The US Election, Part XI

[majestic]

I have to say I'm getting much joy out of watching protesters making petitions to the electoral college to elect Hillary.  If the left wingers put this much effort into actually voting they wouldn't have this problem.  But hey, keep deflecting the blame, dems who didn't vote, surely it wasn't YOUR fault, right?

 

I'd say part of the issue was that the Democrats supplied the Republican candidate this time around. Look at what Trump promised and might try to do: More protection for blue-collar workers, curbing globalism by protectionism, ending free trade where possible, promising to reign in big corporations (sort of, he also promised them tax discounts in exchange for taking away their off-shoring capabilities). You know, the kind of thing one would expect from the Democrats - things that are about as left as they can get in the US.

 

While I do doubt that Trump will actually accomplish much of what he promised because political realities are going to crush him it is telling that the he clearly seemed more believable in championing the plight of the "little" guy than the candidate of the party actually supposed to do that - and why Sanders would have been the better for the Democrats.

Edited November 11, 2016 by majestic

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

 

 

 

Well, that picture depicts hell and sin, so i would say that it is quite accurate.

 

> the picture depicts hell

> accurate

 

pick one

 

 

Hell is usually depicted across cultures either as a place of chaotic punishment or as a stage of society being controlled by its vices. I would say that the picture displays that quite accurately.

 

 

Lucky thing art is subjective, because I ain't seeing either on this one.

[Volourn]

"GD and others my  advice  is try to see these protests and violence in a different context, this is simply how many  people who feel frustrated vent and address institutionalized and societal   " unfairness " 

 

I bet you'd be saying dsifferent if Clinton won and Trump supporters were actinmg like this. People are assaulting humans, dogs, AND tv sets.

 

 

"Clinton did not promote violence, peaceful protestors did not promote violence."

 

Yeah, they did. What did you think was gonna happen when they label the opponent as 'worse than Hitler'? People were gonna just let Hitler take power without fighting? COME ON. This is happening because of fearmongering.

[Malcador]

People did let Hitler take power without fighting, Volo....

Edited November 11, 2016 by Malcador

[Ben No.3]

Well, no... Hitler simply hit his political enemies first.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

 

 

Of course I often say the same about Christians and their bibles.

 

The bible has some screwy stuff in it; might be best if they don't read it.

Come on, the Old Testament is a fantastic guide to living.

 

After all, what would we do without Strong Family Values? Surely everything would descend into gibbering chaos as the last light of virtue and beauty gets extinguished by the nihilist and decadent intelligentsia as they reshape the world to mirror the emptiness that is within their hearts

I don't see how that's a bad thing.

[Ganrich]

People did let Hitler take power without fighting, Volo....

Yeah, and? The German media didn't have a political boogie man to call the actual Hitler to get the masses that terrified.

 

I agree with Volo here. The media has been doing their stock and trade of the past decade against Trump and his supporters these last 6 months. Normally, when they target someone with those accusations that person is given a scarlet letter, verbally chastised, and remove from public life. However, Trump was like the Terminator and kept moving toward his target. In the end, the media just caused their audience to be terrified when he was elected because many of them are apparently too stupid to have looked into what his actual policies were. When someone's first instinct is to sit at the table and talk to a perceived enemy (Russia)... I doubt they are invading Poland next week.

[Malcador]

Well that was a ribbing of sort to Volo. Trump saying stupid BS all the time didn't help in that area.

 

Trying to get a measure of the man is more useful than promises, I suppose, given the latter is usually lies. So maye people weighted that stuff more.

Edited November 11, 2016 by Malcador

[Ganrich]

Ah, sorry. I misconstrued what you meant there, and I don't disagree that Trump's demeanor for most this cycle was off putting, to say the least. However, it was intentional to systematically wreck his opposition. He used the media's "first blood" method of attack while simultaneously showing how to be somewhat impervious to it. Even though I went and voted Johnson, I can say that he dealt with the media in an oddly cunning and bizarrely graceful fashion. It was a bit inspiring. If others learn from his example... the next decade may be interesting.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

 

 

 

Of course I often say the same about Christians and their bibles.

The bible has some screwy stuff in it; might be best if they don't read it.

Come on, the Old Testament is a fantastic guide to living.

 

After all, what would we do without Strong Family Values? Surely everything would descend into gibbering chaos as the last light of virtue and beauty gets extinguished by the nihilist and decadent intelligentsia as they reshape the world to mirror the emptiness that is within their hearts

I don't see how that's a bad thing.

 

 

bu-bu-but western culture and civilization fades away and surely nothing worthwhile could possibly follow it because it's rooted in the deepest truths of the human experience

[pmp10]

I've been muling over some election results and I'm getting a bit concerned over the divide in the US.

Apparently this election saw the greatest gender gap, the greatest divide over college education and historic first of no ticket splitting for the senate.

Add to that a record low trust in media and that both sides seem to be doubling down on their populist agendas.

This could make for an ugly future.

[Fighter]

Well seems American media certainly was caught with their pants down and the distrust vindicated by results.

[Hurlshort]

If that had been the other way around and Trump won the popular vote and Clinton won the election they would not have a problem with it. Neither would anyone who actually supported Trump I might add. 

 

 

 

If Trump had won the popular vote and lost the electoral college, I'm still not convinced things would be easy.  People were talking about revolutionary war and stuff.  Maybe that was all bluster, and obviously and protests would be more rural given the Trump demographics, but I still think there would be quite a bit of temper tantrumping.  (I stand by the word I just made up.)  

Edited November 11, 2016 by Hurlshot

[Pidesco]

Chomsky in 2010:

 

[Meshugger]

 

 

 

 

 

Of course I often say the same about Christians and their bibles.

The bible has some screwy stuff in it; might be best if they don't read it.

Come on, the Old Testament is a fantastic guide to living.

 

After all, what would we do without Strong Family Values? Surely everything would descend into gibbering chaos as the last light of virtue and beauty gets extinguished by the nihilist and decadent intelligentsia as they reshape the world to mirror the emptiness that is within their hearts

I don't see how that's a bad thing.

 

 

bu-bu-but western culture and civilization fades away and surely nothing worthwhile could possibly follow it because it's rooted in the deepest truths of the human experience

 

 

It's already dead but the corpse started to smell so that the people voted in someone able to remove it.

Edited November 11, 2016 by Meshugger

[Wrath of Dagon]

 

 

This is what happens when both candidates promotes a confrontational, latently aggressive and an 'us vs them' approach. The idiots of the world hears their candidates rethoric and dehumanization of political opponents and sees it as a legitimization of violence against them..

You may not have noticed, but violence is all coming from one side.

 

 

If Clinton won, you don't think you'd have protesters going nuts right now?  

 

This was pretty much a no-win situation.

 

GD already pointed out there were no riots after Obola won twice. I also didn't notice any Trump supporters rioting or beating up Hillary supporters during the campaign. Also it's known organized leftist groups like nazi collaborator Soros' Moveon.org are behind these protests.

 

 

For the mainstream media, this is the beginning of the end. All I've seen is them doubling down on their canned narrative. They can't adapt. A bunch of sellout clowns.

American people are now treating their media the way Soviet people used to treat theirs. Whatever the media says, the truth is probably the opposite.

 

 

Well it was a good run: http://www.cnbc.com/2016/11/09/gun-stocks-take-a-hit-after-election-day.html

Poor gun companies, they just lost their star salesman eight years running.

 

 

Right to protest is vital part of democratic system, because it gives people that aren't satisfied with results by system ability to express their dissatisfaction and disagreement with direction that system is steering the country. It is one of the reasons why freedom of the speech is one of the most important rights that people have in democracy. So my question is why do you all hate democracy so much?

As others pointed out, right to protest is not a right to riot.

[Wrath of Dagon]

 

 

This is what happens when both candidates promotes a confrontational, latently aggressive and an 'us vs them' approach. The idiots of the world hears their candidates rethoric and dehumanization of political opponents and sees it as a legitimization of violence against them..

You may not have noticed, but violence is all coming from one side.

 

 

Sure is mate, sure is.

 

https://twitter.com/i/moments/796417517157830656?m=1

 

Ha ha ha ha. http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2016/11/10/police-muslim-student-fabricated-hijab-grab-trump-supporters/

 

 

The only persons blameable are the specific individuals who decided to resort to violence. Clinton did not promote violence, peaceful protestors did not promote violence. A person's freedom ends where another ones begins, but a few individuals will never understand that. For example: there are Christian terrorist in Africa. Am I now supposed to assume all Christians are terrorists? Can you see where I'm at?

Yes she did, her people are on video tape organizing violence.

 

 

The sneering, condescending arrogance of this just turns my stomach.

Sneering condescension is pretty much the definition of Zakaria. What was his plagiarized book, the "End of America" or something like that.

 

It was worth electing Trump just for the comedy the idiot leftists provide. Now they're attacking their own leftie cities.

[Ganrich]

@fighter - They will double down because they are too insulated to do anything else but bask in the echo chamber.

 

I've been muling over some election results and I'm getting a bit concerned over the divide in the US.

Apparently this election saw the greatest gender gap, the greatest divide over college education and historic first of no ticket splitting for the senate.

Add to that a record low trust in media and that both sides seem to be doubling down on their populist agendas.

This could make for an ugly future.

Hillary gained 1% of women voters from what I saw vs Obama. I don't know how we can say that is notable in terms of a gap. However, the amount of time she spent on her being a woman sure didn't pan out.

 

Those uneducated people though. What world do we live in that the backwoods rubes of America have a voice? Sorry. The education thing is a pet peeve of mine. And I don't think you mean it in a negative way that I see it brought up elsewhere. So, don't take this rant as hostile.

 

Just because someone has little education doesn't diminish their the right to vote. I just don't understand why people don't expect people of lower education to backlash when their full time decent waged job was destroyed, and they are expected to replace that with a mix of part time McDonald's work and Welfare. All in the name of feeding their family. Hillary was going after the coal mining industry. They don't get a voice because they are uneducated? It irritates me to no end when education is brought up. That is why we have the electoral college. It's so states that are of lower, more rural populations (usually lower education voters) do no get drowned out by the heavy populated areas. It's always brought up with this sneer, or condemnation, that they should listen to their "betters". What a load of trash.

 

I agree that this is going to get bumpy before it gets better though.

[Drowsy Emperor]

Trump understood the modern media. The political discourse has changed, the tools are different (Twitter, short superficial statements carry more weight than before) the language is more direct and downright primitive, like something from older times. 

 

It sort of reminds me of the crude WW1 propaganda, where you had German chocolate wrappers saying "Gott strafe England" (May God punish England). Its on the same level of street politics as calling Trump voters "**** grabbers" or them calling the other side "feminazis".

 

I'm  guessing his experience with reality TV was invaluable in understanding the political logic the majority now operates with. I feel the average voter across the West (and the east) is now objectively less educated and more of a mob individual than ever. The tools of educating people have become devalued - TV is a cesspool, prominent books and newspapers more sensationalist than ever, the internet is a passable source of information but a terrible substitute for actual learning (and people often confuse the two) and education itself has become commercialized and politicized to the point that blind bias has become an acceptable substitute for genuine scholarship. Not to mention that knowledge is now perceived as useless unless its used in making money, which is great for producing extremely narrow minded individuals (both among the "educated elite" and the "hicks").

 

The last time I bought "Foreign Affairs", an allegedly respectable publication, I was struck by how shallow the analaysis were and how much articles used bias and politicking as a substitute for actual substance. A whole issue of anti-Russian, anti-Putin drivel. I caught myself thinking - maybe that's how it always was? But then the other day I read an article of the issues surrounding Serbia and Austro-Hungary, written in 1914 by a British historian for Foreign Affairs and I was struck by how well he understood the matter he was writing about, even some excellent comments about the Serbian national character - something that must have been a novelty for a historian writing about a state that had appeared only a few decades prior .  At that point I realized the political propaganda of the time might have been crude, but people who had to know things, knew them well. 

 

I'm not sure that's the case today.

Edited November 11, 2016 by Drowsy Emperor

[Chilloutman]

And I was hoping this thread would die after elections...

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

 

 

 

 

Of course I often say the same about Christians and their bibles.

 

The bible has some screwy stuff in it; might be best if they don't read it.

Come on, the Old Testament is a fantastic guide to living.

 

After all, what would we do without Strong Family Values? Surely everything would descend into gibbering chaos as the last light of virtue and beauty gets extinguished by the nihilist and decadent intelligentsia as they reshape the world to mirror the emptiness that is within their hearts

I don't see how that's a bad thing.

 

bu-bu-but western culture and civilization fades away and surely nothing worthwhile could possibly follow it because it's rooted in the deepest truths of the human experience

Muh western culture got a bullet a long time ago and larping with statues or paintings isn't going to change that. We've been living in the new world of Global Capitalism for a while, we're not going back, and all the issues blamed on muh browns or muh degeneracy are only going to get worse as a certain class finds itself more entrenched and powerful.

[213374U]

 

 

 

This is what happens when both candidates promotes a confrontational, latently aggressive and an 'us vs them' approach. The idiots of the world hears their candidates rethoric and dehumanization of political opponents and sees it as a legitimization of violence against them..

You may not have noticed, but violence is all coming from one side.

 

 

Sure is mate, sure is.

 

https://twitter.com/i/moments/796417517157830656?m=1

 

Ha ha ha ha. http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2016/11/10/police-muslim-student-fabricated-hijab-grab-trump-supporters/

 

Hold up. So one reported incident was fabricated, therefore the implication you are making is that ALL of them are, right?

 

I don't even, so I'm just going to quote your own immortal words:

 

Brush up on how logic works.

[Pidesco]

WoD's mastery of logic rivals his knowledge of probability and statistics.

[pmp10]

@fighter - They will double down because they are too insulated to do anything else but bask in the echo chamber.

 

I've been muling over some election results and I'm getting a bit concerned over the divide in the US.

Apparently this election saw the greatest gender gap, the greatest divide over college education and historic first of no ticket splitting for the senate.

Add to that a record low trust in media and that both sides seem to be doubling down on their populist agendas.

This could make for an ugly future.

Hillary gained 1% of women voters from what I saw vs Obama. I don't know how we can say that is notable in terms of a gap. However, the amount of time she spent on her being a woman sure didn't pan out.

But men voted for Trump 5% more than for Romney hence a record gender gap.

What's worse is that a logical answer to this might be making women do the same for Democrats.

[213374U]

 

People did let Hitler take power without fighting, Volo....

Yeah, and? The German media didn't have a political boogie man to call the actual Hitler to get the masses that terrified.

No, they had an actual bogeyman who was in power right next door (literally Hitler Stalin), and a unified, organized and most importantly, unabashedly militant, radical left-wing movement that had already tried to overthrow the democratic Weimar regime.

 

By the time Hitler got elected, commies and nazi shocktroopers were openly duking it out on the streets. Unlike today, the "media" back then didn't need to make stuff up. Just reporting on stuff was enough to get people scared. Problem is today the corporate media are so corrupt and have been doing shock therapy for so long, that what we're seeing is a sort of "the boy who cried wolf" effect. Not saying there is a problem presently, but when there is, you won't see it coming.