2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

Locked
User avatar
TimothyC
Of Sector 2814
Posts: 3760
Joined: 2005-03-23 05:31pm

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Post by TimothyC » 2016-11-09 07:08pm

Simon_Jester wrote:It occurs to me that all the same Senate seats that Bush lost in 2006 (creating a Democratic majority in the Senate that lasted until 2010) are up for re-election in 2018, which means they will be part of a Senate election that is likely to be in large part a referendum on Trump.
Eh, it's a bit more complicated than that. 2018 in the senate, as of right now, looks like it will have 8 GOP held seats up for election (Nevada, Arizona, Texas, Wyoming, Utah, Nebraska, Alabama, & Tennessee) and 25 Dem or Dem affiliated seats up (Washington, California, Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota, Minnesota, Missouri, Wisconsin, Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, Florida, West Virginia, Virginia, Delaware, Pennsylvania, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island Massachusetts Vermont, and Maine). That's over half of the Democratic caucus in the senate. No real breathing room for the GOP if things go south, but they do have the advantage they are not running large blocks of their caucus next time.
Last edited by TimothyC on 2016-11-09 07:10pm, edited 1 time in total.
"I believe in the future. It is wonderful because it stands on what has been achieved." - Sergei Korolev

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 21559
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2016-11-09 07:10pm

Dominus Atheos wrote:
Thanas wrote:
The Romulan Republic wrote:That is not what I said. It is a cheap cliche and a straw man.

Bernie Sanders's progressivism is not like the Tea Party, although some of his opponents have tried to push that false equivalency. The problem with the Tea Party is two-fold: their horrid, corrosive policies, and their fanatical and undemocratic rhetoric and tactics.

At the core, it is the same thing though - the feeling that you lost because you were not progressive enough etc. Sure, the tactics are different and all but still, it is always the establishment vs the outsiders.
That depends on how you define progressive. Most people are saying she lost because she never had a good message for how she would help the lower and middle classes; white, black and hispanic (aka populism). No one is saying that she should have talked about gay marriage or the environment more.

Edit: I may be agreeing with you, I'm not sure.

Double edit: Yeah, I think the problem is that Thanas and TRRl have different ideas of what "progressivism" means. Thanas is talking about "Social Liberalism" and TRR is thinking of left-wing economic populism.
I support both progressive social policies and progressive economic policies, although I am not on the furthest Left fringe on either.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.

User avatar
Thanas
Magister
Magister
Posts: 30779
Joined: 2004-06-26 07:49pm

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Post by Thanas » 2016-11-09 07:17pm

Dominus Atheos wrote:
Thanas wrote:
The Romulan Republic wrote:That is not what I said. It is a cheap cliche and a straw man.

Bernie Sanders's progressivism is not like the Tea Party, although some of his opponents have tried to push that false equivalency. The problem with the Tea Party is two-fold: their horrid, corrosive policies, and their fanatical and undemocratic rhetoric and tactics.

At the core, it is the same thing though - the feeling that you lost because you were not progressive enough etc. Sure, the tactics are different and all but still, it is always the establishment vs the outsiders.
That depends on how you define progressive. Most people are saying she lost because she never had a good message for how she would help the lower and middle classes; white, black and hispanic (aka populism). No one is saying that she should have talked about gay marriage or the environment more.

Edit: I may be agreeing with you, I'm not sure.

Double edit: Yeah, I think the problem is that Thanas and TRRl have different ideas of what "progressivism" means. Thanas is talking about "Social Liberalism" and TRR is thinking of left-wing economic populism.

No, I mean both.
Whoever says "education does not matter" can try ignorance
------------
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then, it seems that the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy, to rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way. Well, the answer to that is 'survival as what'? A country isn't a rock. It's not an extension of one's self. It's what it stands for. It's what it stands for when standing for something is the most difficult! - Chief Judge Haywood
------------
My LPs

User avatar
Dominus Atheos
Sith Marauder
Posts: 3783
Joined: 2005-09-15 09:41pm
Location: Portland, Oregon

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Post by Dominus Atheos » 2016-11-09 07:34pm

Thanas wrote:
Dominus Atheos wrote:
Thanas wrote:

At the core, it is the same thing though - the feeling that you lost because you were not progressive enough etc. Sure, the tactics are different and all but still, it is always the establishment vs the outsiders.
That depends on how you define progressive. Most people are saying she lost because she never had a good message for how she would help the lower and middle classes; white, black and hispanic (aka populism). No one is saying that she should have talked about gay marriage or the environment more.

Edit: I may be agreeing with you, I'm not sure.

Double edit: Yeah, I think the problem is that Thanas and TRRl have different ideas of what "progressivism" means. Thanas is talking about "Social Liberalism" and TRR is thinking of left-wing economic populism.

No, I mean both.
What makes you think that America isn't ready for left-wing populism? I think that if a candidate ran on that platform, they would win handily, even republican votes.

User avatar
Tribble
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2817
Joined: 2008-11-18 11:28am
Location: stardestroyer.net

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Post by Tribble » 2016-11-09 07:58pm

And that's what terrified the Democrat and Republican elites, which is why they did everything possible to stop Sanders in his tracks. He did remarkably well considering just how badly the odds were stacked against him which to me suggests that left-wing populism is certainly present in the US.
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!" - The official Troll motto, as stated by Adam Savage

User avatar
Flagg
CUNTS FOR EYES!
Posts: 12797
Joined: 2005-06-09 09:56pm
Location: Hell. In The Room Right Next to Reagan. He's Fucking Bonzo. No, wait... Bonzo's fucking HIM.

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Post by Flagg » 2016-11-09 08:26pm

Zaune wrote:
The Romulan Republic wrote:I doubt it- no Federal government would be likely to want to set that precedent, or take the hit to America's prestige and wealth.

And its just as well. As I said, their are very, very few circumstances where I might support secession, and in the US in particular... well, we saw what happened last time someone opened that Pandora's box.
The hit to the USA's prestige and wealth from allowing states to leave voluntarily would pale in comparison to the hit it would take if those states won a popular vote on the issue with a big enough majority and turnout to be totally unambiguous, went through all the proper legal procedures and went out of their way to conduct the process in a civilised manner, and Congress refused to let them leave anyway. Insurgencies are bad for business.
There is no "proper legal procedure" for secession. You can hold a plebiscite and get 100% of the vote in an open and fair election and it's still treason and the Feds can, will, and should move in to remove the traitors from office and put down any resistance with deadly force.
We pissing our pants yet?
-Negan

You got your shittin' pants on? Because you’re about to
Shit. Your. Pants!
-Negan

He who can,
does; he who cannot, teaches.
-George Bernard Shaw

User avatar
Flagg
CUNTS FOR EYES!
Posts: 12797
Joined: 2005-06-09 09:56pm
Location: Hell. In The Room Right Next to Reagan. He's Fucking Bonzo. No, wait... Bonzo's fucking HIM.

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Post by Flagg » 2016-11-09 08:28pm

The Romulan Republic wrote:
Flagg wrote:
The Romulan Republic wrote:One thing I do think is that, for better or for worse (and their is a real possibility that it will be for worse), the Democratic establishment has been utterly discredited by this defeat.

I believe that their will be a powerful push to adopt Bernie Sanders' vision as the cornerstone of the Democratic Party, and that if it fails, their is a danger that the party will split. I do not want that, because now of all times we need a united front to block Donald Trump's hateful agenda and regain the ground that we have lost.

But the Democratic establishment must be willing to admit their failure, to make substantial primary reforms, and to continue to follow a progressive platform.
Will you stop it with Bernie Sanders? Dollars to donuts he goes back to being an independent. And even if he doesn't, he got trounced in the Primary because most Democrats didn't like his "vision".
Well, we saw how well the preferred candidate of "most Democrats" did.

Granted, its not "Bernie or nobody". Progressivism obviously is, and needs to be, bigger than Bernie Sanders personally for it to have long-term viability*. But the policies he espoused and the campaign machine he put together form a good potential basis for an alternative to the current Democratic Party establishment.

*For the record, I'm already leaning Tulsi Gabbard 2020.
If you don't like democracy I hear China is nice this time of year.
We pissing our pants yet?
-Negan

You got your shittin' pants on? Because you’re about to
Shit. Your. Pants!
-Negan

He who can,
does; he who cannot, teaches.
-George Bernard Shaw

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 21559
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2016-11-09 08:30pm

Okay, I know you're probably just trying to bait me again, but I have to ask:

What about my post could you possibly construe as being anti-democracy?
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.

Patroklos
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2525
Joined: 2009-04-14 11:00am

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Post by Patroklos » 2016-11-09 10:11pm

TimothyC wrote:
Simon_Jester wrote:It occurs to me that all the same Senate seats that Bush lost in 2006 (creating a Democratic majority in the Senate that lasted until 2010) are up for re-election in 2018, which means they will be part of a Senate election that is likely to be in large part a referendum on Trump.
Eh, it's a bit more complicated than that. 2018 in the senate, as of right now, looks like it will have 8 GOP held seats up for election (Nevada, Arizona, Texas, Wyoming, Utah, Nebraska, Alabama, & Tennessee) and 25 Dem or Dem affiliated seats up (Washington, California, Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota, Minnesota, Missouri, Wisconsin, Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, Florida, West Virginia, Virginia, Delaware, Pennsylvania, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island Massachusetts Vermont, and Maine). That's over half of the Democratic caucus in the senate. No real breathing room for the GOP if things go south, but they do have the advantage they are not running large blocks of their caucus next time.
2018 is not looking good for the Democrats. Using Obama's 2012 carried states as a proxy (simplistic ,I know) to represent a decent Democratic popular turnout, only one of the states you listed for the GOP appears vulnerable (Nevada).

In the case of the Democrats they have 5 seats in play. If we go into 2018 with the wind still behind Trump that turns into 10.

Unless the country is burning in two years, the Democrats should be expecting to lose seats in 2018 even in a good year for them.

User avatar
Napoleon the Clown
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2395
Joined: 2007-05-05 02:54pm
Location: Minneso'a

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Post by Napoleon the Clown » 2016-11-09 10:26pm

Patroklos wrote:2018 is not looking good for the Democrats. Using Obama's 2012 carried states as a proxy (simplistic ,I know) to represent a decent Democratic popular turnout, only one of the states you listed for the GOP appears vulnerable (Nevada).

In the case of the Democrats they have 5 seats in play. If we go into 2018 with the wind still behind Trump that turns into 10.

Unless the country is burning in two years, the Democrats should be expecting to lose seats in 2018 even in a good year for them.
No party is better at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, so the only part I can really disagree with is the "if the country is burning" bit. Even then I can see them dropping the fucking ball. It's nauseating.
Sig images are for people who aren't fucking lazy.

User avatar
Flagg
CUNTS FOR EYES!
Posts: 12797
Joined: 2005-06-09 09:56pm
Location: Hell. In The Room Right Next to Reagan. He's Fucking Bonzo. No, wait... Bonzo's fucking HIM.

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Post by Flagg » 2016-11-09 10:32pm

The Romulan Republic wrote:Okay, I know you're probably just trying to bait me again, but I have to ask:

What about my post could you possibly construe as being anti-democracy?
You suggested that the preferred candidate of "most Democrats" was a bad choice, suggesting it should have been given to Slutty Sanders. Part of being in a Democracy is accepting the results. Moreover, I don't think Sanders would've done any better.

My suggestion, instead of navel gazing, is to put pressure on the current Justice department to seriously investigate the sexual assault allegations against Donnie Douchebag. Not that they will. The Obama administration seems to think tha he's a normal politician who will respect the laws of this country. I don't. He's a dangerous psychopath unfit to manage a Burger King.
We pissing our pants yet?
-Negan

You got your shittin' pants on? Because you’re about to
Shit. Your. Pants!
-Negan

He who can,
does; he who cannot, teaches.
-George Bernard Shaw

User avatar
Knife
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 15714
Joined: 2002-08-30 02:40pm
Location: Behind the Zion Curtain
Contact:

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Post by Knife » 2016-11-09 11:00pm

Well, as it turned out, it was a bad choice Flagg.
They say, "the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots." I suppose it never occurred to them that they are the tyrants, not the patriots. Those weapons are not being used to fight some kind of tyranny; they are bringing them to an event where people are getting together to talk. -Mike Wong

But as far as board culture in general, I do think that young male overaggression is a contributing factor to the general atmosphere of hostility. It's not SOS and the Mess throwing hand grenades all over the forum- Red

User avatar
Flagg
CUNTS FOR EYES!
Posts: 12797
Joined: 2005-06-09 09:56pm
Location: Hell. In The Room Right Next to Reagan. He's Fucking Bonzo. No, wait... Bonzo's fucking HIM.

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Post by Flagg » 2016-11-09 11:06pm

Knife wrote:Well, as it turned out, it was a bad choice Flagg.
Honestly, I don't think Sanders would have faired any better. Yeah, he didn't have the Clinton baggage, but this country is not going to elect a socialist.
We pissing our pants yet?
-Negan

You got your shittin' pants on? Because you’re about to
Shit. Your. Pants!
-Negan

He who can,
does; he who cannot, teaches.
-George Bernard Shaw

User avatar
Gaidin
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2646
Joined: 2004-06-19 12:27am
Contact:

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Post by Gaidin » 2016-11-09 11:21pm

Flagg wrote: Honestly, I don't think Sanders would have faired any better. Yeah, he didn't have the Clinton baggage, but this country is not going to elect a socialist.
Well I mean, to add, since Roosevelt provoked the amendment, it's become historically hard for a party to get 3 terms.

User avatar
Flagg
CUNTS FOR EYES!
Posts: 12797
Joined: 2005-06-09 09:56pm
Location: Hell. In The Room Right Next to Reagan. He's Fucking Bonzo. No, wait... Bonzo's fucking HIM.

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Post by Flagg » 2016-11-09 11:33pm

Gaidin wrote:
Flagg wrote: Honestly, I don't think Sanders would have faired any better. Yeah, he didn't have the Clinton baggage, but this country is not going to elect a socialist.
Well I mean, to add, since Roosevelt provoked the amendment, it's become historically hard for a party to get 3 terms.
Yeah, I'm 35 and the only time in my life that a party held the executive branch for 3 terms was Reagan and Old Man Bush.
We pissing our pants yet?
-Negan

You got your shittin' pants on? Because you’re about to
Shit. Your. Pants!
-Negan

He who can,
does; he who cannot, teaches.
-George Bernard Shaw

User avatar
aerius
Charismatic Cult Leader
Posts: 14642
Joined: 2002-08-18 07:27pm
Location: YHM

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Post by aerius » 2016-11-09 11:52pm

Flagg wrote:Honestly, I don't think Sanders would have faired any better. Yeah, he didn't have the Clinton baggage, but this country is not going to elect a socialist.
I'd disagree with that. Several of the key states in this election such as Michigan have a strong blue collar and/or union presence, Trump was able to use his bring jobs back and make America great message on them since Hillary pretty much ignored them and gave them jack shit. Sanders would've strongly contested those states and he also has a similar message of killing the outsourcing and bringing jobs back, he would likely flip several of those key states to the Dems.

And again, it comes down to the image and what Sanders represents. Like Trump, he isn't part of the establishment, he appeals to a lot of the same poorer voters that Trump scooped up, along with a lot of the youths, progressives, middle class, and other everyday people. He, like Trump, was seen as instrument of change, and he connected with the people and got them invested in the process. IMO he would've shut down a lot of Trump's paths to victory and generated enough support of his own to carry him through.
Image
aerius: I'll vote for you if you sleep with me. :)
Lusankya: Deal!
Say, do you want it to be a threesome with your wife? Or a foursome with your wife and sister-in-law? I'm up for either. :P

General Brock
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1739
Joined: 2005-03-16 03:52pm
Location: Land of Resting Gophers, Canada

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Post by General Brock » 2016-11-10 12:03am

The Donald Trumps all.

That Dilbert guy explains entertaingly much of what went down. Team Trump knew the game better and knew the election wasn't just about Trump the personality, but war, corruption and economic collapse.

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/1529552480 ... -president

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-11-0 ... ing-elites

https://theintercept.com/2016/11/09/dem ... of-brexit/

Trump's fiscal sense is a good sign; he underspent Hilary by a substantial margin to substantial effect.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-11-0 ... te-nothing

The pollster industry needs a little more than a good tweaking; something more like a drop-kick in the rear seems appropriate. The MSM is too pathetic and not worth linking a dis about.

http://statisticalideas.blogspot.ca/201 ... sters.html

There may be a little drama from the Electoral College and anti-Trump dead enders, Hilary having won - very marginally - the popular vote. However, she was decisively crushed by Trump as far as the EC is concerned, unlike Bush-Gore 2000.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-11-0 ... -live-feed

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-11-0 ... dent-trump

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... nald-trump

For now, some folks are feelin' the Bern. Hear the sizzle.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/peopl ... 06346.html

http://observer.com/2016/07/wikileaks-p ... democracy/

Hopefully four years from now we'll be able to assess Trump's first term in peace and liberty.

This is a global Great Game. This is not over, not by a long shot. Where is Operation Spoilsport? What is the Deep Dark One's counterstrike?

... And why didn't Jill Stein go viral? :?

User avatar
Exonerate
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4448
Joined: 2002-10-29 07:19pm
Location: DC Metro Area

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Post by Exonerate » 2016-11-10 12:10am

I suspect the Obama administration is treating him like a normal politician not because they don't have their doubts, but because to do otherwise would dent public confidence in democratic institutions and processes even more.

This country elected a racist, misogynistic criminal robber baron, so why not a socialist? Putting Sanders up would've offered an alternative for the disaffected and split the no college degree white vote. Clinton has no core constituents that would've swung to Trump if Sanders was nominated. This election was about turnout and Sanders would've fared better simply because he stood for something and inspired enthusiasm. Based on mainstream media coverage, the only thing I could tell Clinton stood for was Not Trump. Trump offered change - xenophobic change in the form of deporting Muslims and immigrants that wouldn't solve any problems perhaps, but some form of change nonetheless. Clinton offered putting coal miners out of work.

Clinton has always and will always stand for the status quo, slowly inching away from it only when there's a political advantage to be gained. Shit, just look at the differences in their slogans - "Make America Great Again" is a proclamation by Trump that he'll make things better whereas "I'm With Her" is a complete reversal of the idea that politicians serve their constituents. Vote for me or it'll be Trump, peasant! Let's not get into the problems of personal integrity exploited by Trump. In the end, Clinton ran a campaign of fear and it wasn't enough.

BoTM, MM, HAB, JL

Simon_Jester
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 30123
Joined: 2009-05-23 07:29pm

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Post by Simon_Jester » 2016-11-10 12:25am

To be fair, Trump was so damn scary it almost worked.

I think a lot of Democratic primary voters underestimated just how badly Clinton would fail to put herself out there as a candidate and actively engage the electorate. I'm not saying that was smart, but understanding it is critical to understanding what went wrong. If Democrats can lose to Trump by running an establishment candidate who seems to view the election process from an altitude of twenty thousand feet, they can lose to anybody that way.

If it'd been Obama running for a third term, I strongly suspect he'd have cleaned Trump's clock, purely by putting himself out there openly and candidly and being willing to deliberately reach out to voters who weren't already going to vote for him anyway.
Flagg wrote:
The Romulan Republic wrote:Okay, I know you're probably just trying to bait me again, but I have to ask:

What about my post could you possibly construe as being anti-democracy?
You suggested that the preferred candidate of "most Democrats" was a bad choice, suggesting it should have been given to Slutty Sanders. Part of being in a Democracy is accepting the results. Moreover, I don't think Sanders would've done any better.
Disagreeing with the choice made by the voters is not the same as being anti-democracy. As you know perfectly well, because you're doing it by (rightly) questioning Trump's qualifications to run a fast food restaurant, let alone a civilized country.

Let's not crit those poor hippos too hard.
This space dedicated to Vasily Arkhipov

General Brock
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1739
Joined: 2005-03-16 03:52pm
Location: Land of Resting Gophers, Canada

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Post by General Brock » 2016-11-10 12:26am

Exonerate wrote:... In the end, Clinton ran a campaign of fear and it wasn't enough.
Dead on, that last line. The popular mood was one of sheer frustration and fury, and it lingers still. Fear would only incite more anger, which plays to Trump.

General Brock
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1739
Joined: 2005-03-16 03:52pm
Location: Land of Resting Gophers, Canada

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Post by General Brock » 2016-11-10 01:27am

Patroklos wrote:Some other things to analyze out of this:
1.) The big money candidate lost.
2.) The traditionally run campaign lost.
3.) The big media campaign lost (as in bought airtime)
4.) The ground game candidate lost.

That's something for anyone from any side running in 2018 needs take a long hard look at.
Those are interesting points in and of themselves. Trump seems to have studied Obama, insofar as leveraging inexpensive social media for all it was worth.

http://www.salon.com/2016/02/18/the_twi ... ound_game/

https://people.stanford.edu/jaaker/site ... -obama.pdf

Plus, Trump was already a current popular celebrity; most of his airtime was free. A ground game is centred mostly on getting known; only after becoming a household name does getting the vote out matter.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/trump- ... 2016-05-06

Trump is a billionaire; that's big money. Nor did he lose all his big money friends for running a self-funded campaign, and most people probably respected the self-funded part.

That kind of gives Trump 3/4 points repackaged, lacking only the 'traditional campaign' bit isofar as repackaging goes.

All a candidate needs to be is a controversial (... that's probably optional)... telegenic charismatic celebrity billionaire master persuader. A tall order in just 2 years.

http://blog.dilbert.com/post/1395419756 ... ading-list

User avatar
K. A. Pital
Glamorous Commie
Posts: 20809
Joined: 2003-02-26 11:39am
Location: Elysium

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Post by K. A. Pital » 2016-11-10 01:33am

Exonerate wrote:Clinton offered putting coal miners out of work.
I still don't understand why do people here think that such honest promises from Clinton were/are better than Trump's posturing.
Lì ci sono chiese, macerie, moschee e questure, lì frontiere, prezzi inaccessibile e freddure
Lì paludi, minacce, cecchini coi fucili, documenti, file notturne e clandestini
Qui incontri, lotte, passi sincronizzati, colori, capannelli non autorizzati,
Uccelli migratori, reti, informazioni, piazze di Tutti i like pazze di passioni...

...La tranquillità è importante ma la libertà è tutto!
Assalti Frontali

User avatar
The Jester
Padawan Learner
Posts: 475
Joined: 2005-05-30 08:34am
Location: Japan

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Post by The Jester » 2016-11-10 01:48am

I'm not necessarily as positive as the speakers in this video, but I think it's worth watching.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWMmBG3Z4DI
Last edited by The Jester on 2016-11-10 01:49am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
The Vortex Empire
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1586
Joined: 2006-12-11 09:44pm
Location: Rhode Island

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Post by The Vortex Empire » 2016-11-10 01:48am

Image

Trump did a little bit worse than McCain or Romney. Hillary just did catastrophically worse than Obama.

User avatar
Joun_Lord
Jedi Master
Posts: 1211
Joined: 2014-09-27 01:40am
Location: West by Golly Virginia

Re: 2016 US ELECTION: Official Results Thread

Post by Joun_Lord » 2016-11-10 01:49am

Exonerate wrote:In the end, Clinton ran a campaign of fear and it wasn't enough.
I think they both ran on fear. Just Trump had more then fear of the opposition, he had fear of the economy, fear of immigration, fear of gun rights to play off. Hillary had fear of Donald and little else I think. People were afraid of what Donnie would do (might do meow) but no fears of people losing their ways of life and financial security unrelated to what tRump might or might no do. For the fears of Clinton herself there was existing evidence supporting the fears of her personally. The fears of her playing fast and loose with secrets and government rules, the fear of tuking ur gurns, the fear of being willing to throw allies like the LGBT community under the bus when its convenient to her which I'm sure sacred both members of the LGBT community (obviously) and moderate gun owners. Trump having no experience in politics has no concrete examples of the fears people have of him unfortunately, just shit that feel out of his fat mouth and shit people say aboot him.

Trump had "facts" to back up his fear, Clinton had hollow words. Fear of the Trumpster just wasn't enough to overcome the facts, the real ones or the imagined ones or the overblown ones, of Clinton.

Plus people were afraid of her cooties or so I've been reading on the internet.

Locked