Random initial thoughts on yesterday's election...

Slyfox696 said:

Unlikely, but I'll hear you out.

No doubt some people do. But far too many do not. Trump's nomination as the Republican Party nominee is evidence of that. Trump, in so many ways, is the exact opposite of what Republicans have always claimed to be. Heck, he's a wealthy insider who ran as an outsider and people bought into it. He's a guy who has openly bragged about being part of the wealthy elite and the insider class, yet people think he's going to "drain the swamp". The same people who want him to "drain the swamp" also re-elected an overwhelming percentage of their Congress people.

That's not "thinking for yourself". That's voting with a political party.

What's this nonsense about "lone wolf". I'm not claiming to be a lone wolf, I'm saying I prefer to think for myself and vote for someone who represents my views.

You seem far too defensive of your team to be having this discussion.

Click to expand...

Are you an anarchist who is against all political parties?

Random initial thought...

Trump will be the first President in modern history to not go gray while in office. You heard it here first. In four years, his hair will still be orange.

Mac77 said:

Are you an anarchist who is against all political parties?

Click to expand...

No, I'm against sheep. There's nothing wrong with joining alongside people who believe similarly to you. But voting someone just because they have an R or D behind their name, with no regard as to what the person stands for or if they align with what you believe, is silly. When you care more about your team winning than you do about voting for someone who represents your interests, or when your interests change when it is politically convenient for the party platform to change, then that's when I have a problem.

Grand Mal said:

That horse left the barn long time ago.

Click to expand...

What does that mean?

radcen said:

Random initial thoughts on yesterday's election...

- All I can say is, he pulled it off. For good or for bad, Trump is it.

- Pollsters need some serious work.

- The Dems seriously underestimated the rural person's point-of-view and impact. They kept smugly and arrogantly proclaiming that the demographics have changed, implying a new direction, but it hasn't changed enough to suit their goals. In reality it's only changed significantly in the urban areas and around colleges. Much of the rest of the country is still greatly conservative, and I felt people in these rural areas made it a point to stand up this time and make sure their voice was heard, too.

- Reps, I believe, will get all cocky over these results, take it as a mandate (which it isn't), and basically shoot themselves in the foot. Not unlike how the Dems did so after Obama was first elected in 2008 and they controlled Congress and the WH for a couple years, then blew it. I swear the most un-self-aware entities in the world have to be political parties, but I digress.

- I do believe that the email scandal hurt Hillary more than she and the Dems know, or want to admit. True that she has been able to avoid indictment, but even if it was/is legal it was still a massively boneheaded thing to do and shows an utter lack of judgment on her part. And then on top of that she "lost" so many emails?!? Seriously? That defense, I'm sure, helped keep her from legal prosecution, but from a competency perspective it made her look completely irresponsible and unqualified for the job she was seeking.

- Trump is still a buffoon. But, he's going to be President Buffoon, and as such his office (if not him) deserves the benefit of the doubt now and we *should be* working toward common goals. Will he get get that? Meh, probably not, but petty partisanship of the past is a poor excuse for continuing said pettiness. If you/we can clamor for party unity, we should have no reservations clamoring for national and societal unity, as well... but I won't hold my breath. Ok, off my Pollyanna soapbox.

Click to expand...

Agree with some of that. Oh except the last part, I will Never refer to trump as President, he is still the same snake oil salesman that he was when running for office, and I do not have one iota of respect for him. Maybe enough people will fall in line, but as with the election, I have no intention of jumping on the trump bandwagon, now or ever.

MaggieD said:

I don't think Reps will take it as a mandate. I think it scares the CRAP out of them. The only mandate expressed by this vote is, "We're sick of ALL of you!!"

Trump is not a buffoon. If you can't respect the man, respect the office.

Click to expand...

Oh they will be making that their battle cry, We Have a Mandate, after most of them got re-elected. Did you forget that it always the other guy that they are sick of?

I respect the Office but will not be respecting the person in it, period. Things do not go back to Square One because the guy got elected, ask the Republicans.

MaggieD said:

What does that mean?

Click to expand...

I'm just guessing, but maybe that people have been disrespectful toward President Obama for 8 years, and disrespectful toward President Bush 2 the 8 years before that, etc.

Absentglare said:

I'm just guessing, but maybe that people have been disrespectful toward President Obama for 8 years, and disrespectful toward President Bush 2 the 8 years before that, etc.

Click to expand...

Only a real idiot would want to be president anymore. I always thought that Condy Rice should have run and would have been a shoe in but she is far too intelligent to want such a horrible job.

MaggieD said:

What does that mean?

Click to expand...

It's been several presidents since the office was respected even if the man wasn't. The bad-mouthing of Obama was exceeded only by the bad-mouthing of Dubya.
I expect Republicans are about to be reminded how much easier life is in opposition than in power.

Slyfox696 said:

No, I'm against sheep.

There's nothing wrong with joining alongside people who believe similarly to you. But voting someone just because they have an R or D behind their name,

with no regard as to what the person stands for or if they align with what you believe, is silly. When you care more about your team winning than you do about voting for someone who represents your interests, or when your interests change when it is politically convenient for the party platform to change, then that's when I have a problem.

Click to expand...

I dont see how any open minded centerest can fail to see any difference between trump and clinton

You mar prefer johnson or someone else but no one had a realistic chance to win except clinton and bush

No one asked you to embrace their party.

Just use your brain and vote for one you hate the least

But as I said before if you choose to let me vote for you I will.

However that makes your opinion on the issues unimportant.

Moderate Right said:

Only a real idiot would want to be president anymore. I always thought that Condy Rice should have run and would have been a shoe in but she is far too intelligent to want such a horrible job.

Click to expand...

I think rice was so goofy that she announced she was voting for hillary

MaggieD said:

I don't think Reps will take it as a mandate. I think it scares the CRAP out of them. The only mandate expressed by this vote is, "We're sick of ALL of you!!"

Trump is not a buffoon. If you can't respect the man, respect the office.

Click to expand...

Spoke too soon. Both Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell today used the word "mandate".

Paul Ryan:
Paul Ryan: Donald Trump Has a Mandate and Will Lead a Unified Republican Party
Paul Ryan: Donald Trump Has a Mandate and Will Lead a Unified Republican Party - Katie Pavlich

Can't find a McConnell quote, but I heard it on the radio on the way home.

I viewed some twitter results this morning and many of the Hillary supporters used the same old nasty words to describe Trump voters and these seemed to be the top three: "Hate", "sexist", and "racist". It gets old, especially if you're none of those things. You didn't vote for Hillary? Sexist! You want people to enter this country legally? Racist! People are sick of working hard and loving others only to have some jackass attempt to brand them as some horrible bigot because of a basic political disagreement.

JC Callender said:

I viewed some twitter results this morning and many of the Hillary supporters used the same old nasty words to describe Trump voters and these seemed to be the top three: "Hate", "sexist", and "racist". It gets old, especially if you're none of those things. You didn't vote for Hillary? Sexist! You want people to enter this country legally? Racist! People are sick of working hard and loving others only to have some jackass attempt to brand them as some horrible bigot because of a basic political disagreement.

Click to expand...

I agree with this post

Hillary progressives are unhinged and I dont think they will ever recover.

This bitter, down and dirty election is only a preview of things to come

JC Callender said:

I viewed some twitter results this morning and many of the Hillary supporters used the same old nasty words to describe Trump voters and these seemed to be the top three: "Hate", "sexist", and "racist". It gets old, especially if you're none of those things. You didn't vote for Hillary? Sexist! You want people to enter this country legally? Racist! People are sick of working hard and loving others only to have some jackass attempt to brand them as some horrible bigot because of a basic political disagreement.

Click to expand...

An argument that would make sense if Trump campaigned on political issues.

But he didn't. He campaigned on character assassination. That and baiting the media into giving him free press with ridiculous behavior like making fun of a disabled person, attacking of Heidi Cruz' looks, bragging about his dick size, and crying about the media the whole time.

Absentglare said:

An argument that would make sense if Trump campaigned on political issues.

But he didn't. He campaigned on character assassination. That and baiting the media into giving him free press with ridiculous behavior like making fun of a disabled person, attacking of Heidi Cruz' looks, bragging about his dick size, and crying about the media the whole time.

Click to expand...

You seem to believe that campaigns for president are usually pleasant experiences where both parties treat one another with class and dignity. When Trump talks about illegals and the criminal element they send over and you accuse him of hating all Mexicans and in turn accuse him of racism, that's not his fault. That's you branding someone something horrible because you think it will score you political points and it's reprehensible. When out of the thousands of hours of tape that's probably laying around on Trump because he's been in the public eye his whole life you find a casual conversation where Trump says he can "grab them by the *****..." and you accuse him of sexual assault but purposely leave out the part where he says "they let you do it...", once again you're taking a guy who speaks roughly and inarticulately and attempting to capitalize on it by making it much, much worse than what it was. Instead of simply believing that Trump is talking about how a lot of women will throw themselves sexually at a rich and famous guy like himself, you assume that he literally walks around all day grabbing women by their crotches. :roll: Accusing Trump voters of sexism would make less sense than accusing Bill Clinton supporters of sexism if he ran against a female. Look at the list of his accusers, yet for some reason leftists seem to think he's a nice chap for the same or worse than Trump. And I'm wondering what Trump social policies strictly favor men over women or denigrate the dignity of women? Possibly his two most important supporters were Ivanka Trump and Kellyanne Conway. And I'm sexist for voting for Trump?

I've said it before, Trump is a crass NYC builder, not a career politician, and many leftists and some righties have attempted to capitalize on his crude, inarticulate, and politically incorrect way of speaking to make him out to be much worse than he actually is and that attempt to constantly brand someone as a "racist, sexist, hate monger, etc..." is more distasteful than any words or actions Trump has put out there.

Btw, do you believe Trump hates all disabled people because he made fun of a disabled guy? If not, then call it what it is...a crude comment coming from a guy running for office who's not a career politician used to appeasing people all day long for votes and favors.

Absentglare said:

An argument that would make sense if Trump campaigned on political issues.

But he didn't. He campaigned on character assassination. That and baiting the media into giving him free press with ridiculous behavior like making fun of a disabled person, attacking of Heidi Cruz' looks, bragging about his dick size, and crying about the media the whole time.

Click to expand...

Trump did some of the offenses you list

But not all

He did not mock a disabled person.

Trump mocked a very stupid lib journalist who happened to be disabled

Thats a big difference

But he did attack the sainted lib media and every time he insulted them 75 million Americans pumped their fist and cheered.

Mac77 said:

Trump did some of the offenses you list

But not all

He did not mock a disabled person.

Trump mocked a very stupid lib journalist who happened to be disabled

Thats a big difference

But he did attack the sainted lib media and every time he insulted them 75 million Americans pumped their fist and cheered.

Click to expand...

You're lying. He gestured and made a facial expression specifically to mock the fact that he was disabled.

I know that the right is happy to engage in bigotry against the left, but that doesn't excuse mocking the disabled.

Absentglare said:

You're lying. He gestured and made a facial expression specifically to mock the fact that he was disabled.

I know that the right is happy to engage in bigotry against the left, but that doesn't excuse mocking the disabled.

Click to expand...

You cannot have a rational conversation with a person in that deep a level of denial.

Absentglare said:

You're lying. He gestured and made a facial expression specifically to mock the fact that he was disabled.

I know that the right is happy to engage in bigotry against the left, but that doesn't excuse mocking the disabled.

Click to expand...

Trump has used the same gestures to mock people who are not disabled.

What happened is trump mocked a rather stupid liberal journalist who happened to be handicapped

That is completely acceptable in a society where the disabled demand to participate equally in everyday life

radcen said:

You cannot have a rational conversation with a person in that deep a level of denial.

Click to expand...

Or with so totally uninformed libs like you

Mac77 said:

You mar prefer johnson or someone else but no one had a realistic chance to win except clinton and bush

Click to expand...

Irrelevant. Just because nearly 60 million people thought Trump or Clinton was who they wanted to represent them, that doesn't mean I have to feel the same way.

Just use your brain and vote for one you hate the least

Click to expand...

That's not the point of a vote. The point of a vote is to choose the person you want to represent you, not to hold a figurative gun to your head and be forced to choose.

But as I said before if you choose to let me vote for you I will.

Click to expand...

You didn't vote for me. I voted for me.

However that makes your opinion on the issues unimportant.

Click to expand...

Utterly stupid position I hear all the time. My opinion on the issues is important because it's carefully considered and logically presented. Simply putting a check mark by a name does not make one's opinion valid, and not putting a check mark doesn't render your opinion invalid. Not to mention, I still voted for Senator, Congressman, Governor, etc.

I think the problem you seem to have is you don't like looking in the mirror and realizing you might be one of those sheep I mentioned. And you want everyone else to be sheep also, so you feel better about yourself. There's absolutely no drawback to a person thinking for him or herself, but there is PLENTY of danger blindly following the crowd.

radcen said:

Spoke too soon. Both Paul Ryan and Mitch McConnell today used the word "mandate".

Paul Ryan:
Paul Ryan: Donald Trump Has a Mandate and Will Lead a Unified Republican Party
Paul Ryan: Donald Trump Has a Mandate and Will Lead a Unified Republican Party - Katie Pavlich

Can't find a McConnell quote, but I heard it on the radio on the way home.

Click to expand...

I would agree with the OP that the election results should not be construed as a sweeping mandate to the Republicans- especially since it looks like Hillary will win the popular vote. But I don't think it is much of a stretch to say that the electorate does mandate a couple of things through the results of this election:

1) Repeal and Replace Obamacare, the most unpopular legislation probably ever to be forced down the throat of the American people. The fact that this year many grandfathered policies (including my own) are cancelled effective at the end of the year, despite the promises that "if you like your plan, you can keep your plan." And that the notices came out in September combined with the fact that open enrollment started November 1st... I think this can be seen as a mandate.

2) The American people overall are sick of career politicians, special interest groups, corruption within Washington and incendiary targeting of anyone who doesn't agree with the leftist direction that Obama has taken the country (Racist, masogonist, bigot, hater, etc.)- most people are not those things. Most Trump voters are not those things. What we found was that there was a silent majority who didn't even feel comfortable expressing their opinions to pollsters in advance of the election for fear of being labeled a hateful bigot- people, myself included, are tired of that. The Democrats can read whatever mandate into that that they see fit.

Slyfox696 said:

Irrelevant. Just because nearly 60 million people thought Trump or Clinton was who they wanted to represent them, that doesn't mean I have to feel the same way.

That's not the point of a vote. The point of a vote is to choose the person you want to represent you, not to hold a figurative gun to your head and be forced to choose.

You didn't vote for me. I voted for me.

Utterly stupid position I hear all the time.

My opinion on the issues is important because it's carefully considered and logically presented.

Simply putting a check mark by a name does not make one's opinion valid, and not putting a check mark doesn't render your opinion invalid. Not to mention, I still voted for Senator, Congressman, Governor, etc.

I think the problem you seem to have is you don't like looking in the mirror and realizing you might be one of those sheep I mentioned. And you want everyone else to be sheep also, so you feel better about yourself. There's absolutely no drawback to a person thinking for him or herself, but there is PLENTY of danger blindly following the crowd.

Click to expand...

important to who?

Certainly not the two major political parties who know that your vote is beyond reach

Politically you mean nothing to them

Mac77 said:

important to who?

Click to expand...

In a general sense.

Certainly not the two major political parties who know that your vote is beyond reach

Click to expand...

That is completely untrue. In fact, it is the complete opposite of reality. I'm EXACTLY the type of person the political parties find most valuable. People like you, who only care about playing for a team, don't matter. They know they already have your business or don't have your business. But they don't have mine and they NEED mine. People like me are very important to the parties to become elected.

And, I don't think you understand what I've been saying. My vote is not beyond reach. That is false. My vote is up for whomever convinces me they will best represent me. Barack Obama received my vote twice (and I can state unequivocally he would have again if he had legally been allowed to run). John Kasich likely would have received my vote (if he had continued the campaign he had been running) and maybe Jeb Bush (less likely, but he certainly would have had a much better chance than either Trump or Clinton).

My vote is not beyond reach, I just have standards. It's a shame you seem to not have standards and will vote for anyone with a certain letter behind their name.

Politically you mean nothing to them

Click to expand...

Politically I'm far more important to them than you. You're taken for granted, they try to appeal to me. I assume you vote Republican, so neither the Republican Party or Democratic party care about you. They know how you're voting so they take you for granted.

The fact you think being one of the unthinking masses means your vote is more valued than mine is not only false, it is downright laughable.