Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 67

Thread: 2016 Election Post Mortem

  1. #21
    Senior Member Rusty Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    3,936
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by efmbman View Post
    C'mon, Rusty. I may not always agree with you, but I will admit you are one of the most intelligent members here. Do you honestly believe that a Muslim Registry will be a reality?
    I don't believe it's Constitutional, but in this country's 240 year history, there are many many laws that have been in place that weren't ruled unconstitutional until after the fact.

    Whether or not I believe it will be a reality doesn't matter. Even if it won't be a reality (which I freely acknowledge is the highly likely scenario, by the way) Trump and his advisors want it to be; Congress appears to be willing to support anything he wants to do, and Trump's voters WANT it to be a reality - that's why they voted for him in the first place. Bottom line - Trump won, because he said that he was going to take x action against y people. And the perception is that he's going to carry it out to his utmost ability; whether he legally can or not. That's why "letting it go" isn't as simple as you suggest.

    Believe me when I say this: very VERY few people who voted for Hillary Clinton wanted her to be president. I don't know if I said this before; but I probably would have voted for Kasich if that's who she was up against. And I know PLENTY of former Bernie Sanders supporters who have said the same.

    If Ted Cruz had become president, or if Marco Rubio had - I guarantee you, people protesting Trump right now would have been able to suck that up until the next election.

    Again, like I said, this isn't simply whining over "my candidate didn't win." People are literally afraid for their safety right now.
    "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

  2. #22
    Senior Member efmbman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    1,042
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Rusty Jones View Post
    I don't believe it's Constitutional, but in this country's 240 year history, there are many many laws that have been in place that weren't ruled unconstitutional until after the fact.
    That's how it works. You can't challenge the constitutionality of a proposed law. It must be passed and in effect for a court challenge to be made.


    Quote Originally Posted by Rusty Jones View Post
    Believe me when I say this: very VERY few people who voted for Hillary Clinton wanted her to be president.
    I absolutely believe that. I believe the converse as well - very few people that voted for Trump wanted him to be president. This election was nothing but voting against a candidate rather than for a candidate. It will probably be this way for quite some time.

  3. #23
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    2,965
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Rusty Jones View Post
    Believe me when I say this: very VERY few people who voted for Hillary Clinton wanted her to be president. I don't know if I said this before; but I probably would have voted for Kasich if that's who she was up against. And I know PLENTY of former Bernie Sanders supporters who have said the same.
    Concur. Plenty of people I know who voted for either candidate were not as much voting for that candidate, but against the other.

    I also know many people who voted for a candidate based on the cult of personality around that candidate. I know quite a few who were energetic HRC supporters who didn't know too much about her policies, but knew she would be the first female President. I know many DJT supporters who couldn't talk about his policies too much either.

    We are saturated with information, but starving for knowledge.
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  4. #24
    Senior Member Bos Mutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,565
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mjölnir View Post
    Concur. Plenty of people I know who voted for either candidate were not as much voting for that candidate, but against the other.
    I wish more of them would've voted against both.

    I also know many people who voted for a candidate based on the cult of personality around that candidate. I know quite a few who were energetic HRC supporters who didn't know too much about her policies, but knew she would be the first female President. I know many DJT supporters who couldn't talk about his policies too much either.

    We are saturated with information, but starving for knowledge.
    The Misinformation Age.
    The Voice of Reason

  5. #25
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    2,965
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bos Mutus View Post
    I wish more of them would've voted against both.
    Yeah, but there was no viable third (or fourth) party candidate.

    Gary Johnson could have been a much more viable candidate, when he doesn't know what / where Aleppo Syria is and why it is significant to our foreign policy right now ... that tells me he isn't serious about his own candidacy. Give him a second chance and he can't name one single foreign leader he has respect for -- it wasn't that the answer was "zero" ... he could not recall any names -- he struck me as the kid that showed up for a test but didn't bother to study.

    Jill Stein ... far too out there to be viable ...

    In a year where the vast majority of the electorate was demanding change, they were offered:

    -A highly qualified/experienced, highly unlikable candidate with a lot of 'baggage' who seemed to promote a lot of the same vice change and who could not form a good message on why to vote for her other than to make history and not vote for the other guy.

    -A political novice, with a polarizing personality / history who promised to change things and "drain the swamp".

    HRC (& her SuperPAC's etc.) outspent DJT at least 2:1, outstaffed him 3 or 4:1 and should of had the political machine in place to get her to 270 electoral votes regardless of the popular vote. They got beat.

    Long term, Trump may not be a Lincoln or Reagan, but he may provide benefit to both the GOP and the Democrats, he may "drain the swamp" of political entrenchment within the GOP during his administration. The Democrats are taking a serious self reflection on why they lost the Presidency in a year when they had every advantage, and did not regain the Senate when they had a (albeit outside) shot at it. They never had a chance at flipping the House, but severely underperformed in districts they should have won. Trump may force the Democrats to return to what made them so strong for so long, which was not pandering to the extreme left of the Party.
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  6. #26
    Administrator Mjölnir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    2,965
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bos Mutus View Post
    I wish more of them would've voted against both.
    Yeah, but there was no viable third (or fourth) party candidate.

    Gary Johnson could have been a much more viable candidate, when he doesn't know what / where Aleppo Syria is and why it is significant to our foreign policy right now ... that tells me he isn't serious about his own candidacy. Give him a second chance and he can't name one single foreign leader he has respect for -- it wasn't that the answer was "zero" ... he could not recall any names -- he struck me as the kid that showed up for a test but didn't bother to study.

    Jill Stein ... far too out there to be viable ...

    In a year where the vast majority of the electorate was demanding change, they were offered:

    -A highly qualified/experienced, highly unlikable candidate with a lot of 'baggage' who seemed to promote a lot of the same vice change and who could not form a good message on why to vote for her other than to make history and not vote for the other guy.

    -A political novice, with a polarizing personality / history who promised to change things and "drain the swamp".

    HRC (& her SuperPAC's etc.) outspent DJT at least 2:1, outstaffed him 3 or 4:1 and should of had the political machine in place to get her to 270 electoral votes regardless of the popular vote. They got beat.

    Long term, Trump may not be a Lincoln or Reagan, but he may provide benefit to both the GOP and the Democrats, he may "drain the swamp" of political entrenchment within the GOP during his administration. The Democrats are taking a serious self reflection on why they lost the Presidency in a year when they had every advantage, and did not regain the Senate when they had a (albeit outside) shot at it. They never had a chance at flipping the House, but severely underperformed in districts they should have won. Trump may force the Democrats to return to what made them so strong for so long, which was not pandering to the extreme left of the Party.
    The most important six inches on the battlefield ... is between your ears.

  7. #27
    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
    LOL, no one here buys that "no true Scotsman" bullshit. Not even you.
    In a word were you can call yourself anything you want, white person can claim black or indian, male can be female. Whatever you choose, especially to the left, and how the left disavows conservative blacks as "not really black", can you believe that Trump is still a republican? If he walks, and swims and flies like a duck, but claims to be dog, what do you call it?
    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

  8. #28
    Senior Member Rusty Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Norfolk, VA
    Posts
    3,936
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by WILDJOKER5 View Post
    In a word were you can call yourself anything you want, white person can claim black or indian, male can be female. Whatever you choose, especially to the left, and how the left disavows conservative blacks as "not really black", can you believe that Trump is still a republican? If he walks, and swims and flies like a duck, but claims to be dog, what do you call it?
    Well, let's see here:

    -You're a right-winger. Whenever Rainmaker makes a post defending or supporting Trump, you "like" it.

    -If Trump is a "leftist," then why didn't he run as a Democrat? Is it because he knew he couldn't win the nomination. But, he knew he could win the Republican nomination (after all, he DID win it). Hmmm... why is that?

    You then go on to call McCain, Romney, and the Bush family RINO's too. The funny thing is, there appears to be no general consensus on who is or isn't a "RINO." That's something that appears to be a the personal discretion of the person using the term.
    "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

  9. #29
    Senior Member Bos Mutus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Posts
    1,565
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Mjölnir View Post
    Yeah, but there was no viable third (or fourth) party candidate.
    There were no viable first or second party candidates, either.

    Gary Johnson could have been a much more viable candidate, when he doesn't know what / where Aleppo Syria is and why it is significant to our foreign policy right now ... that tells me he isn't serious about his own candidacy. Give him a second chance and he can't name one single foreign leader he has respect for -- it wasn't that the answer was "zero" ... he could not recall any names -- he struck me as the kid that showed up for a test but didn't bother to study.
    He definitely stepped in it a few times. He's a little kooky, but probably a better choice than the first two, IMO.

    Jill Stein ... far too out there to be viable ...
    Yeah...

    In a year where the vast majority of the electorate was demanding change, they were offered:

    -A highly qualified/experienced, highly unlikable candidate with a lot of 'baggage' who seemed to promote a lot of the same vice change and who could not form a good message on why to vote for her other than to make history and not vote for the other guy.

    -A political novice, with a polarizing personality / history who promised to change things and "drain the swamp".

    HRC (& her SuperPAC's etc.) outspent DJT at least 2:1, outstaffed him 3 or 4:1 and should of had the political machine in place to get her to 270 electoral votes regardless of the popular vote. They got beat.

    Long term, Trump may not be a Lincoln or Reagan, but he may provide benefit to both the GOP and the Democrats, he may "drain the swamp" of political entrenchment within the GOP during his administration. The Democrats are taking a serious self reflection on why they lost the Presidency in a year when they had every advantage, and did not regain the Senate when they had a (albeit outside) shot at it. They never had a chance at flipping the House, but severely underperformed in districts they should have won. Trump may force the Democrats to return to what made them so strong for so long, which was not pandering to the extreme left of the Party.
    Too late now, but would've been interesting to have someone like Bloomberg, Independent in this. Maybe would have just hurt HIllary even more and I think that's why he didn't. He'd be getting the blame for Trump instead.
    The Voice of Reason

  10. #30
    Senior Member Rainmaker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    on a Marl Road
    Posts
    3,882
    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bos Mutus View Post
    There were no viable first or second party candidates, either.
    Actually, the definition of "viable candidate" has changed.

    See, " a viable candidate" no longer means: "someone willing to abandon our borders, offshore our industrial base & take all of our wealth and transfer it to a numerically small clique of international-socialists"

    ....there were plenty of candidates in the primaries willing to continue doing so.......But, They all lost.

    He definitely stepped in it a few times. He's a little kooky, but probably a better choice than the first two, IMO.
    Johnson was a SJW posing as a libertarian. He was a RINO plant that backfired. Because he was so far out in Left field, that he ended up pulling more votes from Shitlery than Trump.
    Last edited by Rainmaker; 11-19-2016 at 06:02 PM.

Posting Permissions

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