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

plenty of places have runoff voting. they are not 'undemocratic' just because they prevent all the other guys from running in the 2nd round. we have what is in practice runoff voting, it just isn't formally structured that way.

― iatee, Thursday, December 1, 2016 9:58 PM (eight minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Not the same though. If in a first round this would have been the result, many Stein voters could have changed their vote in the second round. People who didn't vote could have voted anyway in the second round if they wanted to prevent Trump becoming president. Completely different dynamic in the race.

xps iatee- some of the Libertarians would have voted for Clinton, others would have not voted, still others would have voted for Trump. And not all Stein voters would have voted for Clinton. It's not impossible but difficult to split all those up in a way that gives Clinton more votes

Having said that I still don't think they should let third parties run in what's essentially a run-off election. It's like a tax on the votes of the innumerate

lol stop, the most plausible explanation is clearly flopson's

not seeing any post-election numbers, but:
http://www.people-press.org/2016/08/18/1-voters-general-election-preferences/

Gary Johnson is currently backed by 10% of all registered voters in a four-way race. When asked their preference in a two-way race, Johnson backers split evenly: 43% say they would support Clinton in a two-way contest, while 42% would favor Trump.

"We're losing a lot of people because of the Internet," Trump said. "We have to go see Bill Gates and a lot of different people that really understand what's happening. We have to talk to them about, maybe in certain areas, closing that Internet up in some way. Somebody will say, 'Oh freedom of speech, freedom of speech.' These are foolish people. We have a lot of foolish people."

this stupid fuck

The Electoral College, the over/under-representation of some states seem like much bigger issues with the American system than third parties running, too. The fact that Clinton got 2.5m more votes, to me (abroad) that seems bonkers. But presto, that's your system. I'd be more worried about that though. That not every vote counts as equal.

Not the same though. If in a first round this would have been the result, many Stein voters could have changed their vote in the second round. People who didn't vote could have voted anyway in the second round if they wanted to prevent Trump becoming president. Completely different dynamic in the race.

no, the dynamic is exactly the same. there was a first round election that included sanders, clinton, trump and multiple right-wing candidates. clinton and trump won that first round. the general election *is* the second round, and anyone who wanted to prevent trump from being president was given that option.

"We're losing a lot of people because of the Internet," Trump said. "We have to go see Bill Gates and a lot of different people that really understand what's happening. We have to talk to them about, maybe in certain areas, closing that Internet up in some way. Somebody will say, 'Oh freedom of speech, freedom of speech.' These are foolish people. We have a lot of foolish people."
this stupid fuck

― I've read Ta-nehisi Coates. (marcos), Thursday, December 1, 2016 4:12 PM (one minute ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

where did that quote come from?

unless you live in a solid red or blue state where yer vote don't mean shit

xp

ugh sorry i really have to get better about checking dates on things that show up in my feeds, he said it a year ago http://money.cnn.com/2015/12/08/technology/donald-trump-internet/index.html

still it is an astonishingly stupid statement

xp

some speech he did around this time last year xp

no, the dynamic is exactly the same. there was a first round election that included sanders, clinton, trump and multiple right-wing candidates. clinton and trump won that first round. the general election *is* the second round, and anyone who wanted to prevent trump from being president was given that option.

― iatee, Thursday, December 1, 2016 10:13 PM (forty-two seconds ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

That 'first round' was an already established Dem candidate with a multitude or Gop candidates. That's not a 'first round'. Compare it to France: everyone (dems, gop, yr nazi part, greens etc) enters in the first round. The biggest two go to round two. If you'd have that system youd have seen how much support Trump actually got, shocking the nation, but with still a second round to come.
It doesn't matter, you don't have that system, but because the results of the first round are made public, that creates a different dynamic for the second, final round (i.e. In France socialists voting for a conservative because the far right candidate is even worse etc)

Wait til they insist All Good People vote for Cuomo or Booker in 2020.

I know this is gonna piss Morbz off but I would welcome the election of Cuomo, Booker, Sanders, Warren, Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, or Hillary Clinton as President with unmixed enthusiasm

If Trump was talking about closing the propaganda sites that helped him get elected and the foolish people who voted for him, I couldn't agree more!

yes, eephus, the race to the bottom.

were all of the candidates to run in a first round, trump's win % would be a soft plurality. it would not be any more of a signal to the nation of how much support he would garner than a signal such as 'THE DUDE WON THE REPUBLICAN NOMINATION' xp

I'll grant you that

Trevor Noah sucks. Smug fuck. This is why I hate the daily show

People are politically illiterate and don't know what they want in a candidate. This, more than the primary process, is why we ended up with two people who were widely hated.

some americans are also functionally illiterate

NYTimes in fine both sides do it mode

Trump’s Carrier Deal: Giveaway or New Model to Save Jobs?
By NELSON D. SCHWARTZ 1:13 PM ET

Since the deal to save 1,000 jobs was disclosed, critics have pounced on Carrier’s receipt of $700,000 a year in incentives from the state of Indiana.

Others called Donald J. Trump’s effort a new path to economic growth.

'Others' being trump administration officials and their various water carriers?

All the electoral reform in the world won't make up for the fact that people were dumb enough to believe clinton was mixed up in some sort of pizza sex ring of
whatever the fuck that was. The most promising idea now is keith ellison's emphasis on local politics, building civic engagement in communities. Anomie is the main reason Trump won.

it's going to be pretty tiring if we pounce on every little phrase from the NYT for the next 8 years that's not sufficiently critical of trump

FYI, Nelson Schwartz was the name on the byline of the asslicking NYT article about Trump from the other day. Don't know the dude but looks like he's a schmuck worth keeping an eye on.

I kinda don't care if this has already been posted because it can't possibly be posted enough

https://trumpgrets.tumblr.com/?og=1

at least they're paying attention

Are those generated by AI?

Not this one, at least, Josh.

https://twitter.com/rpachevurova/status/801490280671281152

i'm honestly a little confused about this whole carrier thing. how can trump, the president-elect (i.e., he does not hold political office) make a deal with a company that saves several hundred jobs in exchange for state tax breaks? like, what power does he (or anyone?) have to bring that about?

Pence made the deal. Theyre in indiana, hes still governor

i guess i know very little about how state politics works. the governor can unilaterally lower taxes on a particular company? that doesn't like, require the legislature?

like pence had previously done earlier and carrier told him to fuck off..

what I dont get is the threat of withholding contracts from carrier's parent company wasnt enough to 'save the jobs' alone? had to throw in some corporate welfare in exchange for good pr? art of the deal indeed.

there you go

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/804407177368715265

read the 60 posts above yours, shakes

fucking hell i wish i could unsee that jim bakker video

Haha oops

so can Jill gift her votes to HRC? That seems likely

omg the ultimate Dem wet dream, appropriation of all votes to the left of the Wall St Journal ed page

Carrier is still shipping most of their jobs away. They just compromised because 1.) they were paid and 2.) the attention this circus brought to them made them lool bad

It's so meaningless

smoke n' mirrors, special effects

briefly unretiring from lurking again to post something else potentially insightful conveyed elsewhere on the intertubes. ta ta!

Anyway as someone living in the festering 7th district of MO, I can tell you there is no reason to try to appeal to the Trumpers who were chanting "Lock her up" for the last six months. Trump was right about one thing: he really could have shot someone on 5th Avenue and not lost any votes. I think Hillary could have gone to bumfuck, Alabama, and said "Fuck all you sister-fuckers" and it wouldn't have lost her any votes either. This country has just about hit peak polarization; the only difference is which side is going to turn out more to "stick it" to the other. Clearly the Bernie or Busters/Jill Steiners of the liberal base made their decision, or maybe it was people not showing up to vote because they thought the demographic shift made it a sure thing, or maybe because it wasn't the first black president running for office. Whatever, all we know is the only voters that matter are the ones that turn out. It's a hard lesson, but after four years of Republicans dismantling everything Obama accomplished maybe it will sink in. Sucks for us; really sucks for Obama, but maybe we can turn it around and focus on getting out the vote for 2018? Or maybe just go back to protesting and bitching on Facebook instead...

I don't think you should confuse the 40% of worst savages we knew were going to vote for him no matter what with the other 6.5% who decided because of Comey/etc. or the significant percentage vs. 2008/12 who just didn't turn out.

Given that we fought an actual Civil War over chattel slavery, not sure we can talk about peak polarization. Even compared to other modern elections, I would guess that the percentage of party-hopping voters isn't all that different, it's just that most of them were white and there are relatively fewer white people now.

As hard as the GOP will work to violate voting rights, this isn't the first time they've had all three branches to undermine them - Bush had four and a half years of it. Obama still won in 2008.

Clearly the Bernie or Busters/Jill Steiners of the liberal base made their decision, or maybe it was people not showing up to vote because they thought the demographic shift made it a sure thing, or maybe because it wasn't the first black president running for office.

I'm pretty sure 99% of ILX who didn't back her from the start voted for her (I did, even in a state where it didn't matter), but maybe instead of complaining about people who voted for Stein or stayed home it's time to accept that she was a deeply flawed candidate who lost once as the anointed favorite and had a strong challenge from an elderly Jewish socialist who sounds like one of the interviews from 'Reds.'

or the significant percentage vs. 2008/12 who just didn't turn out.

135.5 million votes have been counted for 2016, vs 129 million in 2012

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/1/d/133Eb4qQmOxNvtesw2hdVns073R68EZx4SfCnP4IGQf8/htmlview?sle=true#gid=19

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/11/politics/popular-vote-turnout-2016/

friend sent me some minor schadenfreude:
https://www.reddit.com/user/coolguy_420

The way he's trying to convince himself that Trump isn't going to fuck with his weed is hilarious.

also https://trumpgrets.tumblr.com/

this made the rounds yet?
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/01/us/politics/trumps-off-the-cuff-remarks-to-world-leaders-leave-diplomats-aghast.html

Mr. Trump’s conversation with Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif of Pakistan has generated the most angst, because, as Mr. Earnest put it, the relationship between Mr. Sharif’s country and the United States is “quite complicated,” with disputes over issues ranging from counterterrorism to nuclear proliferation. In a remarkably candid readout of the phone call, the Pakistani government said Mr. Trump had told Mr. Sharif that he was “a terrific guy” who made him feel as though “I’m talking to a person I have known for long.” He described Pakistanis as “one of the most intelligent people.” When Mr. Sharif invited him to visit Pakistan, the president-elect replied that he would “love to come to a fantastic country, fantastic place of fantastic people.”

The Trump transition office, in its more circumspect readout, said only that Mr. Trump and Mr. Sharif “had a productive conversation about how the United States and Pakistan will have a strong working relationship in the future.” It did not confirm or deny the Pakistani account of Mr. Trump’s remarks.

The breezy tone of the readout left diplomats in Washington slack-jawed, with some initially assuming it was a parody. In particular, they zeroed in on Mr. Trump’s offer to Mr. Sharif “to play any role you want me to play to address and find solutions to the country’s problems.” That was interpreted by some in India as an offer by the United States to mediate Pakistan’s border dispute with India in Kashmir, something that the Pakistanis have long sought and that India has long resisted.

“By taking such a cavalier attitude to these calls, he’s encouraging people not to take him seriously,” said Daniel F. Feldman, a former special representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan. “He’s made himself not only a bull in a china shop, but a bull in a nuclear china shop.”

Husain Haqqani, a former Pakistani ambassador to Washington, said his government’s decision to release a rough transcript of Mr. Trump’s remarks was a breach of protocol that demonstrated how easily Pakistani leaders misread signals from their American counterparts. “Pakistan is one country where knowing history and details matters most,” Mr. Haqqani said, “and where the U.S. cannot afford to give wrong signals, given the history of misunderstandings.”

And still well over a month until he even takes office! Git r dun!

The bumbling boy king schtick is an act.