logo Sign In

Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo — Page 430

This topic has been locked by a moderator.

Author
Time

I was the only person in our family of five who voted for Hillary. I’m sure my mom (and almost certainly my dad) voted Trump, whereas my brother voted Stein and my other brother abstained. So despite most of my family leaning liberal, we voted 2:1 for Trump. I feel like this is representative of the dilemma faced by the country in 2016.

You probably don’t recognize me because of the red arm.
Episode 9 Rewrite, The Starlight Project (Released!) and ANH Technicolor Project (Released!)

Author
Time

I count all non-Hillary votes as votes for Trump. Those other votes may have made people feel better about themselves than if they had voted for Trump, but the end result was the same.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

TV’s Frink said:

Bernie would have had a lot of trouble too.

Yes, but many people who voted for Trump were voting against the status quo, and perception of Bernie was that he was also not status quo. So people wouldn’t necessarily have voted for Trump simply in their desire for change.

Does no one remember how much of a dirty word “socialist” is?

As opposed to a fascist?

JEDIT: I feel that Bernie, had he won the primary, would have been able to run on more than just a “Trump sucks worse than me” platform.

TV’s Frink said:

chyron just put a big Ric pic in your sig and be done with it.

Author
Time

chyron8472 said:

  • She is not bigoted, sexist, nor willfully inflammatory outside of occasionally putting her foot in her mouth;

Oh?

Author
Time

TV’s Frink said:

chyron8472 said:

What bothers me is that there is no definitive answer as to why Trump won. Everyone out there is guessing. Russia. Wikileaks. Comey. Bernie. Status quo. Rust belt. …I want someone with actual quantifiable evidence to say “this is why Trump won the primaries; and that is why Hillary’s poll numbers were oh-so-wrong, and EXACTLY why they tanked in the last week.”

But no. All we have is guesswork, blame games, and a good old fashioned hands-in-the-air WTF.

It’s not that it’s guesswork, it’s that everyone is correct. The margin was so thing that all those things mattered. The people who are wrong are the ones who are insisting it was only one of those things that was to blame.

You forgot to list Hillary. Also forgot to list anyone who didn’t vote for her. Also racism. Also sexism. Also Islamophobia. Also xenophobia. Also other things I’m sure.

Racism? Hillary is white.

Author
Time

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

chyron8472 said:

What bothers me is that there is no definitive answer as to why Trump won. Everyone out there is guessing. Russia. Wikileaks. Comey. Bernie. Status quo. Rust belt. …I want someone with actual quantifiable evidence to say “this is why Trump won the primaries; and that is why Hillary’s poll numbers were oh-so-wrong, and EXACTLY why they tanked in the last week.”

But no. All we have is guesswork, blame games, and a good old fashioned hands-in-the-air WTF.

It’s not that it’s guesswork, it’s that everyone is correct. The margin was so thing that all those things mattered. The people who are wrong are the ones who are insisting it was only one of those things that was to blame.

You forgot to list Hillary. Also forgot to list anyone who didn’t vote for her. Also racism. Also sexism. Also Islamophobia. Also xenophobia. Also other things I’m sure.

Racism? Hillary is white.

Racism was more of a factor towards Trump than against Hillary.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

chyron8472 said:

  • She is not bigoted, sexist, nor willfully inflammatory outside of occasionally putting her foot in her mouth;

Handman said:

Oh?

She herself. Hillary Rodham Clinton herself is not. That image is part of a political game her staff played to beat Obama. There is no evidence that shows Hillary herself chose to do that, nor that she directly accused Obama of being Muslim, nor that she in any way made a plea to the white working class that minorities and/or immigrants were ruining the country. There is and was direct, verifiable, irrefutable, straight-from-the-horse’s-mouth evidence that Trump is racist, sexist, narcissistic and relies on information supplied by conspiracy theorists.

For example, when she called Trump-supporters a “basket of deplorables” she, in her inability to identify with why they would support him, put her foot squarely in her mouth. She wasn’t being intentionally inflammatory. She was frustrated and speaking her mind. Unfortunately it’s times like that, when the media eats you alive, that you learn to clam up and go back to everyone being sick of secrecy again.

It’s because she didn’t and doesn’t understand why she lost that she was kind of damned-if-she-did and damned-if-she-didn’t no matter what she said, because she doesn’t know how else she could have changed it.

TV’s Frink said:

chyron just put a big Ric pic in your sig and be done with it.

Author
Time

Personally, I do believe Sanders would’ve gotten more votes than Hillary, I can’t say how many more, though. There are definitely a lot of reasons why Trump won, but I’d be willing to bet that a sizable portion of them are under the umbrella of Hillary. I don’t doubt that the ‘socialism’ thing would’ve been a major hurdle; and it’s a bit of a shame, since I think both sides are really misunderstanding the term (Bernie calls himself a Democratic Socialist, and to some people, Socialism instantly springs Communist regimes to mind). On the other hand, I think he would’ve run a very good issue-focused campaign.

Honestly, I think Hillary’s irrelevant at this point, and she should stay that way. To some, it seems like she’s preparing to run again in 2020, but I think the best thing she could do for the country is just not. It’s clear that she hasn’t matured or learned anything since November, so she’d really just be handing the election to Trump, and I don’t want that to happen.

Author
Time

Jeebus said:

Honestly, I think Hillary’s irrelevant at this point, and she should stay that way.

Agreed.

To some, it seems like she’s preparing to run again in 2020, but I think the best thing she could do for the country is just not. It’s clear that she hasn’t matured or learned anything since November, so she’d really just be handing the election to Trump, and I don’t want that to happen.

TV’s Frink said:

chyron just put a big Ric pic in your sig and be done with it.

Author
Time

Jeebus said:

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/09/new-cancer-drug-priced-at-475k-raises-questions-about-pricing-and-value/

The $475,000 price tag is much less than Wall Street expected and might disappoint some investors who hoped for a premium on such a complex drug.

I have a lot to say about this, but it’s all very close to breaking rule 3; so all I’m gonna say is that these fucking sociopaths are a blight on this Earth.

Is this the gene therapy thing? Not that I think that’s a good price tag, but it does sound like a pretty expensive operation.

Author
Time

Obviously it’d be stupid for Clinton to run again, but I actually think if she went head to head with Trump again, it wouldn’t be as hard to beat him.

Author
Time

chyron8472 said:

CatBus said:

And his supporters moved to supporting Hillary at a faster rate than Hillary’s moved to Obama, so if Bernie’s supporters were being unreasonable, at least they were less unreasonable than Hillary’s.

You know, I don’t trust Daily Kos polling information anymore.

That’s not a Daily Kos poll. It’s an ABC/Washington Post poll, just a Daily Kos article about that poll.

Not when the pollsters had worse aim than an OT Imperial Stormtooper.

The pollsters and the forecasters are different things. There really wasn’t much in the way of good polling at all in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, because nobody was interested in how much Clinton would win by, and that’s one problem with the polls right there. The battleground states were pre-supposed – which does make some degree of sense, why pay for a poll in Wyoming when you know Trump will win? They just guessed the wrong states. Without good polls in the states that matter, you’re forecasting based on incomplete data.

Project Threepio (Star Wars OOT subtitles)

Author
Time
 (Edited)

DominicCobb said:

Jeebus said:

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/09/new-cancer-drug-priced-at-475k-raises-questions-about-pricing-and-value/

The $475,000 price tag is much less than Wall Street expected and might disappoint some investors who hoped for a premium on such a complex drug.

I have a lot to say about this, but it’s all very close to breaking rule 3; so all I’m gonna say is that these fucking sociopaths are a blight on this Earth.

Is this the gene therapy thing?

It is.

Not that I think that’s a good price tag, but it does sound like a pretty expensive operation.

I don’t doubt that it’s expensive; I’m just amazed that they have the gall to sell it at $150,000 above what it ‘should’ cost, and then turn around and say “hey, at least it isn’t $800,000.” The profit motive doesn’t work for healthcare.

Author
Time

What.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/905381817695526912

Will be going to North Dakota today to discuss tax reform and tax cuts. We are the highest taxed nation in the world - that will change.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/house-prepares-for-harvey-relief-vote/2017/09/06/62919058-92fc-11e7-89fa-bb822a46da5b_story.html?utm_term=.27e957faffc4

President Trump, a man of few allegiances who seized control of the Republican Party in a hostile takeover, suddenly aligned himself with Democrats Wednesday on a series of key fiscal issues — and even gave a lift to North Dakota’s embattled Democratic U.S. senator.

Trump confounded his own party’s leaders when he cut a deal with Democratic congressional leaders — “Chuck and Nancy,” as the president informally referred to them — on a short-term plan to fund the government and raise its borrowing limit this month.

Trump’s surprise stance upended sensitive negotiations over the debt ceiling and other crucial policy areas this fall and further imperiled his already tenuous relationships with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.).

The episode is the latest turn in Trump’s extraordinary separation from his own party, as he distances himself to deflect blame for what has been a year of gridlock and missed opportunities for Republicans on Capitol Hill. It follows a summer of presidential stewing over McConnell and Ryan, both of whom Trump views as insufficiently loyal and weak in executing his agenda, according to his advisers.

Author
Time

Jeebus said:

DominicCobb said:

Jeebus said:

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/09/new-cancer-drug-priced-at-475k-raises-questions-about-pricing-and-value/

The $475,000 price tag is much less than Wall Street expected and might disappoint some investors who hoped for a premium on such a complex drug.

I have a lot to say about this, but it’s all very close to breaking rule 3; so all I’m gonna say is that these fucking sociopaths are a blight on this Earth.

Is this the gene therapy thing?

It is.

Not that I think that’s a good price tag, but it does sound like a pretty expensive operation.

I don’t doubt that it’s expensive; I’m just amazed that they have the gall to sell it at $150,000 above what it ‘should’ cost, and then turn around and say “hey, at least it isn’t $800,000.” The profit motive doesn’t work for healthcare.

Yeah that’s obviously BS. I just hope that if the therapy is legit, it becomes more common and less pricey.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

yhwx said:

What.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/905381817695526912

Will be going to North Dakota today to discuss tax reform and tax cuts. We are the highest taxed nation in the world - that will change.

He only said that because Twitter’s character limit wouldn’t let him say “(except for Denmark, France, Belgium, Finland, Italy, Austria, Sweden, Iceland, Norway, Luxembourg, Hungary, the Netherlands, Germany, Slovenia, Greece, Portugal, Spain, the Czech Republic, New Zealand, Estonia, Poland, the United Kingdom, Japan, the Slovak Republic, Israel, Canada, Latvia, Turkey, Ireland, Australia, and Switzerland)”, so he had to just put a hyphen in there as a placeholder.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/house-prepares-for-harvey-relief-vote/2017/09/06/62919058-92fc-11e7-89fa-bb822a46da5b_story.html?utm_term=.27e957faffc4

The rule of stopped clocks, or someone new has access to the pee tape 😉

Project Threepio (Star Wars OOT subtitles)

Author
Time

yhwx said:

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

chyron8472 said:

What bothers me is that there is no definitive answer as to why Trump won. Everyone out there is guessing. Russia. Wikileaks. Comey. Bernie. Status quo. Rust belt. …I want someone with actual quantifiable evidence to say “this is why Trump won the primaries; and that is why Hillary’s poll numbers were oh-so-wrong, and EXACTLY why they tanked in the last week.”

But no. All we have is guesswork, blame games, and a good old fashioned hands-in-the-air WTF.

It’s not that it’s guesswork, it’s that everyone is correct. The margin was so thing that all those things mattered. The people who are wrong are the ones who are insisting it was only one of those things that was to blame.

You forgot to list Hillary. Also forgot to list anyone who didn’t vote for her. Also racism. Also sexism. Also Islamophobia. Also xenophobia. Also other things I’m sure.

Racism? Hillary is white.

Racism was more of a factor towards Trump than against Hillary.

Yes, people that didn’t like non-whites (racists) liked Trump’s racist side.

Author
Time

You’re excluding the obvious fact, a fact that non-racist Republicans don’t like, that when racists vote, they’re going to vote Republican 99% of the time. The Republican Party has had a covert appeal to racists for at least 25 years now, if not since 1964. I don’t buy that all these racists that wouldn’t have voted otherwise came out of the woodwork to support Trump.

Obviously, another reason Hillary lost was because more electoral votes went to Donald Trump. Another reason she lost is because Bernie Sanders ran against her in the primary. The main reason she lost is because she ran a terrible campaign and was an unlikeable candidate. The blame is on her. If you trip on your shoe laces because you forgot to tie them and happen to fall in a puddle of water, I see little reason to constantly remind everyone that the reason you’re wet is in part because you didn’t tie your laces and fell, and also because there was a puddle in front of you and there was nothing to grab on to and no one caught you before you fell etc. etc… Bad analogy, but it’s all I’ve got.

The Person in Question

Author
Time
 (Edited)

moviefreakedmind said:

I don’t buy that all these racists that wouldn’t have voted otherwise came out of the woodwork to support Trump.

Neither do I, but I think you underestimate the number of racists if not outright white supremacists that vote for Democrats, and even voted for Obama. In terms of presidential candidates, neither McCain, Romney, nor Obama really made a big deal out of race. They were all pitching the same sort of “we all get along and nobody owns anybody else” society, just with different tax rates. From my experience in some deeply racist regions of the country, if racism is a big selling point for you, all of those candidates looked pretty much alike in terms of race. Yeah, one was black, but all of them would lock you up if you firebombed a church, so tomayto tomahto on the race issue. So you decided based on secondary issues – economics, usually. And that’s where Democrats usually pick up the uncommitted racist vote.

Trump was different. We haven’t had a candidate as overtly racist as him in generations. All those Obama-voting racists went to Trump. No respectable Democratic candidate could have picked them up. The only solution was to get non-racist people who didn’t vote before to come out of the woodwork, or non-racist Republicans, and that didn’t happen–not in the right states at least.

Project Threepio (Star Wars OOT subtitles)

Author
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

You’re excluding the obvious fact, a fact that non-racist Republicans don’t like, that when racists vote, they’re going to vote Republican 99% of the time. The Republican Party has had a covert appeal to racists for at least 25 years now, if not since 1964. I don’t buy that all these racists that wouldn’t have voted otherwise came out of the woodwork to support Trump.

Obviously, another reason Hillary lost was because more electoral votes went to Donald Trump. Another reason she lost is because Bernie Sanders ran against her in the primary. The main reason she lost is because she ran a terrible campaign and was an unlikeable candidate. The blame is on her. If you trip on your shoe laces because you forgot to tie them and happen to fall in a puddle of water, I see little reason to constantly remind everyone that the reason you’re wet is in part because you didn’t tie your laces and fell, and also because there was a puddle in front of you and there was nothing to grab on to and no one caught you before you fell etc. etc… Bad analogy, but it’s all I’ve got.

If only C3PX were still here. Way back I tried to say that racists would be more likely to vote Conservative/republican, and he and other conservatives on here slapped me down.

Author
Time

CatBus said:

moviefreakedmind said:

I don’t buy that all these racists that wouldn’t have voted otherwise came out of the woodwork to support Trump.

Neither do I, but I think you underestimate the number of racists if not outright white supremacists that vote for Democrats, and even voted for Obama.

excuse me? why would an outright white supremacist vote for Obama?

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Warbler said:

CatBus said:

moviefreakedmind said:

I don’t buy that all these racists that wouldn’t have voted otherwise came out of the woodwork to support Trump.

Neither do I, but I think you underestimate the number of racists if not outright white supremacists that vote for Democrats, and even voted for Obama.

excuse me? why would an outright white supremacist vote for Obama?

Because there wasn’t a white supremacist option on the ballot. The logic is a little monstrous, but I’ve lived in terribly close proximity with white supremacists. The whole belief system is more warped than even the simple level of warped that’s obvious on the surface.

I agree that Republicans have a lock on the racist vote, but I think it’s more of an 80% lock than a 99% lock. With Trump, it pretty much jumped to 100% and Dems needed to make up the difference – which they succeeded in doing, but not in the correct states for the Electoral College.

Project Threepio (Star Wars OOT subtitles)

Author
Time

but . . . Obama is black! I can not believe a white supremacist would vote for a black person. I just can not believe that.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Warbler said:

but . . . Obama is black! I can not believe a white supremacist would vote for a black person. I just can not believe that.

Most wouldn’t, but I’m pretty sure some would. Again, I don’t know any open white supremacists anymore, so I’m guessing as much as anyone, but I can say that white supremacists have lots of special terms for white people who think other races are their equals. One is “race traitors”. And both McCain and Romney fit the bill, even if they may have arguably had subtle racial connotations in their campaign material. And white supremacists do not like race traitors. A lot. And yes, I think many of them probably hate them just as much if not more than they hate nonwhite races. Like I said, there’s a special kind of twisted to their philosophy that actually gets more crazy the more you hear. But the point is, that under some circumstances, some white supremacists would look at Romney and Obama and be unable to make a race-based decision, so would go with something else like economics. Don’t try to make sense of it. The entire worldview is a mashup of madness and idiocy.

Project Threepio (Star Wars OOT subtitles)