CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › Trumpocalypse Now
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Trumpocalypse Now - Page 9

post #401 of 41180
Quote:
Originally Posted by VTRan View Post
 

Just started reading this interview with Van Jones over at MotherJones...   Hope For the Best, Expect and Prepare For the Worst

 

I think he makes some good points.


He makes some excellent points. "He played everybody" sums it up. And I'm seeing multiple mainstream news networks now confirming that Trump himself never expected to get this far. WSJ reports Trump being "surprised" at the complexity and layers of the presidency, and that Obama plans to spend more time than is usual helping the transition.

 

Trump was never in this to win. And Xenu help us with the people he's appointing for the cabinet and senior staff. CNN during lunch hour was reporting that conservative talk radio host Laura Ingram might be named Press Secretary.

 

We're through the looking glass here, people.

post #402 of 41180

Laura Ingram is a Nazi

post #403 of 41180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zhukov View Post
 

 

 

Your arrangement here manages to leave out Bernie and the rest of the left that are rushing into that vacuum. Kumbaya and all that bullshit. Its the same racket.

 

If Sanders and company manage to install Ellison as opposed to, say, Brazille or some other Clintonite as head of the DNC, it's not a racket, but a hopeful early sign that things might change for the party.

post #404 of 41180

toothless opposition is toothless

post #405 of 41180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zhukov View Post
 

Laura Ingram is a Nazi

 

So is Bannon.

 

This morning on NPR - holy fuck, they're failing so goddamn hard - had a Trump apologist on explaining how the appointment of so many insiders like Preibus and Bannon represents Trump's "brilliance" as an executive and negotiator, that he's essentially satisfying the establishment and the alt-right.

 

This administration is going to make Cheney and Rumsfeld look like Boris and Natasha.

post #406 of 41180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zhukov View Post
 

Laura Ingram is a Nazi

 

That just means she'll fit in perfectly.

post #407 of 41180

post #408 of 41180
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelM View Post
 


He makes some excellent points. "He played everybody" sums it up. And I'm seeing multiple mainstream news networks now confirming that Trump himself never expected to get this far. 

All you have to do is look at the guy's face. That meeting with Obama aged him ten years. A guy who spent the last few years calling the President illegitimate now desperately clings to him in order to learn how to become a legitimate President. What a world.

Here's Eichenwald (aka One Of Five Actual Journalists Left) on the myths that cost Democrats the Presidential election. He actually read the opposition research on Bernie Sanders. Get this: Sanders voters were kinda full of shit! Imagine.

post #409 of 41180

I put equal weight for this on Bernie going scorched Earth in the first half of 2016 trying to salvage the nomination for himself. That radicalized a huge contingent of his true believers and he proved deeply unable to pull them back.

 

Fuck him. Lets put him in charge of the Party tho. Sure. That will turn out great.

post #410 of 41180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mangy View Post



Here's Eichenwald (aka One Of Five Actual Journalists Left) on the myths that cost Democrats the Presidential election. He actually read the opposition research on Bernie Sanders. Get this: Sanders voters were kinda full of shit! Imagine.

Pretty much every thing he says is on point.

 

"More than twice as many millennials—a group heavily invested in the “Sanders was cheated out of the nomination” fantasy—voted third-party."

 

"They traffic in false equivalencies, always pretending that both nominees are the same, justifying their apathy and not voting or preening about their narcissistic purity as they cast their ballot for a person they know cannot win."

 

"Of course, there will still be those voters who snarl, “She didn’t earn my vote,” as if somehow their narcissism should override all other considerations in the election. That, however, is not what an election is about. Voters are charged with choosing the best person to lead the country, not the one who appeals the most to their egos.

If you voted for Trump because you supported him, congratulations on your candidate’s victory. But if you didn’t vote for the only person who could defeat him, and are now protesting a Trump presidency, may I suggest you shut up and go home. Adults now need to start fixing the damage you have done."

post #411 of 41180
Quote:
Originally Posted by RCA View Post
 

Pretty much every thing he says is on point.

 

"More than twice as many millennials—a group heavily invested in the “Sanders was cheated out of the nomination” fantasy—voted third-party."

 

"They traffic in false equivalencies, always pretending that both nominees are the same, justifying their apathy and not voting or preening about their narcissistic purity as they cast their ballot for a person they know cannot win."

 

"Of course, there will still be those voters who snarl, “She didn’t earn my vote,” as if somehow their narcissism should override all other considerations in the election. That, however, is not what an election is about. Voters are charged with choosing the best person to lead the country, not the one who appeals the most to their egos.

If you voted for Trump because you supported him, congratulations on your candidate’s victory. But if you didn’t vote for the only person who could defeat him, and are now protesting a Trump presidency, may I suggest you shut up and go home. Adults now need to start fixing the damage you have done."


Wow, kinda sounds like someone who's been around here....

post #412 of 41180
That article is a bunch of salty jibba jabba. There is no way to tell how Sanders would of done, but here is why he was guaranteed to lose! If his file was 2 feet thick how big was Hilary's?
post #413 of 41180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Munson View Post

That article is a bunch of salty jibba jabba. There is no way to tell how Sanders would of done, but here is why he was guaranteed to lose! If his file was 2 feet thick how big was Hilary's?


The point was that there was plenty of oppo on Sanders that very likely would have had an effect.  As opposed to the idea of Saint Bernie the Flawless who would have walked away with the election.

 

And clearly, Hillary's oppo file was one page that just repeated "EMAILS" 500 times.

post #414 of 41180

How Sanders would have done is largely irrelevant. He was, at no point, in any serious position to actually win the fucking thing.

 

But that didn't stop him from trafficking in innuendo about the front-runner. Ohmygosh the Goldman Sachs speeches! We got the fucking speech transcripts, Bernie. Guess what? Not shit.

That's on him, and his supporters.
 

He parachuted into the Party, tried to kneecap the front-runner, and now he gets to play kingmaker for the Democratics. No surprise that some of us are salty.

post #415 of 41180

Not only are the people Trump is surrounding himself with evil, they're also incompetent which makes everything even more terrifying. I wouldn't be surprised if many of them get constantly shifted out or leave over the next four years when it is clear they can't do the job or have plundered everything they can.        

post #416 of 41180
Yeah, sure, okay, it's silly to think that Sanders would've walked off with the election totally unscathed, no matter how much you might like or respect him. But holy shit that doesn't invalidate criticism of Clinton as a candidate. The entire DNC establishment threw in behind a candidate who was actually under FBI investigation at the time of nomination. Even if you think the email thing was absolutely groundless, that was still a fucking stupid thing to do.
post #417 of 41180

So they were supposed to overturn the entire Primary process on the basis of a politically-motivated FBI witchhunt? Sure, lets empower Comey to dictate who we nominate. Send up Bernie, I bet he didn't have shit in the files on a radical 60s student activist.

post #418 of 41180
I'm just saying, when you nominate a candidate who is actually under criminal investigation, you're basically handing the election to your opponents on a silver platter. You can bellyache about how unfair that is all you like, but it doesn't change the facts.
post #419 of 41180
Quote:
Originally Posted by commodorejohn View Post

I'm just saying, when you nominate a candidate who is actually under criminal investigation, you're basically handing the election to your opponents on a silver platter. 


If only that were actually true.

Donald Trump says Hi, by the way.

 

No, no, I think there must be some further political explanation here.

post #420 of 41180
I'm crossing my fingers that Trump and his minions are in fact so incompetent that they can't undo any of Obama's accomplishments.
post #421 of 41180
He wasn't currently under investigation for anything. O no, he was unemployed at 30!

Bernie wasn't the "answer" and I question how a true lefty would do in a general American election, but the whiny hissy fit of Clinton supporters needs to die.
post #422 of 41180

And it's not going to change the fact that the Nazi playbook is in full effect, and we're a reichstag fire away from Dictator-For-Life Trump.

post #423 of 41180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bradito View Post

I'm crossing my fingers that Trump and his minions are in fact so incompetent that they can't undo any of Obama's accomplishments.

 

This is what I'm wondering about regarding the ACA.  They need to replace it with something better or they're gonna eat shit from everyone.  It honestly wouldn't surprise me at all if they kept the ACA and merely built modifications onto it in order to claim a victory (we fixed it!) 

post #424 of 41180

All it took was some chucklefuck kids buying into the "DNC rigged the primaries!" narrative.

 

And we saw plenty of that around here.

Sure, lets not blame Bernie. Blame the fates. Zeus himself. This idea that sprung, fully formed, into the media.

post #425 of 41180
Quote:
Originally Posted by commodorejohn View Post

I'm just saying, when you nominate a candidate who is actually under criminal investigation, you're basically handing the election to your opponents on a silver platter. You can bellyache about how unfair that is all you like, but it doesn't change the facts.


You mean like the fact that more people voted for the candidate who was under investigation than Trump in both the primaries and the general election?

post #426 of 41180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zhukov View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by commodorejohn View Post

I'm just saying, when you nominate a candidate who is actually under criminal investigation, you're basically handing the election to your opponents on a silver platter. 
If only that were actually true.


Donald Trump says Hi, by the way.

No, no, I think there must be some further political explanation here.
True. I suppose that should be amended to "when you nominate someone who is actually under criminal investigation and you can't keep the media distracted from it with even more outrageous but non-criminal shenanigans..." Still doesn't change the fact that pushing for Clinton was a bad, bad idea, though.
post #427 of 41180
Quote:
Originally Posted by commodorejohn View Post


True. I suppose that should be amended to "when you nominate someone who is actually under criminal investigation and you can't keep the media distracted from it with even more outrageous but non-criminal shenanigans..." Still doesn't change the fact that pushing for Clinton was a bad, bad idea, though.

 

Considering the frankly bewildering array of absolute bullshit that had to line up, just perfectly, in order for her to lose, by the narrowest of margins, while still pulling a 3, 4 million vote advantage.

 

I don't know man. I guess we just didn't take into account she needed 100 votes for every 77 Donald cashed in order to keep pace. Kind of a screwy setup.

post #428 of 41180

I mean, Jesus Christ, we had the FBI and KGB seemingly working hand in hand.

 

Not something you see everyday.

post #429 of 41180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Munson View Post

Bernie wasn't the "answer" and I question how a true lefty would do in a general American election, but the whiny hissy fit of Clinton supporters needs to die.

 

I wouldn't label everyone as either Clinton supporters or Bernie supporters.  One can still support both, as many here have stated, but not be happy with how some people chose to use their voice when it came time to vote.

post #430 of 41180
Quote:
Originally Posted by commodorejohn View Post


True. I suppose that should be amended to "when you nominate someone who is actually under criminal investigation and you can't keep the media distracted from it with even more outrageous but non-criminal shenanigans..." Still doesn't change the fact that pushing for Clinton was a bad, bad idea, though.

 

When did the DNC actually get to decide who wins, much less who runs in the Democratic Primaries?

 

I mean seriously, what narrative are you trying to push here?  That the superdelegates should have swung to Bernie?  That the DNC should have said "No Hillary, you can't run.  We need to convince someone that has decided not to to run instead?" That once she won the nomination they shouldn't have supported her and should have backed up every attack against her because she was so flawed?  What?

 

If there was some magic fucking candidate that would have made everything better and walked away with the election, they chose not to show up.  And then 3.7 million more primary voters picked Hillary over Bernie.  Were they supposed to write in someone that wasn't running (Joe Biden)?

post #431 of 41180
If Clinton's overriding goal wasn't to ensure that it was Her Turn(tm), she would have withdrawn her candidacy when the FBI investigation was launched.  You're going to run for President while you're being criminally investigated by the FBI?  I guess she thought nobody would care or she could wipe the voters' memories clean (like, with a cloth) by pointing out the absolutely ridiculous absurdity of a guy like Trump running for President.  
post #432 of 41180

Gwen Ifill couldn't take this shit.

 

Fuck everything about this.

post #433 of 41180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Overlord View Post

 



Or y'know, she figured the email thing was bullshit, which it pretty much was. Withdrawing from contention would have had every side of the media spectrum dogpiling her for her tacit admission of guilt.

But it's always convenient that the only way for Hillary Clinton to ever be "correct" is to tank her own political career and set her ambition aside, or to plead guilty to crimes before ever being indicted for them.
post #434 of 41180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jmacq1 View Post

When did the DNC actually get to decide who wins, much less who runs in the Democratic Primaries?

I mean seriously, what narrative are you trying to push here?  That the superdelegates should have swung to Bernie?  That the DNC should have said "No Hillary, you can't run.  We need to convince someone that has decided not to to run instead?" That once she won the nomination they shouldn't have supported her and should have backed up every attack against her because she was so flawed?  What?
Beats me, man. My only point is that nominating someone who's under a high-profile criminal investigation for public office is pretty fucking stupid. You can blame the voters, you can blame the FBI, you can blame whoever you want, you can suggest whatever solution you want, I don't care. I just think it's silly to pretend that the only reason Clinton lost is because of those rotten Sanders supporters (of whom, for the record, I'm not one.)
post #435 of 41180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jmacq1 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Overlord View Post

Or y'know, she figured the email thing was bullshit, which it pretty much was.

 

Yeah, electronic record-keeping laws are bullshit.  And pretending you don't know what "wipe a server" means when you're under oath, complete bullshit.  And wanting to avoid Freedom of Information Act requests and also make sure you don't violate the Hatch act, also nonsense.  And deleting emails you've been ordered to produce because your attorneys decided they weren't work related, nobody will care.

 

Except, people cared.  

post #436 of 41180
Quote:
Originally Posted by commodorejohn View Post



Beats me, man. My only point is that nominating someone who's under a high-profile criminal investigation for public office is pretty fucking stupid. You can blame the voters, you can blame the FBI, you can blame whoever you want, you can suggest whatever solution you want, I don't care. I just think it's silly to pretend that the only reason Clinton lost is because of those rotten Sanders supporters (of whom, for the record, I'm not one.)

 



Well, you can take it up with the 15 million people that voted for her in the primaries then.
post #437 of 41180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Overlord View Post

 

Yeah, electronic record-keeping laws are bullshit.  And pretending you don't know what "wipe a server" means when you're under oath, complete bullshit.  And wanting to avoid Freedom of Information Act requests and also make sure you don't violate the Hatch act, also nonsense.  And deleting emails you've been ordered to produce because your attorneys decided they weren't work related, nobody will care.

 

Except, people cared.  

 



Remind me what that popular vote count was again?
post #438 of 41180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jmacq1 View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Overlord View Post
 

 

Yeah, electronic record-keeping laws are bullshit.  And pretending you don't know what "wipe a server" means when you're under oath, complete bullshit.  And wanting to avoid Freedom of Information Act requests and also make sure you don't violate the Hatch act, also nonsense.  And deleting emails you've been ordered to produce because your attorneys decided they weren't work related, nobody will care.

 

Except, people cared.  

 



Remind me what that popular vote count was again?

 

I think the electoral college should have been done away with a long time ago, but you know that's a bullshit argument.  People in "safe" states (both red or blue) in large numbers aren't going to bother voting when they know the result is a foregone conclusion demographically. 

post #439 of 41180

http://www.rferl.org/a/russia-us-explainer-trump-roll-back-obama-policies/28113333.html

 

I think how Trump deals with Russia when he ascends to the presidency will be the first terrifying decision. He has full power to lift all sanctions on Russia if he so chooses, as well withdrawing US troops from the surrounding nations. 

post #440 of 41180

FOIA! So important.

 

Lets see how far any FOIA request gets in the Trump Administration.

 

Comey's gonna give him a pass to do whatever the hell he wants.

post #441 of 41180
Quote:
Originally Posted by RCA View Post

I wouldn't label everyone as either Clinton supporters or Bernie supporters.  One can still support both, as many here have stated, but not be happy with how some people chose to use their voice when it came time to vote.

To be fair it was the Bernie Bro's who originated the whole whiny loser phenom this year, only to have Hillary supporters take up the flag.

I just don't understand the lashing out at everyone who "should" have voted Hillary. It's tone deaf elitism that plays right into the worst stereotypes of liberals.
post #442 of 41180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Munson View Post



To be fair it was the Bernie Bro's who originated the whole whiny loser phenom this year, only to have Hillary supporters take up the flag.



I just don't understand the lashing out at everyone who "should" have voted Hillary. It's tone deaf elitism that plays right into the worst stereotypes of liberals.

 



Or you know, figuring out exactly why you lost so you can hopefully avoid doing so again. But the answer isn't quite as simple as "Well just run someone else, anyone else!"
post #443 of 41180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Munson View Post


I just don't understand the lashing out at everyone who "should" have voted Hillary. It's tone deaf elitism that plays right into the worst stereotypes of liberals.

 

That would be fine and dandy, but these are the same voters who are gonna be bitching and wailing when they realize just what the fuck is in store with this whole deal. I'm not sure 'elitism' is the word, when its simply a matter of refusing to coddle stone-stupid decision making.

 

Like Eichenwald points out, how many of these assholes out there protesting and setting shit on fire actually voted against Clinton? I'd wager more than a few.

post #444 of 41180
post #445 of 41180

That sort of thing shouldn't shock me anymore, but it still does.

post #446 of 41180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jmacq1 View Post
And then 3.7 million more primary voters picked Hillary over Bernie.

 

That's a misleading number that doesn't factor in the caucus states Bernie won, some of which don't even report the number of votes just the delegates awarded.

post #447 of 41180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barry Woodward View Post
 

 

That's a misleading number when a number of the states Bernie won held caucuses, some of which don't even report the number of votes just the delegates awarded.

 

Caucus states are very low population. The differences there would be minimal.

post #448 of 41180

Washington State has 7.2 million people. Sanders won 71% of the votes. NONE of those votes count in the "popular vote totals".

post #449 of 41180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zhukov View Post
 

I mean, Jesus Christ, we had the FBI and KGB seemingly working hand in hand.

 

Not something you see everyday.

 

Indeed.  This was a very strange cycle, and hindsight's genius-granting abilities are only amplified when you're arguing about a path not traveled.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jmacq1 View Post


But it's always convenient that the only way for Hillary Clinton to ever be "correct" is to tank her own political career and set her ambition aside, or to plead guilty to crimes before ever being indicted for them.

 

Yeah, I keep hearing over and over, in differing terms, that the only smart thing for Hillary to do, the only right thing, for the country and the party and whoever else, would be to quit fighting.  To roll over and validate all the bullshit that was slung at her for years and years.  And fuck that, if for no other reason than because it would validate the endless witch hunt's over Benghazi as a valid use of Congressional time and taxpayer money, and encourage whoever controls the branch to blow pointless smoke at any member of the opposition they don't like until they "have" to quite politics altogether. 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jmacq1 View Post
Or you know, figuring out exactly why you lost so you can hopefully avoid doing so again. But the answer isn't quite as simple as "Well just run someone else, anyone else!"

 

The answers are as incredibly simple as they are multitudinous, because this was an incredibly close race that the Democrats won by the most basic (if not most important) metric.  She got the votes, they just weren't distributed in the proper fashion.  Could that have been swung by Stein voters sucking it up and voting for Clinton?  Yes.  Could it have been swung by not having the FBI director essentially make empty accusations while voting was starting only to quietly withdraw them on election eve?  Probably.  Could it have been swung if the mainstream media only gave Trump $2 billion in free advertising?  Maybe.  Could it have been swung if they only equivocated the shit out of her attempts to keep some work correspondence private versus his copious crimes against logic, human dignity, and consumer protection laws, instead of equivocating the living fuck out of them?  I think so.  Could it have been swung if Chelsea was hotter than Ivanka?  Possibly, we're pretty shallow as a species.  Could it have been swung if our intelligence services were more aggressive about keeping Russian interference out of our election cycle?  Maybe.  It was such a close thing that there are dozens of things that could have pushed her over the top, but none of them were individually fatal and few of them had neat solutions that were without political cost.

 

You could do more to reach out to embittered Bernie Bros to try to stop them going third party, but it's not easy to do that while also reaching out more to embittered blue collar whites in the Rust Belt.  I'm reminded of The Might Ducks of all things;  whose to say if a quarter inch in one direction would've been the game winning goal vs missing the crossbar entirely?  We are, obviously, since we are blessed with that superpower of hindsight.  But since Bernie never got to the shootout, we can pretend that he would've won easily, or gotten crushed even worse, and there's no way to really disprove any of it.

post #450 of 41180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barry Woodward View Post
 

Washington State has 7.2 million people. Sanders won 71% of the votes. NONE of those votes count in the "popular vote totals".

 

Only 230,000 participated in the caucus there tho. So, take 71% of that and tag it onto the total. It doesn't materially change the conversation, in my estimation.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Political Discourse
CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › Trumpocalypse Now