Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 67

Thread: 2016 Election Post Mortem

  1. #41
    Senior Member WILDJOKER5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    939
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bos Mutus View Post
    So, you can't be in favor of building a wall, but still hate Trump?

    He also campaigned on jobs...does that mean if you want more jobs you also love Trump?

    C'mon, man.
    Well, when Trump was pleading for the black vote by saying he could get them jobs, and then blacks vote against him, that does kind of show where his thinking is at.
    Progressivism; such great ideas, they need to force you to follow them.

    Socialism is for the people, not the socialist.

    Economic Left/Right: 7.38
    Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.08
    politicalcompass.org

  2. #42
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    2,973
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bos Mutus View Post
    So, you can't be in favor of building a wall, but still hate Trump?

    He also campaigned on jobs...does that mean if you want more jobs you also love Trump?

    C'mon, man.
    You are hitting on what is my biggest frustration of the 2016 post-election narratiive:

    -Voted for DJT does not equal a racist, but I am sure that some of his votes were from racists.
    -Voted for HRC does not equal a radical feminist, but I am sure some of her votes were from radical feminists.

    I have heard too often that racism, misogyny or sexism prevailed in the election, along with too much radical progressivism and political correctness was defeated. I don't necessarily like Trump ... I do like some of his policy points, others I don't. I liked some of Clinton's, others I did not. Fact is he will be the next President and I am encouraged to see him meeting with people like Rep. Gabbard (a Democrat) and Mitt Romney (who vilified him in the primaries); I am equally encouraged to hear the next Senate Minority Leader offering to work with him on key issues.

    Something to ponder as we go ahead, Trump will get the cabinet he wants; in 2013 when Democrats controlled the Senate they changed a procedural rule and now Senate confirmation of Presidential appointees (except Supreme Court Justices) only require a simple majority vice 60 votes to achieve cloture ... Right now the Republicans will control 51 seats ... Possibly 52 after the Louisiana runoff in December. Short of pushing through a Supreme Court nomination, Republicans have two years to do almost anything they can unify behind. The Patient Protection and Affoardable Health Care Act is likely to be largely dismantled using budgetary procedures which only require a simple majority in the Senate as well.

    The bully pulpit eight years ago from the first two years of the Obama Administration is now shifted 180 degrees ... It will be interesting to see what Republicans do.
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  3. #43
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    2,973
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Rusty Jones View Post
    Nah, I'd actually compare Slick Willy to movie characters played by Michael Douglas.

    But that aside, both 1992 and 1996 were well before the age of social media - hell, before the age of "everyone" having the internet in general. The Monica Lewinski thing popped off after Clinton's reelection.

    Bottom line - Bill Clinton won both terms before the general public was aware of anything.
    I don't disagree with most of your post. On the point about WJC specifically, you are right ... He was elected before the Internet and social media. Really took off; few people knew about what he had repeatedly been accused of doing. What severely hurt HRC with a demographic she expected to dominate (white, college educated women) was the HRC knew and actively sought to vilify these women. It is hard to appeal to a swing voter who is an educated female that you are a champion for women when you have sought to dismantle accusations of sexual assault by your husband ... It hurt her in a demographic that could have put her in the White House.

    Don't get me wrong.... DJT has said a lot of stupid things about women, veterans, immigrants etc. the women who in the last weeks of the election were accusing him of assault have pretty much vanished ... In contrast to some of the WJC accuser who have told their stories for years. DJT is no saint, but HRC's inability to own her actions in covering for her husband (on whose coattails she rose to power) definitely hurt her.
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  4. #44
    Senior Member Rusty Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    3,937
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bos Mutus View Post
    So, you can't be in favor of building a wall, but still hate Trump?
    Very disingenuous.

    Do you remember anyone shouting "build that wall" at Latinos back in 2014? No? Me neither. Glad we agree that question is BS.

    He also campaigned on jobs...does that mean if you want more jobs you also love Trump?

    C'mon, man.
    Again, very disingenuous. I'm 36 years old and, my whole life as far back as I can remember, EVERY candidate running for executive or legislative office at the federal, state, and local level has campaigned on jobs. Every. Last. One.

    So clearly, "jobs" didn't make Trump stand out. Other things did. And you know this.
    "Well... Uber's going to "driverless" cars soon, and their research probably shows that they're a natural fit (when it comes to getting paid for doing nothing)."
    -Rainmaker, referencing black males

  5. #45
    Senior Member Rusty Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    3,937
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Sigh, that's what he campaigned on, but that's not what he will do. Bush and Clinton passed laws for a wall, still not built. Can Trump do it? Maybe, but I don't believe he will. Either way, still not racist since there is nothing racist about protecting ones own country and citizens, that includes legal immigrants.
    Doesn't matter if he will do it or not. He campaigned on it, and that's what attracted the people who voted for him - that's the point I'm making. The kind of people that should "build that wall" at Latinos.

    And, yes, it's racist. Under the guise of protecting one's country and citizens? Shows what you think of Mexicans. (i.e., that they pose a threat of some sort).
    Again, "building a wall" is not racist.
    Yes it is, and I explained why.

    Calling a race of people "super predators" is.
    It is, but you know something? The big difference between Clinton and Trump? Clinton retracts her gaffes. Trump doubles down on his. I've said this before; I was a Bernie Sanders supporter... but he wasn't an option two weeks ago.

    But, again; the fact remains... you treat Trump and Clinton differently; and you've made no attempt to disprove it.

    More than just Mexicans cross the southern boarder illegally. If we were having a problem of drug cartels from Canada, I bet there would be a youge call for a wall there too.
    Oh, but there is! Drugs not approved by the FDA but are legal in Canada cross the border all the time. Good thing for you, you didn't place an actual bet.

    Remember Rick Santorum talking all that shit about illegal immigrants? Dog whistle politics. Because it was later revealed that he was financially supporting illegal immigrants from Germany. They're "different." Because they're white. Kind of like Melania, when she was here illegally.

    If they're both "leftists," then shouldn’t you be defending them both? Or joining in on accusations against both?

    BTW, were communists in Germany left or right after WWII? Walls are particular to which ideology again?
    False analogy. The Berlin Wall that was built by East Germany was not to keep West Germans out. It was built to keep East Germans IN.

    Got an example of leftists building a wall to keep people out? No?

    Moving on...

    Also, BIG DIFFERENCE in calling for a wall and calling a certain race of people something.
    There sure is a BIG DIFFERENCE. One is calling a group of people a name. The other is actually making POLICY against a group of people. Glad we agree.

    I didn't vote for either, so how did I treat him differently?
    You talk about them differently.

    I call out those who think everything a so called republican does as "racist" while leaving the glaring racist left out of the conversation.
    But, according to you, Trump isn't a "real" Republican. He's a "leftist." A "RHINO." Remember?

    And, so I say again, Trump, unlike Clinton, is a right wing conservative and you know it. You even see it. That's why you treat Trump differently.

    And?
    And if the DNC could have rigged trough pledged delegates, then so could have the RNC. That puts us at square one. Since there was a chosen one on both sides, Trump made a choice based on who he thought would vote for him.
    BTW, you need to give up on trying to convince anyone that Trump is a leftist. Furthermore, you need to give up on trying to convince anyone that you yourself actually believe it. Just stop. You’ve already failed a long time ago.

    When people see that their "vote wont count" if they don't vote for the winner or "viable option" which was already decided to be HRC, they tend to be persuaded to vote a certain way. Why wont people vote for a third party? Cause they are told their votes are thrown away.
    Not relevant to anything I've said.

    Ron Paul was scoring big in the beginning last election primaries, but he was ignored by the media and got no traction later on. Trump had so much free advertising on the media that his buzz words took hold.
    This doesn't refute the quote that you were responding to.

    You're gonna have to come back with something else. That's speculative. The DNC even said they are there incase the populace makes "the wrong choice".
    I don't have to come back with shit. Look at all of the Democratic primaries since the superdelegates were introduced. In all of the Democratic primaries, the nominee won the nomination by a margin in pledged delegates that exceeded the number of possible superdelegates. In other words, even if the losing candidate got every single superdelegate, every winner of the Democratic nomination since superdelegates were introduced would have still won. With that being said, the superdelegates have never decided the Democratic nominee.

    Wanna do your math again?
    Why, to prove myself right?

    Bill won some south states in 96.
    I said this.

    Bush 1 had the entire south in 88.
    WRONG. He had EVERY state south of the Mason-Dixon line. The only state that's culturally southern that he didn't win was West Virginia. Can't tell if you're lying or talking out of your ass on that one but, in either case, you need to stop.

    Reagan had all but MN and DC in 84.
    True, but as he still won the south, this still supports the Southern Strategy.

    Jimmy only had his home state in 80.
    GASP! You mean Reagan won every state in the south except for one? That Southern Strategy works like a charm, doesn’t it?

    That "southern strat" sucks apparently.
    Well… you, yourself, have just proven that it most certainly does not.

    And keep saying the south is racist,
    I do? Please quote me. But will say this: Republican politicians think this way about southerners. That's how they were able to design the Southern Strategy in the first place.

    you are proving my point of why the GOP never needs to worry about the way the south votes. You are so narrow minded to think that the GOP needs to focus on the south when apparently to you, all they are are racist hicks who will vote for republicans forever.
    You said all that, not me.

    Guess its so racist, that's why blacks and Hispanics are thriving there right? But the utopian urban areas of "enlightenment" in liberal cities, blacks are getting poorer.
    Thriving where? How are whites doing in these states? Funny, it's the southern states that get all the welfare and other public assistance.

    Sounds like you are just giving Obama a pass for being black.
    LOL, I though you conservatives don't "play the race card?"

    Again, there's a difference between using force when deemed necessary, and being eager to use it just because. That race thing just came out of nowhere.

    He has kept up the exact same policies as Bush, but bombed even more countries, making 2 more unstable like Libya and Syria, sold weapons to ISIS, and pushed Russia back into a corner where they felt that if we elected HRC, world war III would break out with nukes. Putin said that btw.
    Sold weapons to ISIS? You mean the organizatin that Bush created and armed? LOL, do you really want to go there?

    And fuck Putin. Conservatives claim that Obama got handled by Putin (when, by their own standards, so did Bush) - but look at Trump. He is kissing Putin’s ass.

    Umm, nope. You said NAACP. Not Jesse Jackson. I’ll go out on limb and say that most Americans – including black Americans – have never heard of the Rainbow Coalition, let alone know what it is. In any case, most blacks have written him off the same way they’ve written off Don King.

    No, he didn't.
    Yes he did. And it was against a minor.
    Not a single trial has taken place.
    Yeah, because she dropped it in response to death threats.
    But, hey - I’ve run red lights many times, and I’ve never gotten tickets for it. Guess that means I’ve never run red lights before, huh?
    It was just an accusation.
    That Trump strong-armed his way out of.
    Bill and HRC BOTH visited orgy island, several times, where underage sex slaves were located with their pedophile friend.
    LOL, you need to stay off of Conservative Tribune, News Max and all those other bullshit sites that have you bamboozled with conspiracy theories.

    Wikileaks is right wing now?
    Nope, but all the sites that claim it was on Wikileaks are.
    Is this part of the ideology "switch" that happened part of the southern strat?
    LOL, quotation marks. Still in denial.

    Links.
    http://letmegooglethat.com/?q=increa...me+since+trump

    Links
    http://indiatoday.intoday.in/story/m.../1/811983.html
    People who voted for Romney were a minority. Men are a minority.
    Jesus fucking Christ, man…

    If you come back with "institutional minority", women are a minority. People who vote for Johnson are a minority.
    Your disingenuity in attempt to avoid discussing this isn’t going to work. The fact is, you’re a heterosexual white male. Possibly Christian, but certainly not Muslim. Here’s a cool meme to illustrate your position:
    Last edited by Rusty Jones; 11-23-2016 at 09:19 AM.
    "Well... Uber's going to "driverless" cars soon, and their research probably shows that they're a natural fit (when it comes to getting paid for doing nothing)."
    -Rainmaker, referencing black males

  6. #46
    Senior Member Rusty Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    3,937
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Any of them rioting? Nope, just leftist babies.
    Who’s rioting?
    I think that the message is going to be clear: this shit conservatives are pulling by harassing minorities because Trump is going to get them hurt or killed.
    You want to talk about rioting like babies over something stupid? Look at the pictures of people rioting because their local college football team lost.

    Like who? He never spoke out against blacks, other than to say the left has done nothing for them and he was going to get them back to work.
    Oh, and saying “the blacks.” Leading the Birther Movement. Claiming that blacks are lazy on two different occasions. Campaigning against the Central Park Five. Let’s not forget housing discrimination dating back 40 years.
    Even if those things never happened… it’s not as if black people have the luxury of listening to a white man speak ill of non-black minorities, and being able to think that black people are in the clear. Black people know better than that.

    Illegals? 12-30 million of them, but then again only like 1% of people are murders, that's a minority of the population that still gets locked up for committing a crime.
    You need to go educate Trump on that.
    Muslims? Only coming from areas known to have had sleeper terrorist who want to cause harm like in France.
    Nope. He didn’t specify. In fact, his moratorium on immigration applies to ALL Muslims.

    Did I deny that it was in play at one point in time?
    You put “switch” in quotation marks. Looks like a denial to me.
    I said today, there is no need for it.
    Right. Explains why Trump came out at the top and Kasich came out at damn near the bottom, despite campaigning for far longer than GOP candidates with way more delegates than he had. The less racist a Republican was, the less delegates he got.
    Looks like a “need” to me.
    Glad you balked at the points I highlighted. Guess Trump got more black votes cause of Don King. Got the blue collar workers of OH and PA because he is all about the rich and spouting off about how they could be rich too right?
    More like the story we all know of poor whites voting against their own economic best interests by appealing to racism against minorities. Making poor whites feel like they’re in some elite club because of the color of their skin, when they’re really not.
    Just admit that Trump won because the US didn't like HRC.
    The popular vote says the US disliked Trump more.
    She wanted to kill the 2A,
    LOL, “Thar comin’ to take yer gunnnnsssss!”

    she wanted to kill the jobs in the coal mines.
    Link.
    She lies, and calls people who disagreed with her names.
    Funny, because Trump is the one getting his ass kicked all over the place by PolitiFact.
    Calling names? You mean names like nasty woman? Lyin’ Ted? Little Marco? Low-Energy Jeb? Crazy Bernie? Crooked Clinton? Lightweight? Loser? Moron? Dummy? Overrated? Thug?
    Err, no, wait… Trump called all those names. Nevermind.
    Obama stepped out and said he would be personally insulted if Trump won cause everything he'd done would be erased. Admit it, most people who voted didn't want more of Obama/Bush legacy of a down ward spiral of America. They didn't want HRC shipping more jobs overseas like Bill.
    He specifically was referring to the people who voted for him that were in the “Bernie or Bust” crowd. Right wingers took that out of context in order to make a “cool” comeback.
    They are tired of the BLM sympathizers in office who do and say nothing when they kill cops and flame the fire when a cop does his legal job.
    LOL, when they kill cops? Every cop killed over the last month or so was killed by white men; some of whom were even in hate groups. In fact, the majority of cops in general are killed by white men. Sorry, what you said here is invalid.
    "Well... Uber's going to "driverless" cars soon, and their research probably shows that they're a natural fit (when it comes to getting paid for doing nothing)."
    -Rainmaker, referencing black males

  7. #47
    Senior Member Rusty Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    3,937
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mjölnir View Post
    -Voted for DJT does not equal a racist
    That's debatable. But you know what's not? That, at the minimum, racism in a political candidate wasn't a deal breaker for those that voted for him.
    "Well... Uber's going to "driverless" cars soon, and their research probably shows that they're a natural fit (when it comes to getting paid for doing nothing)."
    -Rainmaker, referencing black males

  8. #48
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    2,973
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Rusty Jones View Post
    That's debatable. But you know what's not? That, at the minimum, racism in a political candidate wasn't a deal breaker for those that voted for him.
    I don't think that is debatable.

    IRT racism in a candidate, let's be fair, racism by HRC wasn't a deal breaker for those that voted for her either. I know you were not a fan of HRC, but I think you are focusing on an issue with DJT that you had or were otherwise willing to overlook by the democratic candidate.

    -Trump stoked the fires of the birther movement (which I am not convinced was a racists issue but ...), however the birther movement was started by HRC's campaign in 2007.

    -HRC referred to WJC's campaign manager as a "f*cking Jew bastard".

    -HRC made jokes about Indians including Gandhi owning gas stations.

    -HRC referred to "Colored people's time", referencing that blacks are always running late.

    -HRC referred to (some) black men as "super-predators" - regarding the disproportionate percentage of crimes committed by black males compared to their overall share of the population.

    -Then you could have a long debate on whether her policies and proposals were really helpful to the minority community.

    IRT race/racism and Trump. He has said a lot of stupid things, he also showed evidence of discrimination for decades ... at the same time he has hired and put minorities in various positions to include executive positions within his organization.

    I won't say he isn't racist, but am inclined to think he's less racist than ambivalent about race if you are a hard worker. I get the impression he's a businessman with little time to spend on ensuring he has a diverse staff or executive boardroom, top performers rise to the top regardless of gender or race.

    -I know you preferred Sanders, but I never saw him as strong on race, particularly when Sanders insinuated that all blacks live in ghettos?

    -Not really racism, but following the Democrat Primaries in Nevada Sanders supporters sent death threats to a female Democratic Party official because they were outraged at what occurred at the Nevada state convention, I was not overly surprised. but when Bernie Sanders declined to denounce such behavior vigorously, I was very surprised, this does not to me embody someone I would consider tolerant or ... but ... progressive isn't necessarily tolerant. Just as Donald Trump’s supporters would not demonstrate thuggish behavior, such as assaulting protesters, without getting signals from their leader that it’s acceptable, the same is could be considered true of Sanders’s supporters.

    After decades of the DNC practicing racially or gender polarizing politics, I don't think anyone should be surprised that it is now prominent with portions of the GOP as well; but I would argue not to only think that the candidate or politician you don't like is the only one doing it.
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  9. #49
    Senior Member WILDJOKER5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    939
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Rusty Jones View Post
    Very disingenuous.

    Do you remember anyone shouting "build that wall" at Latinos back in 2014? No? Me neither. Glad we agree that question is BS.
    Dude, before 2014, chanting "U.S.A." was the equivalent. It's nothing new and the kids are just trolling the other school. They have zero understanding of what they are saying or the mechanics that will go into building the wall.
    Progressivism; such great ideas, they need to force you to follow them.

    Socialism is for the people, not the socialist.

    Economic Left/Right: 7.38
    Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.08
    politicalcompass.org

  10. #50
    Senior Member Bos Mutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,575
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Rusty Jones View Post
    Very disingenuous.

    Do you remember anyone shouting "build that wall" at Latinos back in 2014? No? Me neither. Glad we agree that question is BS.
    What?

    I'm not following you at all let alone agreeing. The Trump package included a lot of objectionable stuff. I don't think a border wall was one of those things.

    Shouting "Build that wall" at a heavily Latino school is objectionable...but the idea of a wall, I don't think is any more objectionable than restrictions on who can immigrate here...it's just a method of enforcement...same as checking credentials the border...searching cars, etc. Or having a visa system.

    Again, very disingenuous. I'm 36 years old and, my whole life as far back as I can remember, EVERY candidate running for executive or legislative office at the federal, state, and local level has campaigned on jobs. Every. Last. One.

    So clearly, "jobs" didn't make Trump stand out. Other things did. And you know this.
    He didn't invent the idea of a wall, either.

    The whole point was...just because he campaigned on some ideas doesn't mean that if you like or support one or more than you endorse him as a candidate and subscribe to everything he campaigned on.
    The Voice of Reason

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •