Mourning in America - Trump Year One: November '16 to

yeah, i was really stunned by the extent of the hillaryphobia in the nation. like, she's got her flaws, but trump is nothing but flaws. he is a blight on the face of humanity. the world is a much worse place because he is in it, regardless of whether or not he is president. now that he is, well,

Trump is shaping up to be the least powerful President since before FDR remade the executive branch, which isn't exactly great if it means the country is pretty much governed by the Ryan agenda. Then again Ryan is probably loathed by a third of his caucus.

they'll stop loathing him once he can just ship radical GOP legislation straight to a friendly White House and buy everybody a round.

The extent of Hillary disdain isn't really surprising - the right and center-right were still mad at "Hill and Billary" from 1992 and have never let it go, the left of the Democrats still doesn't like or trust the Clintons politically (cf. what happened with Bill's VP).

hm, seems like maybe it was a bad idea for the DNC to decide like 5 years ago that she would be the nominee come hell or high water

thanks for your insight at this important moment

ha sorry i'll take your lead and post paranoid articles about how we're slipping into autocracy

https://twitter.com/amjoyshow/status/802910629816172544

i do secretly enjoy following sarah kendzior's apocalyptics tbh

i feel like she presents a valuable perspective. i don't things will go down like she says but i think it's possible. trump is being entirely unclear about his intentions.

the left of the Democrats still doesn't like or trust the Clintons politically (cf. what happened with Bill's VP).

Ironically, both Al Gore and HRC won the popular vote quite handily.

I hope the USA turns into a country of 500 independent city-states sometime soon

I've been off twitter since the election I'm just using ilx for my stupid quips

yo who gets the nukes in that scenario

every state gets 1 nuke lol

I assume an executive council of mayors gets to do the nukes

It kinda sorta feels like Trump, to the extent that his feeble synapses have any ability to generate an actual strategy, may still be perpetuating a Producers gambit. He wanted to win but never actually wanted the job. He can't quit without looking like a loser, so he figures that by doing everything in his power to visibly demonstrate how unfit he is for the job (hiring unqualified maniacs to cabinet positions, indicating a total lack of interest in security briefings, pooh-poohing qualms about his audacious conflicts of interest, etc.) before he's even sworn in, he can get somebody to chuck him out before he ever has to do anything. And then he would be able to more legitimately nurse the perpetual state of aggrievement that clearly gives his life meaning. But like The Producers, the thing he didn't want to happen is exactly what happened and will continue to happen, but in this case Bialystock is going to make us all suffer for being stupid enough to fall for his con and forcing him to live in some dumb house in DC.

Like, I wholeheartedly acknowledge how profoundly stupid and incurious Trump is, but it honestly seems like he's going out of his way to demonstrate how shitty a president he's going to be. The problem being that the people were already convinced don't need convincing and the people who backed him will double down on their support regardless of how many foreign dignitaries he waggles his shriveled penis at.

Don't you mean "waggles his small hands at"?

Ironically, both Al Gore and HRC won the popular vote quite handily.

this article makes a pretty convincing (and beautifully written case) against using 'realist' political calculations vis-a-vis Trump (which informs the discussion about whether to stress 'identity' politics or not) http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2016/11/27/trump-realism-vs-moral-politics-choice-we-face/

handily is... rather strong. .5% and less than 2% would either be the third and fourth-smallest or third and fifth (if Hillary surpasses Carter in the end) since 1900.

― Kiarostami bag (milo z)

Hm. I thought as of last week Clinton was at Tilden levels.

is this nuts or otm?

https://twitter.com/summerbrennan/status/802302536761810944

While she's tweeting about cyberwar, the prez-elect is tweeting:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/802972944532209664

In addition to winning the Electoral College in a landslide, I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally

Just about to post re: that. If the president elect, the guy who won, is alleging millions of fraudulent votes ...

care to share with the rest of the class mr trump

So he cried fraud before the election, he cried fraud after the election, but he's dismissing recounts as a waste of time?

Politico says in part:

To bolster his claims, Trump has cited a 2014 blog post in The Washington Post by the authors of a disputed study that estimated that "6.4 percent of non-citizens voted in 2008 and 2.2 percent of non-citizens voted in 2010." That study has faced intense scrutiny from election experts, with one analyst telling factcheck.org earlier this year, “Their finding is entirely due to measurement error."

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/trump-illegal-voting-clinton-231860

He's the president, he should appoint people to look into this.

we haven't even started yet

He should also look into how many of his voters host illegal off-highway tiger zoos.

i have been to to the tiger truck stop in louisiana and can confirm that there is one sad tiger in a concerte box there. also the jambalaya sucked

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/962/640/658.png

i don't think congress has the constitutional authority to pass a nationwide voter ID law, thank god

i don't think congress has the constitutional authority to pass a nationwide voter ID law, thank god

OTOH, proposals for national ID cards have been kicking around for awhile - especially in the 9/11 fallout. I certainly expect to see them again.

If there was a national ID (realizing the issues with hassle, threat of authoritarian rule, etc) that was enacted and in force years before an election, could it prevent some of the voter supression that has been a regular issue for a couple of decades?

In other words, we've had the issue of Republican secretaries of state disenfranchising hundreds of thousands in the weeks immediately preceding every election. An ID mandate, if issued a year or two before the next election, would be an equal hassle to all, but would prevent thousands from being turned away as they reached the ballot box.

Frankly, I don't have strongly informed opinions on the issue. I just want a way to prevent the sorts of voter list manipulation that has become the norm, especially in swing states, to stop. I understand voter/citizen ID is intended to disenfranchise, but perhaps if effectively countered at the local level it could backfire. We have the GOTV volunteers, they don't.

Imagine the uproar if senior citizens who got their news from racist nephews on Facebook were turned away, while people of all ethnicities who duly wasted an hour or two to get their national ID walked past to cast their vote. This is the sort of poetic justice I seek.

There would be no more than one office in every MSA unless you pay a fee to skip the line or something equally disenfranchising, but rural gas stations would be able to process the paperwork.

Again, we have the GOTV volunteers. They're shitheads relying upon Facebook for their worldview.

how would theoretical national id laws play out in vote by mail only states (which imo the entire country should be vote by mail bc it works and is easy)

Sanpaku wouldn't you just be offsetting the disenfranchisement from the weeks before the election to whenever it is that people are supposed to get these IDs?

No one can respond to the late period disenfranchisement. I just think there's ample opportunity for these measures to backfire, especially if they're in law for many months before a vote.

I trust that we are smarter and more committed. If some neo-nazi thinks posting Pepe memes is more important than getting their fucking diabetic uncle out to vote, too bad.

Sorry about that, but I've got a lot of contempt issues around the electorate, right now.

I guess I'm not following your argument completely, Sanpaku, since state-level voter ID is a device of disenfranchisement, and the arguments you're putting forward for how people would have plenty of time to get it taken care of in advance, are the same as those put forward by defenders of state voter ID measures. It leads rapidly to "If you can't be bothered to fill out a form you have no business voting!" in defiance of how things actually play out in reality, vis-a-vis disproportionate effects on certain populations. And yeah, unless a whole new federal voter-registration bureaucracy sprung into existence, with outposts and offices and sign-up vans in ever town, the actual implementation would fall to state-level agencies so it'd be the same old shit, as milo z suggests.

how would theoretical national id laws play out in vote by mail only states (which imo the entire country should be vote by mail bc it works and is easy)

― Clay, Sunday, November 27, 2016 4:24 PM (twenty-five minutes ago)

There are states that require you to vote by mail? That seems like it has more opportunity for fraud, as well as disenfranchising people that move.

overview here, I am in the "pro" camp:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vote-by-mail_in_Oregon

i don't think congress has the constitutional authority to pass a nationwide voter ID law, thank god

actually looks like congress can under the elections clause

so trump is gonna use this recount effort to lie about voter fraud, setting the stage for a nationwide voter ID law

Frankly, I'd be pretty happy to have a multiple choice test on the effects of climate change sponsored by the NSF be part of voter registration.

Our problem now is we're playing by the rules, and Republican secretaries of state are disenfranchising voters in the weeks just prior to elections. The problem isn't rules, its changing them before anyone has a chance to react.

They enact voter ID in early 2017, and we can react. In fact, we can win this contest of disenfranchisement, because we are smarter and have more grassroots support. I'll drive people from my neighborhood, but maybe not the Trump worshippers from the nursing home. If they enact voter ID in late 2018, then we're fucked.

^selectively disenfranching

Frankly, I'd be pretty happy to have a multiple choice test on the effects of climate change sponsored by the NSF be part of voter registration.

yeah no

Fundamental rights don't get tested

everything about that post is ridiculous

i saw a person with a bumper sticker today reading "TYSON/NYE 2016". basically made me want to become a trump supporter. i suspect it was on sanpaku's car???