Slashdot Mirror


Donald Trump Wins US Presidency (nytimes.com)

It's official: Donald Trump has won the 2016 presidential election. Slashdot reader Xenographic writes: Google's map of results is now calling the race for Donald J. Trump. This is something that Nate Silver jokingly predicted back on May 10th when he wrote "Reminder: Cubs will win the World Series and, in exchange, President Trump will be elected 8 days later." The House and Senate are also under Republican control. In other news, the Canadian immigration site has crashed under heavy load.This is how The New York Times, America's top newspaper reported the news:The surprise outcome, defying late polls that showed Hillary Clinton with a modest but persistent edge, threatened convulsions throughout the country and the world, where skeptics had watched with alarm as Mr. Trump's unvarnished overtures to disillusioned voters took hold. The triumph for Mr. Trump, 70, a real estate developer-turned-reality television star with no government experience, was a powerful rejection of the establishment forces that had assembled against him, from the world of business to government, and the consensus they had forged on everything from trade to immigration. The results amounted to a repudiation, not only of Mrs. Clinton, but of President Obama, whose legacy is suddenly imperiled. And it was a decisive demonstration of power by a largely overlooked coalition of mostly blue-collar white and working-class voters who felt that the promise of the United States had slipped their grasp amid decades of globalization and multiculturalism. Update: The New Yorker's Editor-in-Chief David Remnick, described the Election outcome as "an American tragedy." The New York Times columnist Paul Krugman said, "Trump will bring global recession." BBC has an article on how the media worldwide has described Trump's victory. The Guardian captured the thoughts of world leaders on the matter. Hillary Clinton addressed the nation this morning and told her supporters that they all should keep an open mind and give Trump the chance to lead.

Editor's note: this story has been updated with more details, and also moved to the top of the front page because of its importance.

129 of 2,837 comments (clear)

  1. Wet paper bag by The+Rizz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Dear DNC and superdelegates: Thanks so much for giving us the most unpopular Democratic nominee in living memory. What should have been a landslide win has become a complete fucking nightmare. Good job.

    1. Re:Wet paper bag by Vitriol+Angst · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think the problem is that the DNC has it's own bubble, and the professional political establishment considers what makes a professional also makes a winner.

      Hillary also kept pitching for the "I'm a woman" and LGBTQ and minorities. Everyone KNEW the Dems were supporting this so WHY always bring it up? They spent ZERO air time saying; "we want to get jobs to coal workers and bring opportunities to rural communities." Instead; "Coal is going out of style."

      While I'm THINK that Bernie Sanders could have won -- I voted for him after all. It's mostly because he didn't EXCLUDE white males. He didn't have a message of who he was or wasn't -- just universal messages of what he planned to do for people. I hope the DNC learns this -- or dies. I'm not a fan of political parties in the first place.

      --
      >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
    2. Re:Wet paper bag by I'm+New+Around+Here · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There were many people who didn't like Trump, but who despised Hillary. They either stayed home, or grudgingly voted for Trump. If Sanders had won the nomination, many who despised Trump would have had little issue voting for Sanders, knowing the Congress will keep him in line. Sanders could have gained many votes that refused Hillary.

      --
      If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
    3. Re:Wet paper bag by quantaman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Dear DNC and superdelegates: Thanks so much for giving us the most unpopular Democratic nominee in living memory. What should have been a landslide win has become a complete fucking nightmare. Good job.

      Dear Media: Thank you so much for turning a relatively banal email screwup that had zero actual consequence into the biggest campaign scandal in decades and turning an otherwise likeable candidate into a pariah.

      Dear Director of the FBI: Thank you for possibly breaking the law by dropping an election bombshell and tanking Clinton's poll numbers over absolutely nothing.

      Dear GOP: Thank you for you massive voter suppression efforts and the SCOTUS for enabling them. Together you were able to obstruct the ability of minorities to vote.

      Dear Wikileaks: Way to go! You just handed a global superpower to a comically corrupt bozo who is so non-transparent he didn't even release his taxes!!

      --
      I stole this Sig
    4. Re:Wet paper bag by phayes · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Thanks so much for giving us the most unpopular Democratic nominee in living memory. What should have been a landslide win has become a complete fucking nightmare. Good job.

      Here I'm with you 100% except that you need to widen the net.

      Dear Media: Thank you so much for turning a relatively banal email screwup that had zero actual consequence into the biggest campaign scandal in decades and turning an otherwise likeable candidate into a pariah.

      Eh, WHAT? Hillary Clinton likable? My personal theme this year was that Trump was the only power on earth strong enough to make me vote for Hillary. 8 years ago part of what got Obama elected was that he wasn't Hillary. The Hillary supporters have always thought that she's just misunderstood, everybody will come around eventually. The email server was her faullt. Covering it up and pretending that no secret Emails were sent/recieved on the server was also her fault. Hillary has been viscerally disliked for who she is for decades by many and her attempting to skate by pretending that the rules for everyone else don't apply to her now mean that we're all going to have to suffer through 4 years of Trump.

      --
      Democracy is a sheep and two wolves deciding what to have for lunch. Freedom is a well armed sheep contesting the issue
    5. Re:Wet paper bag by I'm+New+Around+Here · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Just one thing:

      Dear Media: Thank you so much for turning a relatively banal email screwup ....

      Sending and receiving classified documents on unsecured computers is not a "screwup", it is an illegal act. The Secretary of State cannot use the excuse of "I didn't know it was classified", in the same manner that a police officer cannot use the excuse "I didn't know stealing was a crime".

      --
      If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
  2. Go ahead let it out.... by CajunArson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Please consolidate all the comments about how sexist/racist/xenophobic America is because they didn't coronate Hillary under this comment for organizational purposes. Please provide reasons for why a bunch of people who were "good" when they voted for Obama deserve to be shipped off to your concentration camps today for failing to do as they were told.

    Also, you can post your real estate listings here since you ARE actually going to man up (ooh wait.. too cisgendered a term there) and move to Canada right?

    Interesting microcosm of why Hillary ACTUALLY lost that can't be boiled down to a prejudiced throw-away "ism" hurled at groups of people you don't like: Tonight she flat out refused to go out and face her own supporters at her lavish "victory" party. Not even to thank them for their hard work. No class whatsoever where it actually counts.

    --
    AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
  3. Re:god help us all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    As of today, because of my Islamic surname, I'm a second class citizen in the eyes of America. If I want to visit, I'll have to undergo "extreme vetting", whatever that means.

    The parallels with the rise of Nazism are quite disturbing.

  4. The real losers are his supporters by aberglas · · Score: 4, Insightful

    At the end of the day Trump is too incompetent to start a major war. Or do anything else too drastic. He is vain and intellectually lazy, so the lobbyists will keep him under control.

    But the big thing he WILL do is roll back Obamacare. The thing that poor whites rely on if they get ill. He'll cut taxes to the rich and services to the poor like nobody else.

    He'll make noises about Mexicans but do nothing. He will make noises about China but is unlikely to do anything.

    But if you rely on government services too bad, so sad.

    In a democracy the people get the government that they deserve.

    1. Re:The real losers are his supporters by AaronW · · Score: 4, Insightful

      At least you can get insurance.

      My sister has a major pre-existing condition and requires gamma globulin that costs $5000/month in order to stay alive. She works as a teacher and the insurance where she works (at a private school) does not cover it so she has to go to the exchange for another plan that does cover it. Without the ACA, no outside insurance company would touch her due to her pre-existing conditions. With the insurance she only pays $500/month for her medicine (not counting the other medications and doctor co-pays, etc.) If the ACA is repealed with Trump's plan she'd be out of pocket $5000/month to stay alive, which is far more than she makes. Tax deductions under Trump's plan won't help when she pays little to no federal income tax anyway at her salary.

      If the ACA is repealed my family will have to figure out how to come up with at least $60K/year to keep her alive. My parents are retired and it's far more than I can afford. While healthcare in this country is fucked up and way overpriced, the alternative for many people of repealing the ACA is far far worse.

      I know people who are alive because it prevented insurance companies from imposing lifetime caps on care, my sister being one of them. I also know people who lost everything before the ACA due to something like cancer or a stroke when insurance companies refused to pay due to caps or other reasons.

      --
      This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
  5. Re:Hmmm well by tezbobobo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It should be pointed out that hawkish behaviour under the Bush regime meant a LOT of people didn't survive the Bush regime (literally bombed and shot to death). While American's have been concerned with talk of Mexican Walls and grabbing women inappropriately, the rest of the world has been gravely worried about the potential dismantling of major world alliances and free trade deals, and the potential for nuclear proliferation.

    People in the US need to realise that US guns in US hands kill a LOT of people around the world.

  6. And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by Xenographic · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Incidentally, for those looking for someone to blame here, look no further than the DNC:

    Operationalizing the Strategy Pied Piper Candidates

    There are two ways to approach the strategies mentioned above. The first is to use the field as a whole to inflict damage on itself similar to what happened to Mitt Romney in 2012. The variety of candidates is a positive here, and many of the lesser known can serve as a cudgel to move the more established candidates further to the right. In this scenario, we don’t want to marginalize the more extreme candidates, but make them more “Pied Piper” candidates who actually represent the mainstream of the Republican Party. Pied Piper candidates include, but aren’t limited to:

                Ted Cruz
                Donald Trump
                Ben Carson

    Read the PDF attachment on this email for the source.

    1. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I was one of the Democrats who voted for Trump during the primary to sabotage the GOP. Screw game theory. Elections are too important to not vote your conscience.

    2. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by I'm+New+Around+Here · · Score: 3, Insightful

      With all sincerity, next time, yes, vote your conscious. I, a white male small-el libertarian, voted for Jill Stein, and will get shit for it. Already have gotten shit for it. My wife is a liberal non-white female who voted for Hillary, hoping to see a female President. She's disappointed, I'm glad Hillary didn't win, but we both know we voted for us, for our own reasons. Voting against your conscious isn't worth the mental issues later.

      In fact, the next election, when someone tells you to vote to disrupt "the other guys", smack them as hard as you can. :^)

      --
      If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
    3. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by CajunArson · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Why is it sexist when anybody votes for Trump but voting for Hillary for the purposes of having a non-functional set of gonads being president is OK?

      --
      AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
    4. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by jandersen · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Incidentally, for those looking for someone to blame here, look no further than the DNC:

      - and the GOP, who have been tearing themselves apart and letting the people down. And the God Mongers, who have always been part of the establishment; and the media, whose only interest has ever been to line their own pockets and wouldn't let facts get in the way. And so on.

      What can anyone say at this point? As somebody who has lived long enough to see what the reality is like in politics, I think you guys made a mistake - there is a hell of a lot of difference between "sorting out the world" over a few pints in your usual bar, and tackling real politics in the real world. Clinton knows her way around the political system - she would have been able to make things continue more or less the way they have always gone; admittedly not the best campaign slogan, but we knew what we were getting and she never promised more than she could deliver. Trump, on the other hand - what can he actually do, now that he has to do it for real? Build a wall? Start a major trade war with China? Deport all the illegal immigrants? Make America great again? How would behaving like an idiot make America great? On the other hand, if he doesn't deliver on his promises, because he comes to his senses, what will all the angry people, whose anger he has stoked with his talk, how will they react? Are they going to take it stoically? Well, we will see, but I think we are in for a bumpy ride, and we will feel it no matter where we are.

    5. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by swillden · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm old enough to remember when they wanted to face Reagan. I guess you need to be careful what you wish for.

      Oh how I wish Trump were a Reagan. Not that I think Reagan's policies were all great, but he did do an excellent job of being presidential -- and that is important. It brings people together and gives them confidence in their leader and themselves. Trump... is less qualified than Reagan was at doing the day-in, day-out job of governing, and being presidential is completely beyond him.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    6. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by mwvdlee · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem isn't your vote. It's the political system that makes any votes other than for the two major candidates useless.
      US should look at the political system of pretty much any other democratic country and copy it.
      There are plenty to choose from and pretty much all will be better than the two party system.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    7. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by I'm+New+Around+Here · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually, I've said here on Slashdot that the Greens and Libertarians should form a coalition. They might not win, but they should get enough support to get a spot on the stage in the debates. If they pushed real hard, they could even get a few electoral votes in some states.

      Imagine what they could have done in this election season. Their joint venture would have been newsworthy, get out the vote efforts could have flourished for them, and people who hated both main party candidates could have had an actual option.

      --
      If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
    8. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'd say that double standard, or at least the perception of it, is a big part of what got Trump elected. That, and the fact that Hillary comes across so generally unlikable. She's a typical Washington-insider-back-dealing politician, but without the charming personality her husband had. Think about it... Wall Street is freaking out over Trump's impending presidency. They knew *exactly* what to expect with Hillary, which was "business as usual". No one has a fucking clue what Trump is going to do.

      My going theory is that if either side had put up a remotely likeable candidate, it would have been a landslide. Instead, the Democrats put forth the "next-in-line" insider despite her baggage, and the Republican elite alienated their base so badly that the rank-and-file instead insisted on the "anti-candidate" which NO Republican beltway insider wanted.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    9. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by Alain+Williams · · Score: 5, Insightful

      My wife is a liberal non-white female who voted for Hillary, hoping to see a female President.

      Voting for someone on the basis of their sex is just as stupid as voting for someone on the basis of their race/skin-colour. You should be voting on the basis of their policies — far more complex than some genetic attribute.

    10. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by Mashiki · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ut wait! Hes going to fix all that right? Our growth sucks we need 10% GDP growth per year which he will deliver! He said it during a presidential debate! America, land of 4.9% unemployment

      FYI: If you're counting the actual unemployment rate it's probably closer to 15% in the US. Keeping in mind that the U6 is just shy of 10%, and after a few years even those people permanently drop off the system. You can massage the fuck out of anything to make you look better, hell the Liberals(Trudeau) here in Canada managed to "massage away" a $6B surplus, then blow another $27B and another $6B rainy day fund, and claim that there was no surplus in the first place. The current state of the US is much closer to that of the 1980 then anyone would like to admit. The only thing that's kept it at the same state is repeated pumping of money(AKA QE) directly into the stock markets. The bubble popping and shit hitting the fan? That 10% GDP isn't only possible, it's down right likely.

      --
      Om, nomnomnom...
    11. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by Rakarra · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Speaking as a Republican, FUCK YOU.

      Your party just won the White House, against all the mainstream beliefs that it was impossible. Why are you so angry?

      It shouldn't be the party, or be about the party. It should be about the candidate. George Washington warned of the perils of political parties, but no one took his advice. Washington said, and this is a direct quote "Fuck the Democratic Party and Republican Party because someday they're going to push a cheetoh-colored monkey and a corrupt harpy for President, and somehow the harpy will win, and you'll just have to like it." I'm pretty sure he said that because he grew weed, but it was prophetic.

    12. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by Rakarra · · Score: 5, Insightful

      On the other hand, if he doesn't deliver on his promises, because he comes to his senses, what will all the angry people, whose anger he has stoked with his talk, how will they react? Are they going to take it stoically? Well, we will see, but I think we are in for a bumpy ride, and we will feel it no matter where we are.

      Having seen this sort of thing over and over again... no, there's not going to be a reckoning. Because, like Trump did all throughout the primaries and general election, you can always blame someone else when you're wrong, and a sizable number of idiots will say you were right and it was someone else's fault.

      So when Trump's policies fail, it will be the work of those shameful Democrats somehow.

    13. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by wienerschnizzel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Incidentally, for those looking for someone to blame here, look no further than the DNC:

      - and the GOP, who have been tearing themselves apart and letting the people down. And the God Mongers, who have always been part of the establishment; and the media, whose only interest has ever been to line their own pockets and wouldn't let facts get in the way. And so on.

      Why not just blame people who voted for him? We talk about failure of the institutions, failure of the intellectual elites, failure of the politicians...

      F*@! that! I'm calling this the failure of the masses!

      And if you think it's snobbish to say so, you are wrong - I'm the one acknowledging their agency, that their decisions matter! Now they voted for a guy who wants to use the nuclear bomb. There's no excuses for that. That's not just 'locker room talk', that's not 'complicated economic policy', that's not 'showing the top 1% the finger' - that's just pure evil!

      And the worst part is that this is happening all over the world. The Phillipinos voted for a loud mouthed buffoon as well. And the Polish have got a right wing isolationist president as well, ironically all the while the British isolationists claim they need to leave the EU because the Poles are getting all the gravy to the detriment of UK! All over europe extreme right is on the rise! There are elections comming in France and Germany next year and FN and AFD are hoping for a surprise as well!

      W.T.F. people!

    14. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by lucm · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm sorry, but what part of "It's Her Turn" don't you understand? You sexists are all alike.

      This kind of patronizing attitude is the most pervasive form of sexism. Women don't need "their turn" they're perfectly capable of competing for top jobs.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
    15. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by Gussington · · Score: 5, Insightful

      FYI: If you're counting the actual unemployment rate it's probably closer to 15% in the US.

      It may very well be 15%, but the quoted 4.9% is published using known methods that we can independently validate. Can you do the same? Or is this the new Trump era where just saying so is good enough?

    16. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They knew *exactly* what to expect with Hillary, which was "business as usual".

      And that is exactly why I blame the Democrats for Trump.

      It has been clear for a long time that people are fed up with business as usual and want change. Hillary represents business as usual, while Trump and Bernie represent change.

      By making Hillary the Democrat candidate, they ensured that Trump would get the votes from everybody wanting change.

    17. Re: And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by chill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Using the number of Americans"not in the work force" is inaccurate and dishonest. That 95 million number includes both my parents, who are retired and living in a nursing home; my 18 month old grand daughter and my 8-year old son in elementary school; and my wife who is a traditional home maker and not interested in outside work.

      None of the people in those categories should be considered in "unemployment" statistics, which is what you're doing by citing the 95 million non-working Americans.

      U-6 from BLS is much more representative and is currently at 9.3â.... It includes people who want to work but have given up on despair, as well as people who want to work full time but can't get anything other than a few hours on a part-time gig.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    18. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Clinton knows her way around the political system - she would have been able to make things continue more or less the way they have always gone; admittedly not the best campaign slogan, but we knew what we were getting and she never promised more than she could deliver.

      We didn't want the status quo, and the DNC offered nothing better.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    19. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Actually, I've said here on Slashdot that the Greens and Libertarians should form a coalition.

      That can not and will not ever happen because they are fundamentally opposed entities. The Libertarian party's core tenet is fuck you, I'm eating, and the Green party's core tenet is wait, I live here. Ne'er the twain shall meet. If we had a less-insane Libertarian party which cared about the environment, then you wouldn't need a Green party.

      I propose we take a page from Red Mars and consider ecology economically. If you spend it, you have to pay back into it. But as long as the Libertarian party is ignoring physics by suggesting that we should all be able to do whatever we want with whatever piece of land we take by force, or which we buy from someone who took it by force, it will be fundamentally incompatible with both science and the Green party.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    20. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by MachineShedFred · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A lot of people forget that there isn't a lot Trump can do without the Congress playing along. And while his nonsense might play in the House, he's still down a few votes for cloture motions in the Senate. There are ways to work around that in the budgetary process through reconciliation, but it has a whole new set of rules around that.

      The Congress is going to put the brakes on a lot of shit he wants to do, and even thinks he can do. The White House Counsel's office is going to have a busy four years.

      --
      Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
    21. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by SharpFang · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Trump's sexism is mostly harmless. Stupid remarks, some prejudices, business as usual, offensive, annoying, but in the long run with no impact.

      Clinton, on the other hand, is a sexist with an agenda. She'd be "bringing gender balance to the government" by replacing men with women on key positions - even with a shortage of adequately competent female candidates. Skill be damned, gender matters - she'd actively discriminate against male candidates, with disregard for actual qualification levels. She'd allow female supremacists to push their laws through, and obstruct their opponents.

      We had recently a somewhat similar situation in Poland, though more regarding political integrity than gender issues. We've voted a quite competent party out, and voted stupid bozos into their place. Simply, because the competent party was very actively using their competence to rob the country blind, using their immense political talents and brainpower for things that benefitted them, at heavy cost to the society. Well, the bozos are incompetent. Even if they go full evil, they won't be capable of causing so much harm, because they simply don't know how.

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    22. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You could say people who voted for him are victims, like most of the people who voted for Hitler. They were tricked. Look at how many think that straight white males are being repressed, even though they just proved that actually they have the majority of the power. So much power that they can vote to deport millions of the minorities who they think are oppressing them.

      They voted for the guy who promised to protect their jobs from cheaper immigrant and foreign labour, when he himself makes use of that labour instead of employing Americans.

      He used the standard Nazi tactic, as outlined by Hermann Goering at his Nuremberg trial. Tell people they are being attacked. Make them think you are the only one who can save them.

      Having said that, a lot of them are just racist scum. But not all of them.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    23. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by hey! · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Because you get one-time pass on that kind of question. Barriers need to be broken down. Generally to do so you need someone who would otherwise be quite capable of winning. Obama is a gifted communicator who would be a formidable politician if he were white. But he needs some people to vote for him because he's black, because others won't vote for him because he's black.

      On the other hand many people who would vote for Obama "because he's black" wouldn't vote for Jesse Jackson, because no matter his personal qualities he doesn't really have the political talent and ability to do the job. So it's not a case of vote for anyone who is black or female just because they're black or female; you give a little preference for someone who should be able to win but can't because of prejudice.

      It's a kind of like acid-base titration. You want to add enough to make the system balanced.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    24. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by Overzeetop · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Indeed.

      Had the Democrats fielded almost anyone *except* HRC, it would have been a D landslide victory. They probably could have fielded a dog and a used ball of aluminum foil and won. But, no, they chose to anoint one of the most hated women in politics - and I say that as a life long Democrat. She's simply toxic in a way that the party core is simply blind to.

      I feel like we just had the Superbowl, and the 49ers and Browns ended up as the NFC and AFC representatives.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
    25. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by elrous0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Clinton, on the other hand, is a sexist with an agenda. She'd be "bringing gender balance to the government" by replacing men with women on key positions - even with a shortage of adequately competent female candidates. Skill be damned, gender matters - she'd actively discriminate against male candidates, with disregard for actual qualification levels. She'd allow female supremacists to push their laws through, and obstruct their opponents.

      As a classic liberal, that's what really scares me about the new SJW left. I was on the left when they supported true equality and civil rights (and I still support those things). But the modern SJW's are just racists and sexists themselves. They villianize white males the same way that Klan members used to villianize blacks. The only thing that separates them from Dixiecrats is which race/sex they want to disenfranchise and discriminate against. It's sickening that they've been able to take over the left like a cancer and turn a party that used to stand up for equality and freedom into a party of black nationalism, misandry, and opposition to free speech.

      So congrats snowflakes, you actually got this old-school liberal to vote for Donald Trump. And the more "hate speech" laws you advocate for and the more you push an agenda of open hatred and discrimination against white males, the stronger the backlash against you will grow. Even many women are starting to think about what kind of world their sons will have to grow up in if your ideology wins the day.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    26. Re: And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by silentcoder · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Really ? So you think he's not going to try and force Muslims to register on a special database and carry special ID ? He promissed to do that many times. You think being okay with a president who wants laws like that does not make you complicit in the atrocity such a law would represent ?
      Normally we would say - the supreme court would chuck that out so fast his head would spin since it would clearly violate both the first and fourth ammendments, but Trump gets to fill Scalia's seat now, with a republican congress - so he can give that seat to any bigotted jerk he wants to, and suddenly that particular defence is a lot weaker.
      You think he couldn't get enough votes in congress or the senate to pass such a law ? Republicans have pandered to that same sentiment all year, and they have majorities in both houses. You think any of them would risk the ire of the voters by taking a principled stand against it ? Maybe a few like John McCain might, especially having just won re-election and thus being safe for 4 years, but are you CERTAIN there's enough of those ?
      How is being willing to take that risk not making you complicit in the bigotry that lead to it ?

      What if Trump resurrects DOMA ? With his new conservative court - the current legal status of gay marriage may very well end, the most we could hope for is a sanity clause to allow existing marriages to remain valid. What about all those insane laws that outlaw abortion by proxy (in Texas they've managed to get it down to a single abortion clinic for the entire state) - you think a Trump supreme court will shoot those down ? You just have to pray we don't get another roe-vs-wade style case or it ends entirely.

      Now it's quite likely none of these things affect you personally - they don't affect most of Trumps voters and the most hardcore ones actively WANT these things. But it makes them all bigots, it makes them all to blame for every single one that happens - because they chose somebody who would do those things, it doesn't matter why they chose him. It doesn't matter if they voted for his tax policy or his trade policy - they were willing to subject other people to a bigotted government to get those things - and that makes them bigots themselves. It makes them responsible for his actions.

      The only Trump actions ALL of his voters don't bear EQUAL responsibility and guilt in - are whatever he ends up doing that was NOT in his campaign. The things he said in speeches he will do - if even one of them comes to pass, all the horrors it causes is blood on the hands of everybody who voted for him. And coincidentally voted for Pence too - a man who signed a law demanding that gay couples be jailed just for WANTING to get married and has publicly stated that he believes women should be charged with murder if they have a miscarriage.

      Yeah, I'm upset, even traumatized. I'm fucking scared for the world my little girl is now going to grow up in. I'm legitimately worried that another world war is looming and I don't know if we'll live through it. Vast numbers of people didn't make it the last two times - and those didn't have large nuclear arsenals. You bet I'm fucking traumatised... but at least I have a clean conscience.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    27. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by wienerschnizzel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You could say people who voted for him are victims, like most of the people who voted for Hitler.

      I don't buy it.

      You know what life was like in the Weimar Republic? The currency was worthless (the mark depreciated by a factor of 10^12 in five years), unemployment was by 25%, streets were not safe (the reason why the government residen in Weimar rather than Berlin) and when the government defaulted on war reparations due to the terrible state of the economy, the belgian and the french force moved into and occupied Ruhr, the most industrially advanced part of the country... The situation comparable to today's Venezuela.

      In other words, the people there really *were* victims regardles of Hitler. He did not quite manufacture that situation just took advantage of it. Still, he got only 33% of the votes in the last free elections.

      There is no way you can compare that situation to what's going on in the US now. There were starving people roaming the streets begging for food; here the lowest classes are a generation of morbidly obese... I can see how people overlooked the warmongering and hate speech when Hitler also promised order and food. On the other hand the americans are overlooking the use torture and atomic weapons for the promise of getting rid of the immigrants.

      Sorry, I'm not sympathizing with that!

    28. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by Xyrus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      My wife is a liberal non-white female who voted for Hillary, hoping to see a female President.

      Voting for someone on the basis of their sex is just as stupid as voting for someone on the basis of their race/skin-colour. You should be voting on the basis of their policies — far more complex than some genetic attribute.

      I think this election has demonstrated that policies are irrelevant.

      --
      ~X~
    29. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by allcoolnameswheretak · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Trump's sexism is mostly harmless. Stupid remarks, some prejudices, business as usual, offensive, annoying, but in the long run with no impact.

      Except that Trump voters just told their kids that being a racist, foul-mouthed and sexist demagogue who likes to grab women by the pussy is OK because you can be president.

    30. Re: And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by silentcoder · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I really, really wish Sanders had been the democratic nominee - Trump was the anti-politician ? The left should have answered with a populist anti-politician, the difference would be, they'd be electing a sane one.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    31. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by ranton · · Score: 5, Insightful

      All democratic political systems require coalitions between disparate groups in order to govern. In the US you get to see the completed coalition before voting, as they are represented by the Republican and Democratic parties. In other countries you vote for one of many parties, and then leave it up to the elites in those parties to form coalitions without further public input.

      There are pros and cons to both ways of running a democracy, and claiming a two party system is fundamentally different than a 3+ party system is deeply ignorant. The only significant difference is the lack of control a 3+ party system gives the electorate.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    32. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by Lord+Apathy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This would be one of the biggest reasons I didn't vote for her. "It's Her turn." The sense of entitlement that Hillary had for the Whitehouse, like it was her destiny to ascend to the throne or something. To put it bluntly, she needed to be put in her place.

      Before all you women get your panties in a wad, i'm not against a woman president. I do believe its time for a woman president, just not that one. I would have voted for Condlisa Rice in a heart beat.

      --

      Supporting World Peace Through Nuclear Pacification

    33. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by Jack9 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > overwhelmingly to put the same old congresscritters back in office.

      To be fair, that's because many of our choices were the same critters from the major parties. I had no other options (write-ins for congress havent worked).

      --

      Often wrong but never in doubt.
      I am Jack9.
      Everyone knows me.
    34. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by Somebody+Is+Using+My · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I hope you aren't "getting shit" for voting for Jill Stein due to accusations that you "cost Hillary Clinton the election". Looking at the numbers, I don't see one instance in any state race where the outcome would have been any different had the independents not run. That is, even if all the people who voted for Jill Stein voted for Hillary Clinton, it still wouldn't have given her enough votes to win in the states where she lost to Trump (and similarly, none of the states where Trump lost might have been won had he gotten support from Gary Johnson voters). So if somebody is accusing you of costing Hillary Clinton they have absolutely no standing besides sour grapes.

      Similarly, I despise people who accuse anyone of voting Independent as having "thrown their vote away". Elections are not a popularity contest and just because "your guy" doesn't win does not make your vote wasted. Voting is how citizens say, "this is the direction I want the country to go". If enough people vote for a third-party candidate, it can cost the major parties their victory, and in future elections the major parties will be forced to change to win back those third-party supporters. Unfortunately, voters have become extremely short-sighted, and cannot see beyond the immediate election (largely due to indoctrination by the major parties, who would prefer to minimalize third parties so they don't have to change). Catchy campaign slogans aside, voting third party really is the only way to force the major parties to alter their ways.

      Personally, I find this one of the most disappointing things about the election, because - Trump's rhetoric aside - this was less a victory for the average citizen and more just a sign that things will continue to be the same (Trump is not going to "drain the swamp; he just filled it with Republicans who now control the House, the Senate, the Presidency, and most of the governors; they have no reason to significantly change tactics). I was really hoping that the independent candidates could make a decent showing this year - 4% of the vote would have been nice - to threaten both the Democrats and Republicans party enough to induce change. Unfortunately, the status quo has been maintained.

      Of course, the most terrifying thing is that the Republicans have such a strong grip on the country. I say this not because I necessarily disagree (or for that matter, agree) with their policies; I just am extremely wary of any one power-block having, well, so much power. I would have felt the same had Hillary Clinton won and the Democrats gained control of Congress too. Ideally I would like the Congress controlled by one party (well, the House by one party and the Senate deadlocked), and the Presidency by the other party under the principle that the government that governs least governs best. I do not generally subscribe to the Libertarian philosophy of tiny government, but I do believe that any time one power block has such a sure grip on things, they fast track their policies and swift action like that is never good for the nation. Deadlocked government forces change to a crawl and requires compromise to get anything done, which is the ideal.

      So, the short of it is, good for you for voting for a third party if you believe that the major party candidates did not adequately represent you. Don't let anyone tell you that you were wrong to do so.

    35. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by harperska · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You are lucky. Far too many states that shouldn't have been swing states suddenly became so. I live in Minnesota, which was supposed to be a part of the "blue wall", and has the dubious honor of being the only state in the union to vote democrat in the 1984 election, still hasn't been called. I have family in Wisconsin and Michigan, also supposedly part of the blue wall, both of which unexpectedly swung for Trump. In all 3 of those states, the vote counts for Johnson alone are greater than the difference between Trump and Clinton, so peoples' choice to vote 3rd party definitely had an effect on the outcome.

    36. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by kimvette · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Newsflash:
      Lawsuits don't clean water once it's been contaminated, and lawsuits do not reverse global warming. Lawsuits don't subdue increased ferocity of tropical storms. They just punish with a laughably small punitive financial charge that is chalked up as the cost of doing business, and then depending on the nature of the judgement, might be written off as losses when taxes are filed.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    37. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by kimvette · · Score: 1, Insightful

      1. Trump revealed nothing about the policies except that he has the best policy and no one can implement policy better than he does
      2. Democrats threw away the best candidate of the whole race (Sanders) in favor of a highly qualified and successful, but wholly unlikable candidate (Clinton)
      3. Pundits who pander to the tin foil hat set (Limbaugh, Beck, and Jones) committed character assassination by starting a lot of baseless conspiracy theories that neocons believe despite their having been debunked many times by many credible sources and necons are WILLFULLY ignorant because they disregard any legitimate media source, the courts, the FBI all as co-conspirators
      4. All too many who saw Trump for what he is voted third party "to make a statement" and insisted they're "not wasting a vote" because "trump has no chance of winning." Well, as it turns out, and as many people warned, third-party votes caused the upset in this election. I agree with their sentiment and I have voted third party, but never when the stakes were as high as they were for this election.

      Now, we've got an admitted sexual predator, draft dodger, old-guard soviet communist sympathizer, proven crook, proven compulsive liar who hasn't got a clue how government works (as evidenced by "why didn't you fix it" to hillary in regard to the budget; um, all spending bills MUST originate in the House of Representatives, and she was a senator) who has promised to oppress and persecute minorities, promised to break a large number of treaties, and has pledged to destroy the environment by eliminating the EPA, as president-elect.

      This is a very fucked up situation we're in. When the stakes are this high you don't vote third party to "make a statement"; you vote for the lesser of the two major evils in the election.

      The only problem with Hillary is that despite her accomplishments and her wonderful charity work, she is a very unlikable person and does not know how to play a crowd, while Trump excels at people chessing.

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    38. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by amicusNYCL · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Add myself to the list of people who refused to vote for Hillary. She didn't lose my vote because she's a woman, she lost it because she's Hillary Clinton. I would have voted for Elizabeth Warren (or Sanders) without any hesitation, but the DNC was so hell-bent on making sure that Hillary was the nominee that they forgot to nominate someone who was capable of beating the most disliked candidate in the history of presidential polling. Hopefully by this point it will be blatantly obvious that voters do not want Hillary Clinton, and hopefully she will retire from politics and public life. She's earned it.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    39. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by Khashishi · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Trump's sexism may be mostly harmless, but his narcissism is very dangerous. At least Bush was smart enough to take advice from more capable people he surrounded himself with. Unfortunately, many of these people were totally evil (Cheney). Trump thinks he's the smartest person around, and he's more likely to go with his gut than listen to the advice of generals, directors, and economists. And this makes him dangerous.

    40. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by Lord+Apathy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Isn't that the truth. The DNC brought this on themselves. If they had fielded any other candidate they would have wiped the floor with Trump last night. Bernie Sanders comes to mind. If they hadn't been so keen on sinking his campaign they might be celebrating instead of crying today.

      --

      Supporting World Peace Through Nuclear Pacification

    41. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by Khashishi · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't think even Libertarians believe the nonsense they repeat about protecting the environment. Bringing a lawsuit is a large burden, and most forms pollution are small but cumulative and difficult to trace to their sources. Who the fuck am I supposed to sue when the sky is brown day after day? When there's mercury in my well water? When the river is full of E coli from people shitting in it?

    42. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by cusco · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I wonder if the DNC will get the message that voters want to make a choice, not be told who the candidate will be after their discussions in the legendary "smoke filled room". It's not likely, considering the inside-the-beltway articles that I'm already seeing that tRump won because of this or that. He won because the DNC insisted on running a candidate that was universally loathed by the opposition and whose only real asset was "I'm not Donald Trump."

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    43. Re:And to think the DNC wanted to face Trump... by skam240 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Honestly i just tune out when i see the SJW acronym. Whenever i see it it's almost always people complaining about the fringe left like it's the mainstream. It's exactly the same as saying all memebers of the political Right are rascist because fringe groups like the KKK and neo-nazis are on their fringes.

      Spend some time off the internet and you'll realise most people are perfectly normal moderates of one slant or another. All this "I saw it on the internets so that means its widespread!" from both the Left and the Right feels like football fans arguing over whose team is better only with this stuff the pettiness is distracting far too many people from issues that actually matter.

      "The Right's all rascist, misogynists, homophobes!" "The Left want to give all the jobs to gays, illegals and women and control our words!"

      Please. All of you, just shut up and live your lives as best you can and stop whining. The stuff above are not our country's real problems.

       

      --
      I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
  7. We Cut Off Our Nose To Spite Our Face! by slacka · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Four years we get to listen to his pedantic bullshit.
    And in four years, we have to sit through another goddamn election season where he's a candidate.
    I fully expect him to appoint every conservative wingnut he can find to positions of power.
    We're going to try trickle down economics one more fucking time.
    We're going to boot 20 million people off of their health care, and institute health savings plans instead (great if you live well enough above your means that you can afford to set money aside).
    We're going to ignore the Paris Climate Accords. The EPA will be left in tatters.
    We're going to waste half a trillion dollars building a fucking wall, to address an immigration problem that is nowhere near our top concern.
    We're going to defund the Department of Education.
    And on and on and fucking on.
    And I fully expect the Trump administration to be rife with scandals. There's a reason he didn't want to get into financial disclosures. He will use the office to further his investments.
    President Trump, the greatest shitshow on earth!

    1. Re:We Cut Off Our Nose To Spite Our Face! by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm not happy about the result but I'm going to make 2 predictions right now:

      * The wall never gets built, I can't see congress aggreeing to fund it
      * Trump comes around on climate change. I think he's smart enough to know that it's a real thing and he has young kids to think of.

      Maybe I'm just a glass half full kind of guy.

    2. Re:We Cut Off Our Nose To Spite Our Face! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      * The wall never gets built, I can't see congress aggreeing to fund it

      I think the wall would never be built because Trump didn't believe what he was talking in the first place

      * Trump comes around on climate change. I think he's smart enough to know that it's a real thing and he has young kids to think of.

      I am pessimistic on this one, because Trump does not look that smart

    3. Re:We Cut Off Our Nose To Spite Our Face! by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Oh, shit, I had forgotten about the environment with all the other bad news. America may just have broken the planet.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re:We Cut Off Our Nose To Spite Our Face! by lucm · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's all rhetoric but the fact is that walls work. Always have.

      Remember how it was a daily thing to have bus bombs or market bombs in Israel? Then they built a wall and that stopped, the terrorists had to go hide with civilians in Lebanon to shoot rockets.

      Same thing earlier in 20th century when the Italians had problems in Libya because weapons and fighters were coming in from neighboring countries. They built walls (well fences) and the problem went away.

      There's also the wall of China that worked pretty well.

      Sometimes you don't need complex socio-economic theories to solve a problem, you just need a wall.

      --
      lucm, indeed.
  8. Re:One party rule by Dracos · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They won't have it for long. Brexit remorse will set in quickly and a D wave will flow into Congress in 2018. I have a suspicion that Trump will be a pariah in DC, constantly at odds with everyone except the sycophants in his Cabinet.

  9. Disappointed but not surprised by pushing-robot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Since term limits began we've been in a cycle of 8 years one party, 8 years the other. Bush (the first) was the only exception, because Reagan was ridiculously popular and Dukakis wasn't.

    More accurately, Republicans have a base of ~40% that turns out no matter what; Democrats don't, which is why all the true landslides of the past 50 years have gone to Republicans. The party cycle is pretty much all because of Democrats; after two elections they become complacent and idealistic and stop turning out, then it takes a couple terms of Republicans to build up the fire in their belly again. It would be funny, except for how many people suffer in the meantime.

    And if you were one of those idealists who would only vote for Bernie, remember that idealism is an extremism as dangerous as any other, because it ends in letting the world burn because you won't settle for second best.

    Anyway, all hail Grand Nagus Trump and see you in 2018.

    --
    How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
  10. Re:One party rule by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    There goes the neighborhood. You know Obamacare is going to die, followed by womens rights, gay rights, black rights, oh hell, I wouldn't be surprised if Trump orders the national guard to round up everyone non-white and drop them on the Canadian or Mexican border.

  11. Re:May the Lord have mercy on us all by Lotana · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Every country has some weird traditions. USA's is electing a clown as president.

    I am sure it will not be as bad as most people think. After all president is constrained by the budget set by congress. Neither can a president declare war without their approval. I am sure that if he really starts to act out then impeachment is on the table.

    Still, you have to wonder about the voter disillusionment to get such a result.

  12. Re:One party rule by pushing-robot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Most of the senate seats up in 2018 are Democrats, not to mention how many supreme court justices he's replaced by then. We'll be dealing with the fallout from this for a long time.

    And don't think for a minute that the Republican congress won't exploit Trump to get legislation passed. Narcissists are easy to manipulate; put their ego on the line and they can be goaded into anything.

    --
    How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
  13. Re:god help us all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The West is "so great" primarily because we DON'T do those things. The minute we start is the minute we AREN'T "so great". How does that concept escape you?

  14. Re:One party rule by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Trump's every election promise violates against the constitution in a form or the other. He does nothing he promised during the campaign. He probably only wants to show off his wife at diplomatic events and make "deals". This is how the populists operate in Europe as well.

  15. Don't move to Canada, liberals. by neiras · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Pick a swing state and colonize it if you actually care about your country.

    If you look at the state maps, wherever population is densest, people tend to vote left. The reason is simple: people who live in close quarters have learned that it's important to get along.

    All those folks out in the sparse spaces haven't figured out that rugged individualism is basically childishness. We look out from the cities and see drooling yokels - they look at us and see preening fops making useless rules.

    World's getting smaller though. Eventually the children will have to grow up. We have to take care of each other and share limited resources.

  16. Re:One party rule by ichthus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    See, it's this kind of loony shit that just lost you the election.

    --
    sig: sauer
  17. Re:Hmmm well by Misagon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Bush Jr held back the fight against climate change for eight years.

    First this year, Obama finally ratified a global treaty, sorry: "agreement", on the climate -- one that does not really commit to anything, and if countries even followed it would be too little and too late.

    And now the US elected a president that "does not believe in global warming" that wants to tear that up.

    And you still say that we can survive?
    If Gore had been elected back in 2000, there might have been a chance.

    --
    "We mustn't be caught by surprise by our own advancing technology" -- Aldous Huxley
  18. Re:One party rule by AK+Marc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It was predicted in the primaries. Hillary Clinton was the weakest possible candidate against Trump. If the party had rallied around Bernie Sanders, Trump would have lost. So many of the Trump votes were anti-Hillary protest votes. A vote for Hillary in the primaries was a vote for Trump.

  19. Re:One party rule by CajunArson · · Score: 1, Insightful

    You said:
    1. All of Trump's campaign promises violate the constitution. (wrong).
    2. But he won't do any of them anyway.

    So according to you, Trump will actually follow the constitution. Looks like that puts him ahead of the current administration.

    --
    AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
  20. Re:One party rule by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Literally no excuse. So when Bob the redneck keeps whining It's Obama's fault he doesn't have a job you can gleefully tell him to GTFO.

  21. I doubt it'll happen by rsilvergun · · Score: 3, Insightful

    the 1% are fine with Trump. Lots of tax cuts, regulation cuts, Union busting, etc. That leaves the loons, and the left just aren't up to assassinations. We've shied away from violence this entire campaign. Trumps fine. The rest of us? Not so much.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  22. Re:Wow, not even eight minutes later, and... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Cya later. Have fun. Nobody will miss you.

  23. Re:Very true by I'm+New+Around+Here · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You realize Hillary and trump both won their party's nomination

    Yes, of course.

    fair and square, right?

    You're joking, right?

    --
    If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
  24. Re:One party rule by hardburlyboogerman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I hope folks are ready for sheer hell to break loose because it will..Folks like me can look forward to dying as our Medicare and Social Security are ripped away from us.
    America has collectively gone Insane

    --
    Geek Hillbilly
  25. Re:Hmmm well by goose-incarnated · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The parallels with the rise of Nazism in the 1930s are quite disturbing. Trump wants to deport 11 million people, persecute Muslims, force other countries to respect and build walls for America, and all on the back of a populist campaign of lies and blame.

    The Republicans control both houses, the presidency and will get to appoint an ultra conservative to the Supreme Court. Trump won by appealing particularly to white males, a group that thinks it is repressed and under attack when in fact it has all the power and is now persecuting everyone else. The President has admitted sexually assaulting women, and is being sued for the Trump University scam, used cheap immigrant labour to build his empire and wants to put his political rival in jail.

    The world is turning to shit again. I honestly thought this couldn't happen, that we had learned from the 1930s and would never allow the same mistakes to be made, but it has happened.

    And that above, people, is how you lose an election.

    No one likes smug assholes, and they like them even less when the doom-and-gloom fails to materialise.

    --
    I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
  26. Re:One party rule by KozmoStevnNaut · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's gonna be Not Very Fun At All to be a minority in the US for the next couple of years.

    --
    Eat the rich.
  27. The silver linings. by jcr · · Score: 5, Insightful

    1) Both the Bush and Clinton crime families are finished. They will never hold any power in either side of the Ruling Party again.
    2) Trump is ego driven. He has no actual policy agenda.
    3) Trey Gowdy might actually have enough integrity to prosecute criminals from both sides of the Ruling Party. Obama gave Bush's minions a walk as a professional courtesy.
    4) This defeat is an opportunity for the Democrats to clean house, big time. (Not that I really expect them to do so, but still.)

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  28. Re:One party rule by Z00L00K · · Score: 3, Insightful

    First Trump came and messed up the Primaries for the Republicans and collected a lot of enemies, and now he bashed Clinton and probably gained more enemies.

    This will be fun.

    But I think that Trump will have a tough time with the congress - and it will be a sour awakening for both parties that now there's a president that none of the sides likes and they have to revisit what they have to do to control him - and gain support in the long run.

    In many political issues Trump is leaning to the center but the news has bashed him for his sometimes outrageous claims of building a wall and so on.

    --
    If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
  29. Re:Im confused how Republicans could win so much by ScentCone · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I don't know where the extra Republican votes came from.

    From people sick to death of a corrupt, lying Clinton and the totally transparent corruption of the DNC and all of the media machinery that was trying to shove her down everyone's throats. If you still think this was about "Russian hacking" or any other sort of external influence, you're exactly the sort of out-of-touch person that probably thought Clinton was entitled to more of the sort of power she's been so eager to abuse and enrich herself with over the years.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  30. Re:Hmmm well by Mashiki · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The parallels with the rise of Nazism in the 1930s are quite disturbing. Trump wants to deport 11 million people, persecute Muslims, force other countries to respect and build walls for America, and all on the back of a populist campaign of lies and blame.

    Sure are! Media was in the tank for a single candidate. Told the world and the american people if they didn't vote one way, the world was going to end. That those people were racists/bigots/sexists/misogynists/delplorables/etc. That "white people are the problem" and they were "all poor and uneducated." And the people said Fuck and You. In that order. Trump wants to deport 11 million illegals AKA people breaking the law. And enforce the laws that are on the books, unlike the current "we'll just turn a blind eye." And if you're an ICE agent, you'd better let that illegal go--or we'll can your ass. He wants to restrict muslim immigration, especially from countries where fundamentalist islam and repression of women is the norm, and the murder of gays is not only great--it's a past time. How's that unrestricted importation working out for you in Europe? Trojan horse scandal, Rotherham, 700% increase in rapes, sexual assaults, and robberies? Just to start with. And wants to actually enforce the borders that exist, instead of having them as an unrestricted flow of people who want to enter the US illegally to gain citizenship to boot. While said illegals piss all over people who waited in line, followed the rules, and became citizens.

    --
    Om, nomnomnom...
  31. Re:Very true by Solandri · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Early in the primaries, Sanders was really close to Clinton in elected delegate count - within about 10%-15%.. But all the media reported the delegate count including the DNC-selected superdelgates, making it appear as if Clinton had an insurmountable 40%-60% lead. That had the effect of discouraging potential Sanders voters from bothering to vote because the primary race was "already over", as well as swaying undecideds to not seriously consider Sanders because "he didn't have a realistic chance of winning."

    One party deliberately manipulated their primary process to select the candidate the party bosses wanted, instead of the candidate the voters wanted. The other party grudgingly accepted the voters' choice of nominee even though the party bosses thought it was crazy stupid. The first party lost the Presidency. The latter party won it. Turns out listening to the voters' choice instead of the party bosses' opinions pays off in a democracy. Who'd've thunk it.

  32. Better plan for the economic consequences.... by rahvin112 · · Score: 1, Insightful

    DOW Futures were down almost a 1000 points when it looked like Trump might actually win because of all the idiots voting for 3rd parties. Expect a significant stock market crash tommorow, by the time he takes office the ecomomy is going to be in recession unless he repudiates his threats to reneg on the existing free trade agreements and other economic suicide policies he's promissed to implement to placate the ignorant. He's scared the business community so badly that most companies will halt investments, within a month layoffs will start because everyone is holding back waiting to see how badly he fucks up trade and the economy. Negative views like this become self fullfiling in very short order because emotion drives the market.

    The great recession that Obama narrowly stopped turning into a full depression is going to cycle back around. And just like Bush's first term when R's controlled both houses they will cut taxes, increase spending and sink the countries future. But maybe we'll get lucky and he'll start a nuclear war because someone insulted him.

  33. Fascism has come to America. by meglon · · Score: 1, Insightful

    75 years ago over 400,000 of our troops fought a war against nations lead by people like Trump. Every person who voted for him just spit on their graves.

    --
    Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
    1. Re:Fascism has come to America. by clonehappy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You have to understand that they can't help it. They're running a program they've been coded to run, just like a computer. Anything that's not in 100% agreement with their opinion is automatically flagged as "hate", "dangerous", "scary", and must be stopped "at all costs". Do we blame the computer when it executes the commands it is told to execute and then gives an incorrect result? No, we'd blame the programmer.

      We need to look no further than the schools/universities, media, celebrities, and those who control them (the programmers) to see why leftism is losing. Radical leftism is a failed ideology, but like all malevolent actors they just assume they can brute force their code onto enough systems so that they control the botnet. They've programmed these "machines" to react in this way. Unlike computers, however, we can't just wipe the hard drive and start with a fresh image--and unlike coding we can't debug the routine to see why it provides the incorrect result.

      All the rest of us can do is continue to spread the words of truth, honesty, love and liberty rather than the inverted result you get from the malfunctioning machines.

  34. Re:Hmmm well by codeButcher · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Actually, first priority will be packing up the statue of liberty and shipping it back to France with a rude note and a poop emoji.

    It was hollow from the start in any case. The symbolism is quite appropriate.

    --
    Free, as in your money being freed from the confines of your account.
  35. Re:One party rule by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1, Insightful

    It's gonna be Not Very Fun At All to be a illegal alien in the US for the next couple of years.
    FTFY

    What actual evidence do you have that Trump will attack minorities? Quoting Democrats does not count as evidence.

    --
    Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  36. Re:Hmmm well by Mashiki · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Unless you get sick, and can no longer get health insurance...

    Considering people are already hitting the point where they can't afford the health insurance in the first place. Hell my buddy in Alaska saw his premium go from $400/mo w/2200 deductible to $1100/mo w/$9000 delectable. Can you afford that? My neighbor in Central Florida? Well he's lucky, his 28 year old daughter and her husband? Nope. $250/mo pre-obamcare to $4800/mo with w/14k deductible? A lot of people are now worse off then they were before.

    --
    Om, nomnomnom...
  37. Re:Fucki voting your conscience by I'm+New+Around+Here · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Vote for the damn issues, AND, whatever or whoever serves their ACTUALLY HAPPENING, however incrementally.

    This means NO THIRD PARTY shit,

    What if I think voting third party is the best way to accomplish the issues I care about?

    NO PROTEST VOTES,

    I agree with that, as my reply above said.

    PARTICIPATING IN PRIMARIES,

    Yes, but they aren't the be-all-end-all some think they are, as this year showed.

    and VOTING FOR ONE OF THE TWO.

    Sorry, now I have to tell you to fuck off. I vote for who I want, from whichever party, for my own reason. If that happens to be NOT one of the two main parties, so be it. It is my choice, my vote, not yours. So, again, kindly fuck off.

    FUCK.

    Not tonight, my wife is too depressed.

    --
    If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
  38. Re:Hmmm well by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Trump doesn't give a shit about the law or about the people he claims to represent. He has been screwing ordinary, hard working Americans his entire life. Using cheap immigrant labour to build his business empire, setting up scams like Trump University. He's a billionaire who was given a huge loan by his parents, not a man of the people.

    You know nothing about Europe. The child abuse in Rotherham was by people of Asian descent, mostly from Pakistan. They and their parents mostly came here in the 60s and 70s, before we even joined the EU, from our old Commonwealth empire. I happen to be half Asian, so FUCK YOU for even playing the race card.

    Deporting people isn't going to make America great again, unless you think working for pennies on the Dollar is great.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  39. I am proud of this country by Trachman · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I really am.

    To survive such a powerful stream of filth from massmedia, and to win in landslide.... He is the man, he rocks! True Mr. ImPerfect....

    Also... sort of... shame on that arrogant MINORITY who treat MAJORITY of the country as deplorables, sexists, misogynists, racists, xenophobes.

    1. Re:I am proud of this country by ooloorie · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Deplorable is a judgement call, but the majority of people are sexist, misogynist, racist xenophobes. Nobody wants to believe that they could be any of those things, so they don't look inside and actually figure out which of those beliefs are based on some bullshit programming from early in their formative years

      I think the problem with progressives is pretty much analogous to the problem with Christian conservatives. Christian conservatives believe that deep down, they are promiscuous, wanton homosexuals, and they need the state to protect them from themselves. And progressives believe they are "sexist, misogynist, racist xenophobes" and need the state to protect them from themselves. And the sad thing is: you are both right. Where you are wrong is assuming that everybody else is like you.

  40. Re:One party rule by Rakarra · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Elizabeth Warren decided not to run against Hillary.
    Joe Biden stepped aside for Hillary.

    Biden vs Trump, what an election that would be. Maybe that could still be 2020.
    Tim Kaine isn't looking too bad, though I don't think he's president-material, not yet.

  41. Re:One party rule by AaronW · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Obamacare is literally keeping my sister alive. The medication she needs to survive costs $5000/month and is not covered by her employer's insurance (she's a teacher at a private school). Thanks to Obamacare she was able to get into an exchange and buy insurance that does cover her medication for only $500/month. Being on a teacher's salary, my parents who are retired help her out. With her pre-existing conditions, there's no way any insurance company would take her and she'd quickly hit the limits with the medical issues she's had since every couple of years something major comes up. Her medication is so expensive because it is derived from human blood because her immune system has shut down and isn't making antibodies. And Trump's plan with tax deductions won't come close to paying for the medication, especially on a teachers salary where she doesn't pay much if any federal taxes.

    --
    This post is encrypted twice with ROT-13. Documenting or attempting to crack this encryption is illegal.
  42. Re:Hmmm well by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I knew it wouldn't be long before someone would Godwin this thread. The slight difference is that Trump doesn't want to exterminate the entire race of Hispanic people, and isn't intent on conquering some Lebensraum for his master race to spread out into Canada. Don't forget, we've had men of questionable morals in the White House before, and we certainly will again. Probably women too, in the future. Trump is an arrogant ass, but seriously comparing him to one of the most evil mass-murderers in modern history demonstrates a lack of perspective, or at least a severe lack of faith in the people of the US, to think anyone would go along with such schemes.

    I'd hope that you can now understand the angst of conservative voters when President Obama won the last two elections. Or perhaps I can at least empathize with you a bit because of that, if you're not feeling very empathetic yourself yet. Many conservatives predicted the end of America as we know it, and they were just as wrong. I believe America is still a strong country, generally made up of good people who just want to get along with their neighbors and live their lives in peace. Maybe you think that's naive or optimistic, but so be it.

    If nothing else, just keep reminding yourself that you'll have another chance to vote him out in four years.

    --
    Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
  43. Why Trump won by LichtSpektren · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Don't be daft and lie to yourself that Trump won because America is overwhelmingly populated by misogynists, homophobes, racists, and xenophobes.

    He won because he spoke up on behalf of the workers who lost their jobs to outsourcing, due to free trade deals and H1-B1 programs and illegal immigration that favor big business at the expense of the middle class. Clinton pretty much openly pledged her allegiance to Wall Street, so those desperate for work already made up their minds.

    That's definitely the biggest issue. There's also the fact that the Democrats are still supporting Planned Parenthood even though they've been caught multiple times illegally selling baby carcases to maximize their profits and not reporting ongoing sexual abuse, and the fact that Clinton's the war hawkiest war hawk in recent memory and people don't much like having America bombing every country it can get its grubby hands on. But hey, keep telling yourself that it's because everybody else is so uneducated and votes out of fear. I'm sure Trump won't win his reelection off of your same mistakes.

  44. "it was her turn" by perpenso · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The DNC's failure started long before that, they should not have attempted a coronation.

    This year's Democrat primary was truly weird, no Presidential incumbent but only a single prominent Democrat running? How the hell did that happen? It should have been a crowded field like 2008. Somehow the party machine convinced other prominent Democrats to stay out of the race, "it was her turn". There was one token opponent who mostly said he largely agreed with her and that she would be a good President. And there was the Independent running as a Democrat, a party outsider, Bernie.

    It should have been a crowded Democratic primary field like 2008 and a more viable candidate emerging like in 2008. But that didn't work out for the party machine's preferred candidate last time did it, so they worked to avoid that same mistake and essentially ran here "unopposed" in the primary. The shock of Bernie doing so well should have told them something, but no, "it was her turn".

    [sarcasm] DNC, thank you for Trump. You found the one candidate he could beat [/sarcasm].

    1. Re: "it was her turn" by sjames · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It is notable that most analysis showed Sanders being stronger against Trump than Clinton. If they had really wanted the best chance of having someone at least nominally a Democrat in office, they shouldn't have pushed the coronation.

      Those few points advantage Sanders was projected to have over Clinton would have likely turned the election. Not to mention they would have avoided the defections that hurt them in the House and Senate.

  45. Re:One party rule by jcr · · Score: 1, Insightful

    If the party had rallied around Bernie Sanders, Trump would have lost.

    Nah. Bernie is a commie rat bastard, and the country isn't quite ready to vote for bread lines. The Bernie Bros had more enthusiasm than Hillary's Harpies, but they wouldn't have changed the outcome.

    Now, if the Democrats had nominated a decent human being, it would be a different story. If they want a landslide next time, they could nominate Ellen DeGeneres, for example.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  46. Re:One party rule by Feral+Nerd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It was predicted in the primaries. Hillary Clinton was the weakest possible candidate against Trump. If the party had rallied around Bernie Sanders, Trump would have lost. So many of the Trump votes were anti-Hillary protest votes. A vote for Hillary in the primaries was a vote for Trump.

    Voting for Trump out of protest is like shooting your self in the foot to cure foot fungus.

  47. Re:Hmmm well by Mashiki · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Trump doesn't give a shit about the law or about the people he claims to represent. He has been screwing ordinary, hard working Americans his entire life. Using cheap immigrant labour to build his business empire, setting up scams like Trump University. He's a billionaire who was given a huge loan by his parents, not a man of the people.

    Oh good, now we've got your bullshit out of the way. Remember that part where Hillary wanted to enforce no-fly-zones against Russia in Syira, and operated multiple pay-for-play scandals?

    You know nothing about Europe. The child abuse in Rotherham was by people of Asian descent, mostly from Pakistan. They and their parents mostly came here in the 60s and 70s, before we even joined the EU, from our old Commonwealth empire. I happen to be half Asian, so FUCK YOU for even playing the race card.

    Oh so which is it? They're asian or pakistani? They came here in the 60's and 70's? Or multiple people who were arrested were "new immigrants" and were in their 20's and 30's. According to the court records. I also happen to be half-asian(actual half-asian, not the lovely code-word that UK and EU media likes to use for people from the middle east). So fuck you for trying to be a weaseling little shit, and trying to crawl out of it.

    Deporting people isn't going to make America great again, unless you think working for pennies on the Dollar is great.

    Gotcha. Ensuring that companies actually employ americans = bad. Stopping the flow of illegals that cause crimes = bad. Bet you're right there cheering on H1B's replacing Americans and them being forced to train their replacement too.

    --
    Om, nomnomnom...
  48. Re:16 Celebrities who said they would leave the U. by lucm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This election was just like the Arab spring. Take the information monopoly out of the hands of the biased elites and use social media to reach everyone with the real message.

    They did their best to sabotage him but Twitter and Facebook are the main reasons for the Trump victory.

    --
    lucm, indeed.
  49. Re:Hmmm well by Shane_Optima · · Score: 1, Insightful

    People in the US need to realise that US guns in US hands kill a LOT of people around the world.

    Cut the ignorant self-flagellating shit! This is one of the many reasons why the left is suffering in this country! First of, American-made guns are ridiculously overpriced, particularly in those poor-er parts of the world where these conflicts of the worst. The specs and machines are freely available.

    Beyond that, people like you still quote six or even seven figure casualty numbers in Iraq, despite the fact that those people overwhelmingly did NOT die from American guns in American hands. They largely died because they killed each other, and we (incompetently) failed to prevent that. Yes, Iraq was moronic and caused (and continues to cause) untold suffering. We all know that. That doesn't mean you're going to score any points with this Fahrenheit 9/11 level hyperbole any more. Stop destroying the left. A lot of us would really like to live here.

    Mexican Walls

    Which is (in the form of a literal wall) extremely stupid, but despite the fact that ELEVEN MILLION people have made it over here illegally, wreaking havoc on the economy and societies in myriad wars (e.g. minimum wage cheating), people like you still want to imply that his problem shouldn't be solved, or that it will do damage if we solve it.

    Nonsense, self-destructive nonsense. You can't argue it's infeasible to ship back 11M illegal immigrants and then five minutes later talk about how "a wall" (no not a physical one, and sure Trump is a populist dumbass for all his statements implying such) is inherently undesirable. The solution, the compromise has been (for reasonable people) very clear for literally decades now:

    Republicans get their "wall"; Democrats get "path to citizenship" amnesty for the millions of people who have settled here for years and are great, contributing members of society. Every reasonable person on either side of the aisle should have been agitating for this compromise. Both of these things are correct and moral to desire.

    The one thing this doesn't address, wild card of how many legal immigrants to let in, is something both sides need to agree to disagree on, but illegal immigration has never, ever been an acceptable alternative to any thinking person.

    grabbing women inappropriately

    Like Bill fucking Clinton, the man Hillary said she was going to put in charge of "fixing our economy" (presumably as a member of her cabinet.)

    I'm not going to analyze his quotes to death any more (guess what, he most certainly did not admit to assaulting anyone. His entire obnoxiously macho thesis was that the women "let him" grope them; that is generally what's known as "consent" to reasonable people); the point should be clear by now that sexual scandals have run their course. Rapists should be arrested and imprisoned. If there's not enough evidence because women don't tend to come forward until decades later (generally only after someone hits the headlines), then our police and more importantly our culture need to change. Slut-shaming needs to be banished from the Earth[1], and quite frankly women need to start carrying guns (or at least pepper spray), fighting back, and not taking any of this shit lying down. (That may seem to veer perilously close to victim-blaming, but the sad fact is if there's a rash of car thefts you really do have to mention, at some point, the importance of locking your doors or getting Lojack.)

    But that's orthogonal to someone's political significance. If he's committed crimes (against women or against anyone else), arrest the motherfucker. If not, oh well. People are pretty much bored with sexual scandals in politics right now. This shit literally jumped the shark like 17 years ago, but the left somehow has not gotten the message.

    potential dismantling of major world alliances and free trade deals, and the potenti

  50. Re:One party rule by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    See this attitude is part of the problem. It's the "everybody who doesn't agree with me is Hitler" attitude. It causes people like you and many others - especially the talking heads in the media, on Twitter or wherever, to paint broad sections of the population as racist, sexist, homophobes. It's just not true. Trump was only 6 ticks behind with female graduates, for example. Ask yourself why.

  51. Re:One party rule by Mashiki · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Trump's policy is to treat "Muslims" as second class human beings. You can't undo voting for that easily.

    You mean those "muslims" in fundamentalist countries, that already treat women, blacks, and anyone who doesn't follow their belief as second class human beings? Oh, I forgot. Restricting immigration from those countries is "bad" just like ensuring that you have national borders is bad.

    --
    Om, nomnomnom...
  52. Re:Peter Thiel for SCOTUS. Shut down the FED and I by Kiuas · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Hoping against hope that this will happen. Shut down the Fed, IRS, FHA, EPA, departments of energy, small business, education, get rid of all departments that are unconstitutional. Get libertarians, objectivists, ancaps into positions in SCOTUS and other powerful positions. Shut down everything public, get rid of SS, Medicare, labour laws and regulations, income and wealth taxes. This planet needs individual freedoms on that level at least in one country.

    So, what you're essentially saying is that you want the US to turn into a full-on plutocracy in which one will simply die without a job/income? And this at a time where menial jobs are fast disappearing because automation and machines are fast becoming more effective than human workers? And at the same time you want to make sure getting education becomes more difficult if not altogether impossible for people who cannot afford to take massive debt.

    Do you understand what life under such a system would actually be like? It would essentially destroy any social mobility that you guys have left and mean that anyone born into a poor/uneducated family would permanently stay that way.

    If this is the direction you guys want to be heading to, I'm doubly glad I'm not american, that's just lunacy.

    --
    "It is the business of the future to be dangerous" -Alfred North Whitehead
  53. Re:Interesting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The people that have the guns have no problem with Mr. Trump.

  54. Re:Most perceptive comment of the night by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    He thanked his parents, siblings, and children. Praised Hillary's service to the country without making any crass remarks about her. Stated he'll represent all Americans, even the ones who didn't vote for him, and to make put unemployed Americans to work building the country to make it great again. That last part sounded bit like the FDR's new deal.

    Keep in mind when Trump was first exploring running for the presidency before Obama, it was as a Democrat. I don't think Trump cares about political parties and will reach out to the Democrats to get the things "he want" done when Republican support aren't enough. What I think will happen is that he'll be disgusted by the pettiness and bullshit of being a politician and fail to get any of plans implemented the way he wants it.

  55. Re: Not a level playing field by MachineShedFred · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You can't elect women that don't run.

    There are many reasons why Congress and the population as a whole don't sample equally.

    --
    Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
  56. Re:Lizards, lizards everywhere by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And so people voted for the blabbering airhead instead of the lizard. People of or for the left: please learn your lesson. Reform politics. Create an "alt-left"... or just continue down your current path, keep making your token snide remarks and behold as the right destroys everything.

    The lesson here is that the democratic party is not left-wing. The Green party is our only real left-wing party, and it is a whisper of a murmur of passage in the night compared to the other parties. The Democratic party is a centrist, status-quo-maintaining party, and this is a time when people are demanding change. Remember how Obama ran on the Hope (you don't get drone striked or indefinitely detained) and Change (prior administration's policies very little) platform? Problem is, he failed to meet people's hopes and he delivered very little change. Racism is clearly still as rampant as ever so having a black president clearly didn't accomplish anything, and nothing has really changed. The world is still at the brink of war, the same number of people are still seeking employment because the unemployment rate is still a lie (just as it was under republican presidents in the past, this is a bi-partisan effort to fuck us) and he's going to let Standing Rock "play out for a few weeks" after promising that the natives there would not stand alone. So provably, clearly, undeniably, the Democrats could not run on the platform of Change when even their color-changed candidate couldn't provide any. They ran on the basis of maintaining the status quo at a time when people are clearly done doing that.

    At best, the DNC is a bunch of incompetent raving lunatics. At worst, they threw the election.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  57. Re:One party rule by MachineShedFred · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Don't forget that the DNC actively encouraged people to vote in the Republican primaries for Trump, because that's who they wanted to run against instead of a more moderate, experienced, and level headed candidate.

    They got who they wanted, and they rigged their own primary to nominate their candidate; then they fucked the dog and lost the election through smugness and not paying attention to what the voters were actually telling since the early primaries.

    They lost an election. The whole country will lose far more than that. Thanks, DNC. And I say this as a registered Republican, who did not vote for Trump.

    --
    Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
  58. Not only that... by Ecuador · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Not only that, but they pushed hard (with dubious means as we found out) to have Clinton win the nomination, when she is probably the "Democrat" that Democrat voters themselves like the least. And "like the least" is a euphemism when many outright hate her. ALMOST ANYONE else would have had an easy time against Donald Trump, but no, they didn't want people like Bernie etc, Clinton was the DNC's favorite gal...

    --
    Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
  59. Re:You're forgetting Mike Pence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Pence is the real danger. Funerals for miscarriages, hates LGBTs, and is against all forms of birth control and even protection against STDs. Stock up on Plan B and condoms now before they're banned.

  60. Re:One party rule by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It did the same immediately after Brexit, and then climbed back over where it was after the realization that the Sky-Is-Falling crowd was wrong yet again. Brexit 2: The Brexening.

  61. Re:Not a level playing field by goose-incarnated · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How is it that over half the population is women and yet they account for only 20% of congress?

    For the same reason that over half the population is women and yet they account for only 15% of the prison population... they take fewer risks.

    --
    I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
  62. Re:One party rule by nehumanuscrede · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The fix isn't ObamaCare.

    Your sisters premiums are likely to continue going up btw. At some point she won't be able to afford them either and will be in the same boat.

    The problem is the fact that we allow drug companies to gouge the shit out of the folks who need the medicines to begin with.
    Once the medical and pharmaceutical industries becomes regulated, all these problems about needing insurance to afford health care will cease to exist.

    There is absolutely ZERO reason a cancer treatment should cost over $100,000 a year. None. Nada. Zip.
    One of my family members watched their entire retirement savings vanish because of this bullshit.
    ( and they STILL died of Cancer )

    Look past the short term solutions and work towards the long term goal. Healthcare is one of those things that really should be regulated.

  63. Re:Not a level playing field by Mashiki · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Really? How many women are CEOs of Fortune 500 companies? How many women have been president? Vice president? How is it that over half the population is women and yet they account for only 20% of congress? If you honestly think it is a level playing field then you are either delusional or sexist.

    Why does it matter? Why do you want to force people into positions that they don't want? Why do you believe that someones genitals, or sexual identity is important? Do you also believe the same thing about an individuals race? Why does it seem your most important qualification to hire someone, or have them in office is something that they're born with.

    All of those things? If you want to put people a head of others based on characteristics that they were born with instead of their skill, ability, or the earned merit that they gained from hard work. You're no different then a sexist that believed that only men could be doctors or politicians in the 1910's and earlier. Or a racist in the 1960's that believed those "blacks and/or mexicans" could never be educated enough to succeed.

    --
    Om, nomnomnom...
  64. Re:Not a level playing field by mpercy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And if Dr. Condoleeza Rice had run, we'd probably have elected the first black woman. But she didn't.

  65. Perhaps by argStyopa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If the democrats learn a single lesson from this election, it's that:
    Democracy is compromise.
    Starting a negotiation with the premise (stated stridently and repeatedly) that anyone who disagrees with your opinion is a complete and utter fucking moron doesn't make you right. It makes people hate you.

    --
    -Styopa
  66. Dissent becomes patriotic again by mi · · Score: 1, Insightful

    After eight years of being racist, dissent is patriotic once again. Congratulations, America.

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
  67. Re:One party rule by Charcharodon · · Score: 1, Insightful
    Define your terms please. A minority in many places in the US these days is defined as white, male, and employed. In much of California being white of any gender meets the traditional definition of a minority.

    Now I get what you are insinuating:

    It's not going to be very fun being an illegal criminal from south of the border since they will be sent home in larger numbers. (Deported or jailed and then deported)
    It's not going to be very fun being a non-criminal illegal from south of the border, since they too will be sent home in larger numbers. (Deported)
    Being an American hating foreigner with ties to violent overseas groups, that for some odd reason rather live in the US than their own country of origin. Will be less than easy from now on. (Deported or never allowed to visit the US in the first place)
    Being a Black Lives Matter rioter/looter will no longer be a free pass. Not talking about the people with the protest signs but the jackasses burning down everything and looting stores. (Jail or stand your ground CCP holders, also know as being gunned down in the street)
    Being an unemployed social program free rider. (get a job or get kicked off)
    Being a government bureaucrat used to big pay, big benefits, and lots of power. Pretty sure there is going to be a big surge in people from the FBI and Justice Dept.updating their Linkedin accounts here in a month or two.

    The problem is those groups of people are no longer a small "minority" anymore. We are pretty close to parity, if we haven't already pushed passed it, on those that make verse those that take, and people are sick of it. Plenty of white people fall into those categories too, so save your non-arguments of racism for someone who believes that non-sense.

  68. Re: Trump 2016!!! by marklark · · Score: 2, Insightful

    As opposed to the current transfer of public goods, services, and privileges to private (sometimes foreign) interests through access to the highest levels of the gov't courtesy of donations to the Clinton Foundation?

    I and many other Americans decided to risk your hypothetical instead of continuing the current reality.

  69. Re:Necessary by Patent+Lover · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Donald Trump is in the elite of elites. He was born with a fucking gold plated platinum spoon in his mouth. Trump could give a flying fuck about "those in between". Wake the fuck up.

  70. Re: Trump 2016!!! by thegarbz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Can't do worse than Obama? Shit he was doing worse than Obama from day 1 of his campaign. Well you'll be yearning for him back soon.

  71. BS by s.petry · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Trump won on platform, and was the only person putting forth any platform. Immigration reform and protecting the US/Mexico border was the first part of his speeches and people latched on. Politicians have barely paid those issues lip service in the last 40 years, let alone done anything to fix it. In fact many will argue that the Democrats want more of the same because it increases their voting base.

    Trump actively questioned the decisions in keeping the US at war in the Middle East where thousands of US Soldiers have been killed and hundreds of thousands have suffered permanent disability. The President and Hillary planned and achieved massive destabilization in the Middle East and Africa. They failed to hold VA executives accountable for failures which have led to the suicides of thousands of vets and exacerbated health issues.

    Trump actively discussed the unfair economics at play which has greatly increased wealth disparity in the US, the massive amounts of unemployment and underemployment, and massive reduction in the middle class.

    Trump actively talked about media and political corruption, which was made very transparent despite the efforts of the people involved in corruption and holding power. Drain the Swamp should ring a bell.

    Trump sending mean tweets was the only thing the media talked about, but people saw him talking and heard the messages on platform which the media happily ignored.

    Compared to Hillary who wanted to do everything President Obama did but times 10. She only latched on to immigration because she saw how much she was losing and tried to pull base Democrats back to her side. Even then, like so many issues, people simply found no way to believe what she said she would do.

    I have said for years that we were due for a soft revolution, and that is exactly what happened. I have posted numerous times that Trump has a great shot because the average American is fed up. If the soft revolution does not work, we will get to a hard revolution. As I have also said, we hope it does not need to get to that point. Democracy still works, and that fact alone has given a huge number of people hope. Corrupt cronies don't always win, and people's voices are still heard.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  72. Re: Trump 2016!!! by Yunzil · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I wouldn't vote for him in 2020 if he cured cancer single-handedly. He's a vile, disgusting failure of a human being.

  73. Re: Trump 2016!!! by Darinbob · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Some who voted against him, you mean. American voters aren't one dimensional. We have pro-gun lesbian hedge fund managers living across the street from anti-gun evangelical illegal immigrants!