Skip to main content

TR Memescape

  • Talk Rational: :colbert:

Topic: 2016 Election (U.S. Presidential, duh) (Read 53457 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Re: 2016 Election (U.S. Presidential, duh)
Reply #6400
Is it the same 43& of the population who stayed away this time compared to last time though? I guess the racists turned out because they had someone to vote for- although I'd expexct them to have turned out in 2012 and 2008 because they had someone to vote against.

Turnout was down from the previous two elections, but not comparatively down compared to most presidential elections. It was more down in states that favored Clinton though, so somebody needs to crack that black box and figure out why.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/voter-turnout-fell-especially-in-states-that-clinton-won/
The Clinton foundation and wall street speeches are the issues. 
Love is like a magic penny
 if you hold it tight you won't have any
if you give it away you'll have so many
they'll be rolling all over the floor

Re: 2016 Election (U.S. Presidential, duh)
Reply #6401
I think the deeper issue is that they saw inside the political process of how things get done in Washington and it didn't jive with their view of how politics ought to work. This was seen as "corruption" when in many cases it is just that people have collegial relationships with the people they work with, even people they are in opposition to.  I agree that the wall street speeches thing was ugly and something Clinton needed to be more open about, but I think there was a bit of daylight between how people imagine politics to be and how politics actually is, and that was the problem

Re: 2016 Election (U.S. Presidential, duh)
Reply #6402
Also, it's important to remember that the group that voted against Hillary is not the group that voted for trump.
Love is like a magic penny
 if you hold it tight you won't have any
if you give it away you'll have so many
they'll be rolling all over the floor

  • VoxRat
  • wtactualf
Re: 2016 Election (U.S. Presidential, duh)
Reply #6403
Is it the same 43& of the population who stayed away this time compared to last time though? I guess the racists turned out because they had someone to vote for- although I'd expexct them to have turned out in 2012 and 2008 because they had someone to vote against.

Turnout was down from the previous two elections, but not comparatively down compared to most presidential elections. It was more down in states that favored Clinton though, so somebody needs to crack that black box and figure out why.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/voter-turnout-fell-especially-in-states-that-clinton-won/
The Clinton foundation and wall street speeches are the issues.
Those are two issues that made me, personally, less than ecstatic with my choice*.
But the election was actually damn close, and there were lots of issues: leaked e-mails, the ham-fisted FBI interference, Alex Jones / Limbaugh / Breitbart shit-stirring, NAFTA/TPP,  people wary of dynasties...

We don't want to be overly ... reductionist about it, now, do we?



* (singular - i.e. the only viable alternative to the unthinkable)
"I understand Donald Trump better than many people because I really am a lot like him." - Dave Hawkins

  • Pingu
Re: 2016 Election (U.S. Presidential, duh)
Reply #6404
Is it the same 43& of the population who stayed away this time compared to last time though? I guess the racists turned out because they had someone to vote for- although I'd expexct them to have turned out in 2012 and 2008 because they had someone to vote against.

Turnout was down from the previous two elections, but not comparatively down compared to most presidential elections. It was more down in states that favored Clinton though, so somebody needs to crack that black box and figure out why.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/voter-turnout-fell-especially-in-states-that-clinton-won/
The Clinton foundation and wall street speeches are the issues.

Which is ridiculous given the Trump Foundation and Trump's banking habits.
I have a Darwin-debased mind.

Re: 2016 Election (U.S. Presidential, duh)
Reply #6405
I can't really speak for all Dems/dem leaners out there, but those were very serious issues for me. It's not the how politics is done problem because I get how politics is done. It's the 'the exact group you are clearly speaking for is the exact group that needs heavy regulation.' issue.

I hear a lot of people dissing occupy because it didn't accomplish anything but it did. It engaged American voters in an important issue and hillary totally missed that.
Love is like a magic penny
 if you hold it tight you won't have any
if you give it away you'll have so many
they'll be rolling all over the floor

Re: 2016 Election (U.S. Presidential, duh)
Reply #6406
Is it the same 43& of the population who stayed away this time compared to last time though? I guess the racists turned out because they had someone to vote for- although I'd expexct them to have turned out in 2012 and 2008 because they had someone to vote against.

Turnout was down from the previous two elections, but not comparatively down compared to most presidential elections. It was more down in states that favored Clinton though, so somebody needs to crack that black box and figure out why.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/voter-turnout-fell-especially-in-states-that-clinton-won/
The Clinton foundation and wall street speeches are the issues.

Which is ridiculous given the Trump Foundation and Trump's banking habits.
No. It's not ridiculous. The group that voted against Clinton is not the group that voted for trump.
Love is like a magic penny
 if you hold it tight you won't have any
if you give it away you'll have so many
they'll be rolling all over the floor

Re: 2016 Election (U.S. Presidential, duh)
Reply #6407
Is it the same 43& of the population who stayed away this time compared to last time though? I guess the racists turned out because they had someone to vote for- although I'd expexct them to have turned out in 2012 and 2008 because they had someone to vote against.

Turnout was down from the previous two elections, but not comparatively down compared to most presidential elections. It was more down in states that favored Clinton though, so somebody needs to crack that black box and figure out why.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/voter-turnout-fell-especially-in-states-that-clinton-won/
The Clinton foundation and wall street speeches are the issues.
Those are two issues that made me, personally, less than ecstatic with my choice*.
But the election was actually damn close, and there were lots of issues: leaked e-mails, the ham-fisted FBI interference, Alex Jones / Limbaugh / Breitbart shit-stirring, NAFTA/TPP,  people wary of dynasties...

We don't want to be overly ... reductionist about it, now, do we?



* (singular - i.e. the only viable alternative to the unthinkable)
Yeah. But those are the issues that, say a couple hundred thousand informed (to some degree) voters still could semi legitimately use to stay home. The ones that don't listen to Alex Jones etc.
Love is like a magic penny
 if you hold it tight you won't have any
if you give it away you'll have so many
they'll be rolling all over the floor

Re: 2016 Election (U.S. Presidential, duh)
Reply #6408
as much as you try to make excuses for why the transparency argument was convincing, the problem is that Trump was less transparent than Clinton on essentially every subject.

Re: 2016 Election (U.S. Presidential, duh)
Reply #6409
i heard a trumpo saying that he thought "hillary seemed kinda dishonest" and then he liked how "trump has no filter, he just says whatever he's thinking, or thinks to say, and who knows if he even means it..." lmao.

Re: 2016 Election (U.S. Presidential, duh)
Reply #6410
as much as you try to make excuses for why the transparency argument was convincing, the problem is that Trump was less transparent than Clinton on essentially every subject.
Unfortunately, trump voters didn't care about transparency. Clinton voters did but I'm not ready to say it's unfortunate that they did.
Love is like a magic penny
 if you hold it tight you won't have any
if you give it away you'll have so many
they'll be rolling all over the floor

Re: 2016 Election (U.S. Presidential, duh)
Reply #6411
i heard a trumpo saying that he thought "hillary seemed kinda dishonest" and then he liked how "trump has no filter, he just says whatever he's thinking, or thinks to say, and who knows if he even means it..." lmao.
Thanksgiving is going to be weird this year.
Love is like a magic penny
 if you hold it tight you won't have any
if you give it away you'll have so many
they'll be rolling all over the floor

  • F X
  • The one and only
Re: 2016 Election (U.S. Presidential, duh)
Reply #6412
Not for the Trump supporters
"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous he will not bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog and man."
― Mark Twain 🔭

Re: 2016 Election (U.S. Presidential, duh)
Reply #6413
How many more votes do you think Clinton would have received if not for the gutting of the Voting Rights Act and all the Republican-led voter suppression that went on this year, as long as we're talking about alternate universes where things suck less?

How much voter suppression went on in Michigan and Pennsylvania?  I'll give you that it probably happened in Wisconsin because Scott Walker.  I believe if she took MI and PA she would have won so all the voter suppression in NC, GA and places like that wouldn't have mattered.


Well, I'm not talking about results there; I was talking about enthusiasm, and how much more support she'd have had, period, if everyone who should have been able to vote was able to.  Though I will note that both NC and GA were reasonably close in the end, themselves; GA was one of the ones I was watching in the hopes that it might go blue.

In terms of the results, MI and WI in particular infuriate me because the Stein votes alone would've flipped them, last I looked.

  • F X
  • The one and only
Re: 2016 Election (U.S. Presidential, duh)
Reply #6414
"If you pick up a starving dog and make him prosperous he will not bite you. This is the principal difference between a dog and man."
― Mark Twain 🔭

Re: 2016 Election (U.S. Presidential, duh)
Reply #6415
http://forsetti.tumblr.com/post/153181757500/on-rural-america-understanding-isnt-the-problem

Almost stopped reading when he used 'epitaph' instead of 'epithet' but I skimmed half of the rest. It was enough to convince me that this is your typical superiority complex like the one we see in the Atheist community. No real evidence for his assertions, just "I tried talking to them and they wouldn't listen!" (yeah I wonder why), and "they're ALL at the LEAST COMMON DENOMINATOR".

There might have been a point in there I missed, but it looked like a bunch of nothing.
At the end, he listed some "truths" they will never accept.  No. 1 was : "Their economic situation is largely the result of voting for supply-side economic policies that have been the largest redistribution of wealth from the bottom/middle to the top in U.S. history."

::) Jesus Christ.

Re: 2016 Election (U.S. Presidential, duh)
Reply #6416
Not for the Trump supporters
Lol. For at least one it will be.
Love is like a magic penny
 if you hold it tight you won't have any
if you give it away you'll have so many
they'll be rolling all over the floor

Re: 2016 Election (U.S. Presidential, duh)
Reply #6417
I think the deeper issue is that they saw inside the political process of how things get done in Washington and it didn't jive with their view of how politics ought to work. This was seen as "corruption" when in many cases it is just that people have collegial relationships with the people they work with, even people they are in opposition to.  I agree that the wall street speeches thing was ugly and something Clinton needed to be more open about, but I think there was a bit of daylight between how people imagine politics to be and how politics actually is, and that was the problem

Yup.  Clinton was friendly with Republicans I'm not sure I'd have been able to give the time of day to, as well.  She's been able to work across the aisle to get shit done, and that was a plus for me, because it's using the power you have to affect incremental change that helps people.  Which is going to mean dealing with some pretty awful ones along the way.  She... I'm not saying she didn't make compromises or that I'm happy with all of them, I'm saying that some compromises are necessary when you're trying to make progress on divisive issues, and I'm not comfortable with completely disavowing and condemning the people doing that on my behalf when I believe their ultimate intentions are good.

Someone ultimately ineffective but more morally "pure" is not what I want in a president; much as I adore President Obama, I was so, so sick of all his good intentions not being able to translate into actions because Congress blocked him at every turn.  Hillary would have been just amazing :(

  • Bilirubin
  • Ain't nothing ta fuck wit'
Re: 2016 Election (U.S. Presidential, duh)
Reply #6418
http://forsetti.tumblr.com/post/153181757500/on-rural-america-understanding-isnt-the-problem

Almost stopped reading when he used 'epitaph' instead of 'epithet' but I skimmed half of the rest. It was enough to convince me that this is your typical superiority complex like the one we see in the Atheist community. No real evidence for his assertions, just "I tried talking to them and they wouldn't listen!" (yeah I wonder why), and "they're ALL at the LEAST COMMON DENOMINATOR".

There might have been a point in there I missed, but it looked like a bunch of nothing.
That's cool, although I kind of take your dismissal like that as elitist. And its a fucking Tumblr so if you expect high literature I don't know what to say.

The observation that once one swallows one complete impossibility then any number of concepts that run into a factual conflict can be dismissed without consideration rings very true to my own experience having been raised fundamentalist. My parents, proud of my scholastic achievements, still wanted me to do a year or two at bible college to shore up whatever doctrinal firewall was necessary for me to survive being exposed to scary ideas at University. Its a easy thing for those who have not experienced it to breeze over without due consideration.

  • Bilirubin
  • Ain't nothing ta fuck wit'
Re: 2016 Election (U.S. Presidential, duh)
Reply #6419
I think the deeper issue is that <snip>
BINGO!

Re: 2016 Election (U.S. Presidential, duh)
Reply #6420
In terms of the results, MI and WI in particular infuriate me because the Stein votes alone would've flipped them, last I looked.

The Stein votes were Stein votes. They didn't belong to anyone else. Speaking of possible worlds, this one also is unpredictable.

BOOM says Mother Jones

Re: 2016 Election (U.S. Presidential, duh)
Reply #6421
That's cool, although I kind of take your dismissal like that as elitist. And its a fucking Tumblr so if you expect high literature I don't know what to say.
The guy reduced everyone to the least common denominator so he could insult them and point out how much smarter he is than them, but I sound like an elitist. Ok.

Quote
The observation that once one swallows one complete impossibility then any number of concepts that run into a factual conflict can be dismissed without consideration rings very true to my own experience having been raised fundamentalist. My parents, proud of my scholastic achievements, still wanted me to do a year or two at bible college to shore up whatever doctrinal firewall was necessary for me to survive being exposed to scary ideas at University. Its a easy thing for those who have not experienced it to breeze over without due consideration.
Dude, I live here. I've met the irrational thinker in the wild. I just find reductive babble to be completely unenlightening.
BOOM says Mother Jones

Re: 2016 Election (U.S. Presidential, duh)
Reply #6422
Is it the same 43& of the population who stayed away this time compared to last time though? I guess the racists turned out because they had someone to vote for- although I'd expexct them to have turned out in 2012 and 2008 because they had someone to vote against.

Turnout was down from the previous two elections, but not comparatively down compared to most presidential elections. It was more down in states that favored Clinton though, so somebody needs to crack that black box and figure out why.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/voter-turnout-fell-especially-in-states-that-clinton-won/
The Clinton foundation and wall street speeches are the issues.

Which is ridiculous given the Trump Foundation and Trump's banking habits.
No. It's not ridiculous. The group that voted against Clinton is not the group that voted for trump.

they literally are.  because they all voted for trump.

Re: 2016 Election (U.S. Presidential, duh)
Reply #6423
In terms of the results, MI and WI in particular infuriate me because the Stein votes alone would've flipped them, last I looked.

The Stein votes were Stein votes. They didn't belong to anyone else. Speaking of possible worlds, this one also is unpredictable.

It's not a question of them being rightfully Hillary's, it's a question of the voters who put their ideology before people's actual lives and now are acting all horrified at the outcome and playing like they're on marginalised people's sides and always have been.  I can't easily forgive those I know who did this.

  • Bilirubin
  • Ain't nothing ta fuck wit'
Re: 2016 Election (U.S. Presidential, duh)
Reply #6424
That's cool, although I kind of take your dismissal like that as elitist. And its a fucking Tumblr so if you expect high literature I don't know what to say.
The guy reduced everyone to the least common denominator so he could insult them and point out how much smarter he is than them, but I sound like an elitist. Ok.
I disagree with your reading of that text

e. and yes, having my direct experience of life within an indoctrinated world, as is being described by that author for folks like you, who have merely, by your own admission, "met irrational thinkers", dismissed so out of hand is p much a definition of elitism.
  • Last Edit: November 17, 2016, 09:56:01 AM by Bilirubin