2016 U.S. Presidential Race Megathread Mark 2.

RobertKK wrote: »

You know the way Trump is sexist and had the first woman ever to manage a winning presidential campaign for him, and you know how he hates the LGBT community by hiring Peter Thiel who is openly gay to be part of his transitional team.
Shouldn't Trump have avoided all this to live up to the stereotype that some people want to believe?
Sexist, homophobic...

Just like that well known racist George W Bush had two African American secretaries of state.

RobertKK wrote: »

It went further than that.
The Trump campaign also said “views do not represent the tens of millions of Americans who are uniting behind our campaign.”

That is disassociating themselves from the KKK.

People can be irrational about feeling safe. I live alone, late last night as I went to bed I played Dominique by the singing nun, it kinda scared me as I thought of American Horror Story and the Asylum where the song was played constantly...it was irrational fear, but the mind can create irrational fear.

The feeling safe bit was a joke at the Trump team. I specified that I was not serious about it.

I saw what it said, I thought the repulsive line was stronger but it is best to have both I suppose.
It is a technical statement from his campaign. It came late and most importantly of all it hasn't reached those who might perpetrate these attacks in his name (even if he would rather it otherwise). He needs to be clear on this because people don't see it this way. Obviously a formulated statement from his campaign team was not near sufficient to counterattack his own previous words.

K-9 wrote: »

How do they work out each state's electoral college vote? I assume it is based on population?

In Ireland we've PR with a minimum of 3 seats per constituency. There has to a minimum of 1 seat per minimum 20,000 people, maximum 30,000 though that may have changed in the last electoral update.

The electoral college is biased towards smaller states it seems, due to all states getting 2 senators. California has one electoral vote for every 711,000 people, while Wyoming gets one electoral vote for every 195,000 people. That's a fairly large gap, surely it would be better based purely off population?

Amerika wrote: »

They say a picture is worth a thousand words…



This is why the electoral college is necessary. It helps to insure the interests, wants, and needs of a few urban areas don’t hurt the nation as a whole.

But in the current electoral college, it a) ensures that the needs of a few swing states decide the entire election and b) places a disproportionate amount of influence with rural areas. You say in other systems urban areas would get that influence, but more people live there. And people should decide elections.

I'm not sure what the solution is, bit of a balancing act between ensuring that everyone is represented equally and that minority areas are heard. I don't think either are completely satisfied in the current system.

Ok, I've had a few days to digest what happened and there's something that's being, well, either bugging me or something I've realised - not sure yet which...

The reaction of the media and the folks protesting in the streets has been a bit of an eye opener. This was a democratic election and one side clearly won. Granted, Hillary may well have a very slight edge in the popular vote, but 42 states had a swing to the right and Trump did pretty well across a lot of demographics and very well in some. The people spoke and gave a clear answer. As paralysingly scary as it may be that he not only has control of the White House, but also both chambers of Congress and soon the Supreme Court for a very long time to come, it was the democratic decision of the people. We can't blame the media, as most of it was against him, most of his party was against him and he had almost no 'establishment' backing him. He still won. Why?

As hard as it is to accept what happened, burning stuff in the street or having emotional monologues on late night TV just, to me as I think about it, highlights how it's not just the right that likes to live in their own 'bubble of bullsh!t' as Bill Maher always likes to mock the right with.

I think we have to accept that the 'liberal media' (a term that irritates, but I'm using it as a catch-all and not an insult) were cocooned in their own insular bubble - they did not want to contemplate that Trump had a valid voice, therefore they lampooned him, they looked to polls and reports that supported their world view and ignored the reality of what was happening.
A very large swathe of the US had been ignored for too long by the economic system and by the media, and they latched on to the guy that voiced their frustrations, that listened to them and was ready to fight for them.

You may have heard the phrase 'the media took him literally and his followers took him seriously'. The media and establishment jumped on him for every brain-fart and word salad that portrayed him as a narcissistic clown but to his followers, that had felt ignored for so long, he was someone that's not part of the establishment and he's on their side, ready to listen, ready to fight for them and speak like they feel.

Hillary's 'basket of deplorables' remark was one that a lot of us probably reacted to as 'yeah, she's right, look at all the small minded racist idiots, falling for Trump's bluster', but all that did was confirm to his supporters that they are being ignored by the establishment and drew them closer to him, willing to ignore all the crazy and racist stuff he came out with - hence the remark that the media took him literally, but his followers took him seriously.

His rise to power cannot just be blamed on him pandering to the worst elements of the American psyche - he certainly used inflammatory rhetoric that was divisive and yes, deplorable, but the feelings that he reached out to were symptomatic not just of an economic system that has increasingly failed large areas of the states, but also a media and culture that ignored them almost completely, except for the 'crazies' on the internet and, yeah, Fox News too...

So when I see people protesting in the streets or late night hosts giving almost tearful monologues, my reaction is not, weirdly, to agree with their righteous indignation, as I would have expected to, but instead my reaction is one of frustration that they just don't get it. My frustration is that I have to acknowledge that I too have being living in a bubble, one where I could blame the crazies and Fox News for creating the Trumpeters and that he exploited that ignorance for his own narcissistic ends. I have to realise that that's a way too simplistic view of what happened.

Trump tapped into a real rage and frustration that exists, that was fomented not just by the right wing media but it was also a reaction to a status quo created by a liberal media and establishment that left them feeling ignored, ridiculed and which they blame for killing their American Dream. Their beliefs and economic situation were sneered at and finally someone came along and cried bullsh!t, I'm on your side, we're mad as hell and we're not going to take it anymore. That's why 'Make America Great Again' resonated so strongly with them - not because they are small minded idiots, not because they are incapable of critical thinking - but because of deep seated feelings of being left behind and marginalised in a system and culture that disregards their needs and lives. The more the media and even the Republican hierarchy attacked Trump, the more convinced they were that they had their champion and they were going to support him no matter what. That's why all of the pussy gate and racist stuff made no difference. That's why, when he complained about the system being rigged and pointing to the press-pool at rallies, they cheered him on and were determined to vote.

For the first time, they felt that they had someone on their side that cared about them, spoke to them without condescending to them and would fight for them. So when liberals are shaking their heads at what has happened, they (we) need to pull those same heads out of the bubble and look at why it happened.

Maybe we will realise that Trump wasn't just the obnoxious symptom of a negative discourse caused by a toxic right-wing media and was instead maybe, just maybe, the cure for a culture and environment where the media and establishment had become too complacent and so wrapped up in their own self-righteous bubble that they were incapable of seeing how people different from them were actually living....

I'm not for a second condoning Trump's more outrageous remarks, my point is that this cannot be blamed solely on unthinking right-wing nut-jobs, or the crazy side of the net or a lack of critical thinking that was discussed on this thread last week. It's more than that. It's a reaction to a complacent status quo that has been created by liberals too. I try to be a glass half full kinda guy when looking at something dismal, and my hope is that his election might be a wake-up call for everyone, and hopefully not an excuse for everyone to run for their bunkers. When you have voters in the rust-belt turn to Trump in such numbers, potentially voting against their economic self-interests, it's not just because he's telling them what they want to hear and they're too stupid to realise it. It's a clear indication that they have been left behind by both parties and they see Trump as their only hope. Bernie fed into that feeling of frustration, but as we saw, he was never going to be allowed to win, so Trump filled that gap.

Whether real or not, liberal culture certainly feels like it has become intolerant of others views - that's maybe due to the echo chamber effect of the net - but it can feel like Liberal thinking has morphed from being an open-minded world view into a narrow ideology that is just as confining and intolerant of criticism as we always viewed conservatives. There also seems to be a growing sense of entitlement when it comes to views and beliefs - look at the millennial Bernie or Busters and how they reacted by insisting they wouldn't vote for Hillary and would instead vote for Trump, the polar opposite. 'Safe Places' on college campuses where they can be protected from hearing views, from being 'triggered' by people with views different to theirs. This has driven the whole 'it's time to get rid of political correctness' dialogue and liberals need to realise that there is a valid point being made here - using derogatory words to describe people that are different is wrong, plain and simple, but when political correctness begins to impact freedom of speech and thought, it's going too far and when it goes too far, the reaction will also go too far. Everything, on both sides of the cultural and economic divide, has become too rigid and complacent and Trump's election was a reaction to that.

So, that's what has been bugging me - it's not just the right that have gotten it wrong - the liberal/progressive/left have to take some of the blame too. We have gone too far as well, representing a narrow point of view that can be just as rigid and intolerant of others as we have always liked to blame the right/conservatives for being. This needs to be a wake up call for everyone - we have to recognise that the status quo, of which the left is just as much a part of as the right, has to change and potentially change radically. Lets see what happens....

RobertKK wrote: »

The CEO of Grubhub sent an email to employees saying that basically said people who voted for Trump voted for hateful politics, and anyone who works for Grubhub and voted for hateful politics should send in their resignation.
The Grubhub CEO said he stood for tolerance :pac:

People magazine put a picture of Trump on the cover of their magazine with the words "President Trump", a number of Hollywood Celebs have now said they will boycott People Magazine.

The question is, who are the fascists here?
One company criticising it's employees who voted for Trump and saying they should resign.
The celebrities who are so far up their own backsides that the words "President Trump" is so bad they say they will boycott a magazine.

For the record, there has been fascist behaviour in my opinion from a small amount of supporters from both the Hillary and Trump support base.

Not buying a magazine is fascist but banning a religion from a country isn't.
trumpworld 2016.

Sofa Spud wrote: »

Maybe we will realise that Trump wasn't just the obnoxious symptom [...] and was instead maybe, just maybe, the cure .

If Trump is the cure, I think the disease is starting to look very attractive.

I applaud your well written piece, you do get in to the why's and wherefores of his election. But do you not think that many countries have been here before? The 'disease' that is identified and needs curing? The demagogue who arrives claiming to have that cure? But the cure ends up causing more suffering for those who were convinced they were afflicted.

Trumps election was built upon a tissue of lies, false rumours, invective and an unrelenting campaign to paint the opponent as a criminal. And as for the Hoover-esque intervention of Comey - I can guarantee that will be the subject of a congressional committee in the future. All the while several questions about his own history went unanswered. A multi billionaire who resonated with the working classes. The anti establishment hero who then proceeds to stock his cabinet with establishment die-hards from the world of finance.

And a look like a rabbit caught in the headlights when he enters the White House.

I think Johnnie Rotten said it best

20Cent wrote: »

Not buying a magazine is fascist but banning a religion from a country isn't.
trumpworld 2016.

Islam will not be banned in the US.

I guess you find Europe fascist given the deal the EU made with Turkey.

The EU allowed in many terrorists in 2015 with uncontrolled immigration from countries with phenomenal terrorist problems.

We have to see what Trump actually does. There are many good reasons for severe restrictions on immigration from countries with such a huge terrorist problem.
Strangely the countries like Saudi Arabia and Qatar who fund so much of the terrorism have not been leading in taking in immigrants.

You never addressed a company telling it's employees to resign if they voted for Trump.

20Cent wrote: »

Not buying a magazine is fascist but banning a religion from a country isn't.
trumpworld 2016.

No religion is banned from the US, but a CEO is firing people for their political beliefs in the name of "tolerance"

That's f**ked up.

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

No religion is banned from the US, but a CEO is firing people for their political beliefs in the name of "tolerance"

That's f**ked up.

Indeed it is.