Babe Ruth instead of vote for him. I mainly voted because of the state and local issues.
Quote from: Mike Cl on November 12, 2016, 12:12:56 PM
I voted HRC and would do so again. And I voted for her with the knowledge that it would not make one whit of a difference in the outcome because of the electoral college. While I like some of what Johnson stands for, I think he is dolt and would have written in Babe Ruth instead of vote for him. I mainly voted because of the state and local issues.
I mostly vote for the ballot issues myself ... that is actual Athenian democracy. And we know from another thread, you have a hard-on for Babe Ruth, and I don't mean the candy bar ;-))
Quote from: Baruch on November 12, 2016, 01:07:50 PM
I mostly vote for the ballot issues myself ... that is actual Athenian democracy. And we know from another thread, you have a hard-on for Babe Ruth, and I don't mean the candy bar ;-))
Hard on for Babe Ruth? Yeah, the Viagra kind that does not go away after 4 hours. And no, I have not consulted a dr. yet.
As for the candy bar, Baby Ruth, it was named after President Coolidge's daughter, Ruth. Or so said the Curtiss Candy Co.; they never paid Ruth any money for the use of his name.
Quote from: Mike Cl on November 12, 2016, 02:42:44 PM
Hard on for Babe Ruth? Yeah, the Viagra kind that does not go away after 4 hours. And no, I have not consulted a dr. yet.
As for the candy bar, Baby Ruth, it was named after President Coolidge's daughter, Ruth. Or so said the Curtiss Candy Co.; they never paid Ruth any money for the use of his name.
In today's IP rights environment, Babe Ruth could sue over the similarity. But the average candy bar eater, wouldn't be thinking of Coolidge's daughter.
Quote from: Mike Cl on November 11, 2016, 04:26:12 PM
I really, really, deep down, really, want that to be correct. I am not so sure any more. I have a feeling many of the people of Germany, in the late 1920's said much the same. The Supreme Court is already in the process of turning back the social clock several hundred years. Congress is less than a joke; they do nothing other than insure they get paid. And now the presidency is in the hands of some sort of hate monger; and one who cares only about his own personal finances. I don't feel good about our chances as a nation.
Trump may discover why Congress has ruled the US for decades in the past. It may be a time when that returns.
Quote from: Cavebear on November 13, 2016, 02:33:55 AM
Trump may discover why Congress has ruled the US for decades in the past. It may be a time when that returns.
Correct, but it is very handy for the Reps to delegate to the WH what they should be doing, and then blame the WH for when it fails.
Quote from: Baruch on November 13, 2016, 10:10:30 AM
Correct, but it is very handy for the Reps to delegate to the WH what they should be doing, and then blame the WH for when it fails.
For all the complaining and distancing the Republican elite did with Trump, they have suddenly flocked around his victory and are floating all kinds of wild trial balloons to test the waters. I think they see a golden opportunity to bet bold, and have a pigeon to blame if things go south. It will take some finesse, but I'm confident they have it in them.
Quote from: Cavebear on November 13, 2016, 02:33:55 AM
Trump may discover why Congress has ruled the US for decades in the past. It may be a time when that returns.
Yeah, I suppose so. But this congress???? It really is the worst we have ever had. Can't even fund the fight against zika virus.
Quote from: Cavebear on November 11, 2016, 12:14:17 AM
The voters have made a choice.
Yeah, the voters made their choice:
http://www.snopes.com/2016/11/13/who-won-the-popular-vote/
QuoteAll the ballots haven't been counted yet, but it looks like Hillary Clinton really did win the nationwide popular vote â€" if not the presidency â€" by a considerable margin.
This only seems to happen in the modern era when Republicans are running. Coincidence? I think not.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_presidential_elections_where_winner_lost_popular_vote
I for one would be happy if the chief executive position wasn't chosen at all by popular vote, but maybe by a vote of the Senate ... and all Senators also no chosen by popular vote, but chosen by their respective states.