I’m all for a Californiaectomy.

Mackeyser wrote:

wv wrote:

waterfield wrote:

I don’t mind if its politics by algorithm as long as its used by a candidate I think is better suited than the other guys. Campaign machinery and demographic targeting has always been part of a general election. But I’m in no mood to begin any type of argument over this election. Been doing that for a couple of years and I’m tired. I will say that I agree with parts and don’t agree with other stuff in the article. I do think we need to revisit the electoral college issue given the reason for it being part of our Constitution simply no longer exist. Would I feel that way if my chosen candidate lost the popular vote and won the electoral “college” vote? Probably not.

————
The pollsters are usually right. They were almost all wrong this time. Why do u think that is?

Do you think Bernie would have won?

w
v

YES!!! Bernie would have won. The OVERWHELMING issue among the ex-urban voters who repudiated politics as usual in the rust belt was the embrace of bad trade deals like NAFTA, CAFTA and the up coming TPP that have decimated the working middle class of all races and genders.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/presidential-election-donald-trump-would-have-lost-if-bernie-sanders-had-been-the-candidate-a7406346.html
And as Trump proved…RALLIES MATTER!!!

Bernie had a real message.

And here’s a real point on that.

The Republicans actually put their money where their mouth was in believing in democracy…so much so that they were willing to let their party burn down. NO ONE rigged any process or did anything to impede any candidate. They…LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE. Contrast that with Debbie Wasserman Schultz who essentially acted like a Campaign Chair for Clinton while DNC Chair. She allowed the campaigning for super delegates prior to Clinton announcing. She restricted the debates to 4, initially, and then had them on the weekends when fewer would watch. She worked with media insiders to plant stories against the candidate and essentially rig the nomination process. Donna Brazille lost her job at CNN because she showed questions for the debate to the Clinton campaign prior to the debate. Guess she never stopped working for the Clintons or the DNC.

Had the Dems had as much faith in democracy as the Republicans… We’d be talking about President-Elect Bernie Sanders right now.

And I’m gonna pound on THAT every single fucking time some pseudo-liberal wants to cry about Hillary losing. Fuck that. She never should have been on the ticket.

And now we have a totally unified Republican Congress, White House and old Supreme Court.

Fuck the DLC/corporate DNC and Clintonistas for abandoning democracy when we needed to fight for it most.

But hey. At least now, hopefully, that corporatist Clintonista bullshit is dead and we can go back to work on the progressive agenda. Hopefully.

Tulsi Gabbert 2020.

Excellent post.

— X — wrote:

Billy_T wrote:

My guess is few people here will go out of their way to see it, but I think you should. Just watched it and it surprised me.

For most of this campaign, when I tuned in to see her, I found her to be rather wooden, with her shields up, mostly incapable of connecting on a human level with her audience. Too wonky, etc. Not really all that comfortable in her own skin, etc.

But this speech, which may be her last in public? She did connect. The crowd seemed to be really moved. Her tone was just right, IMO, and her words were gracious and, at least relative to her political peers, “classy.” If Clinton had been like this from the start, I think we might have had a different election result.

I heard it on the radio, and that was ultimately my medium of choice. I don’t even like to look at her, because she oozes condescension and elitism in her facial expressions. I imagine it was different this time if she has truly been humbled. It sounded good though. It sounded inspirational. But it also sounded very scripted, and it seems to me that’s the very reason she didn’t address her supporters last night. Nothing to say from her heart, so someone whipped up a speech for her to use the next day in order to manufacture some feelings. I don’t think she cares one iota about the people she claims to “love”.

Just being honest. I trust that’s what you were looking for.

I think both candidates had acceptance and concession speeches already prepared before the election was called. She was probably too emotional early this morning to do anything but make the phone call to trump.

Billy_T wrote:

bnw wrote:

I have a clear conscience too. BTW Trump should have won by even more but the system is rigged.

The GOP holds a majority of the states and has passed umpteen measures designed to restrict voting by likely Dem voters, as well as those who won’t vote for either party. If the system is “rigged” for anyone, it’s rigged for Trump and the Republicans.

And, again, Trump is losing the popular vote. He’s likely to lose it by 300,000 or more.

He has zero “mandate.” He just has a ton of bluster, BS and empty promises.

Bnw, I guarantee you’re going to be one very disappointed supporter in the not too distant future. Kinda like many an Obama supporter in 2009 who thought he’d govern as a “progressive,” and watched him do that from the center-right instead.

Perhaps though I’ll never be as disappointed as you.

wv wrote:

Well i know your view on that. I was expecting you to respond to that line of mine, with exactly what you did

I think I may be the only guy whose 2 cents you dismiss in advance like that. Odd distinction.

Now now I think I’m in the running.

Zooey wrote:

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/the-consequences-trumps-victory-are-coming-focus

The consequences of Trump’s victory are coming into focus
11/09/16 09:09 AM
By Steve Benen
David Axelrod, the former senior strategist for President Obama, has long espoused an interesting theory about national elections. As Axelrod explained in January, “Open-seat presidential elections are shaped by perceptions of the style and personality of the outgoing incumbent. Voters rarely seek the replica of what they have.”

By Axelrod’s reasoning, it’s expected that voters will choose a new president who is roughly the opposite of the departing executive – an assertion that looks quite sound this morning.

Some of this will be obvious immediately, because the shifts in presidential style will be jarring. President Obama is measured; Donald Trump is erratic. Obama is intellectual; Trump is incurious. Obama is honest; Trump is pathological. Obama is serious and committed to sound policymaking; Trump is clownish and dismissive of the details of public affairs.

But come next year, the stylistic differences will be an inconsequential afterthought by the time a Trump/Pence administration begins governing alongside a far-right, radicalized Republican majority in the House and Senate. The New Republic’s Brian Beutler had a good piece on this overnight:
At a minimum, Republicans are going to do incredible violence to President Barack Obama’s accomplishments…. Trump will almost certainly abrogate Obama’s international climate agreement and the global powers agreement preventing Iran from creating their own nuclear arsenal. Republicans will send Trump legislation undermining Obama’s legacy everywhere they can find congressional majorities to do so, and Trump will sign those bills. Republicans don’t know how to repeal Obamacare, let alone replace it. But they will try.

The Supreme Court will return to conservative control, and over the next four years, it may very well become far more conservative. Voting rights will be further weakened; the constitutional right to abortion is vulnerable to abolition.

But things could get much, much worse.
There’s a temptation among some to try to look for comfort where available. We collectively hit an iceberg, but maybe we can cling to some floating debris for a while until help arrives. Americans are resilient, and we’ve been through rough times before.

I’d like to offer some kind of assurances along these lines, but I can’t do so with any honesty.

Millions of families are going to lose their health benefits. Efforts to combat the climate crisis will end and move backwards. The tax system will become radically more regressive. Wall Street will be freed from safeguards and recently created layers of accountability, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau will be decimated.

Immigrants who consider the United States the only home they’ve ever known will be forced from the country. Minority communities will experience less justice and fewer voting rights. Higher education will be further out of reach for many young people.

The United States will lose the world’s respect. The Supreme Court will move even further to the right, and the clock on reproductive rights will be turned back a half-century.

This is really just a sampling. At no point in modern American history have we seen a political party as radicalized as the contemporary Republican Party, and as a result of the decisions voters made this year, that GOP will dominate federal policymaking for the next several years – making changes that will affect the nation and the world for generations.

And if we look beyond legislative measures, we also see the worst major-party presidential candidate in history who will have access to nuclear codes.

Yes, there are some political structures and institutions in place that may offer us some semblance of protection, but Trump has made no secret of his hostility towards democratic norms, his indifference towards traditions, and his affinity for authoritarian ideals.

I’m looking for a silver lining. I don’t see one.

Lost me and everyone with a working brain after “Obama is honest.”

nittany ram wrote:

All programs researching alternative energy sources will be gutted. Roe v Wade will be overturned. Science funding will be gone. Planned Parenthood will be gone. The irony is that Planned Parenthood prevented way more abortions than it performed. More teen pregnancies, more abortions only now they’ll be the back alley variety which means higher morbidity and mortality and an increase in medical costs. Privatization and development of publicly held lands, millions losing their healthcare coverage, civil rights legislation overturned. At times Trump has said he supports and has said he doesn’t support Affirmative Action so who knows what will happen with that…

There are no silver linings here. If he appoints 4 SC justices this country will be set back 100 years and likely won’t recover in our lifetimes.

Science funding will continue. Planned Parenthood will still continue. Abortion will revert to the states. Healthcare will be restored. Civil rights will remain inviolate. There are indeed silver linings and lets hope a well stacked SCOTUS will serve liberty for many decades.

I watched it. It was her best speech and of that I am sincere. She showed emotion and poise which will serve her well on her upcoming perp walk.

For the vote I don’t know. For the rule of law all pretense of fairness is trashed. Respect has been replaced with contempt. No big deal for democrat voters but for republicans it is new and the consequences of a stolen election we can only wait and see.