Technically Hillary Clinton could still be elected President.

ligerdub

K-9 wrote: »

Well we shouldn't really believe Russian denials either if we are going down the spy agencies are lying, double crossing scoundrel lines!

Agreed.

Amerika

The mainstream media for over a month have been reporting on mass Republican electoral college elector defections from Trump. But the results are in. Trump secured 304 electoral votes. It amounted to 2 fewer than he earned on election day. But eight electors tried to defect from Hillary Clinton. Clinton secured 227 which was 5 fewer than she earned on election day. Three Democratic electors tried to vote for candidates other than Clinton but were disallowed because of state rules binding them to the statewide popular vote winner. Seems the mainstream media is the main culprit of ‘Fake News.’

I remember back in 2008 many in the mainstream media were writing epitaphs on the demise of the Republican party. But under president Obama Democrats have lost 13 Senate seats and 69 House seats in Congress, 12 governorships, 30 state legislative chambers, more than 900 state legislative seats, and now the presidency.

And since the election many of the high ranking Democrats are doubling down on commitments to the reasons for their losses. Sometimes it seems true that you can’t fix stupid.

Inquitus

Amerika wrote: »

Sometimes it seems true that you can’t fix stupid.

Indeed, and vast swathes of the American populace are exactly that, when people are too stupid to vote for their best interests, educate themselves on the issues, or be able to spot fake news spread on facebook, this is what you get.

m1ck007

Seems like democrat sympathisers are labelling anything pro trump as fake news and anything negative about clinton fake news also.

FreudianSlippers

Amerika wrote: »

I remember back in 2008 many in the mainstream media were writing epitaphs on the demise of the Republican party.

I would argue that the traditional GOP is truly dead when you look at the shift to more-and-more conservative orthodoxy over the past decade or two. Trump's campaign was a prime example of this focus on social conservatism under the guise of economic grievance as opposed to the traditionally economically guided policy of the GOP (whereby there was room for deviation from social policy in the past, so long as economic policy - particularly the 'small government' ideals - were followed).

The fact that Trump's social conservatism trumped (for lack of a better phrase) conservative economics from an early stage in the primaries this year shows a growing gap between the "Whig-Republicans"/"Yankee Republicans" and the current batch of Republicans backing Trump. The fact is that Trump's economic policy is inconsistent with both itself and his social policy; but the Trump supporters don't seem to understand or, worse, care.

I would argue this is evident in both the election of Trump on an untenable economic platform, as well as the "success" of the Republican party in enticing non-educated voters; historically, the GOP would have cleaned up with college-educated voters.

I have a feeling that both the Democratic party and Republican party will look significantly different in 10 years time, but the Republican party may be in for a split before the next Presidential election depending on what happens in the next 4 years. I do not think traditional GOP voters are necessarily sharing the same economic values as the Democrats - who appear themselves to be polarising to an economic leftist position.

FreudianSlippers

m1ck007 wrote: »

Seems like democrat sympathisers are labelling anything pro trump as fake news and anything negative about clinton fake news also.

Fake news is fake news: it either is or it isn't.

K-9

Stop video dumping please.

Amerika

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I would argue that the traditional GOP is truly dead when you look at the shift to more-and-more conservative orthodoxy over the past decade or two. Trump's campaign was a prime example of this focus on social conservatism under the guise of economic grievance as opposed to the traditionally economically guided policy of the GOP (whereby there was room for deviation from social policy in the past, so long as economic policy - particularly the 'small government' ideals - were followed).

The fact that Trump's social conservatism trumped (for lack of a better phrase) conservative economics from an early stage in the primaries this year shows a growing gap between the "Whig-Republicans"/"Yankee Republicans" and the current batch of Republicans backing Trump. The fact is that Trump's economic policy is inconsistent with both itself and his social policy; but the Trump supporters don't seem to understand or, worse, care.

I would argue this is evident in both the election of Trump on an untenable economic platform, as well as the "success" of the Republican party in enticing non-educated voters; historically, the GOP would have cleaned up with college-educated voters.

I have a feeling that both the Democratic party and Republican party will look significantly different in 10 years time, but the Republican party may be in for a split before the next Presidential election depending on what happens in the next 4 years. I do not think traditional GOP voters are necessarily sharing the same economic values as the Democrats - who appear themselves to be polarising to an economic leftist position.

The Trump phenomena is an outlier. If I could point to only one thing Trump said that won him the election, it would be this: "We are going to fix our inner cities and rebuild our highways, bridges, tunnels, airports, schools, hospitals. We're going to rebuild our infrastructure, which will become, by the way, second to none. And we will put millions of our people to work as we rebuild it." Although much of this could be considered traditional Democratic policies, I think it resonated with people because it was teamed with a level of fiscal responsibility. Obama spent trillions and originally promised to only spend on shovel ready projects. But it didn’t turn out that way and the money primarily went to things managed by political cronies (IMO), it didn't create sustainable jobs except in the government sector, and only added to the nation's deficit. Democrats have been continually losing the middle class for 8 years now, as they have become the party of elitists, leftists, minorities and freaks. Conservatives have found the correct mix, even if it has moved from their core principles, and moved more towards social conservatism because that is what appeals to the voters. And political parties continually change. I have heard this a lot lately... "Today's Republicans are yesterday's Democrats... And today's Democrats are yesterday's Socialists."

Riva10

Inquitus wrote: »

Indeed, and vast swathes of the American populace are exactly that, when people are too stupid to vote for their best interests, educate themselves on the issues, or be able to spot fake news spread on facebook, this is what you get.

We do not have to look at America for stupid. Look closer to home (Éire) Look at what we have elected to lead us in goverment.

oscarBravo

Riva10 wrote: »

We do not have to look at America for stupid. Look closer to home (Éire) Look at what we have elected to lead us in goverment.

Oh, I dunno. Whatever else you can say about our government, it doesn't appear to be a naked and shameless kleptocracy.

Inquitus

oscarBravo wrote: »

Oh, I dunno. Whatever else you can say about our government, it doesn't appear to be a naked and shameless kleptocracy.

Yep we are a bastion of integrity by comparison. I'd take Clare Daly over most US Politicians and that's saying something!

FreudianSlippers

Inquitus wrote: »

Yep we are a bastion of integrity by comparison. I'd take Clare Daly over most US Politicians and that's saying something!

I'd take Trump over that idiot any day.

Riva10

Inquitus wrote: »

Yep we are a bastion of integrity by comparison. I'd take Clare Daly over most US Politicians and that's saying something!

I would take Clare Daly too but maybe I'd get arrested if caught

Amerika

"Technically Hillary Clinton could still be elected President."


At this point... in 2020, maybe. But in 2016... Sorry, no cigar!

Overheal

yeah.... this thread is a bit pointless now isnt it.

Inquitus

Yep, if its not going to be Donald then it will be President Pence who always reminds me of the Emperor out of Star Wars, although that said the Emperor is probably more tolerant....

ligerdub

Oooooh get you.