Indecision 2016 - In Soviet Russia, we elect american president!
-
Wake me up when trump says something about iran
-
This post is deleted!
-
Apparently President Elect Trump won't give up on his midnight twitter rants:
Just had a very open and successful presidential election. Now professional protesters, incited by the media, are protesting. Very unfair
Talk about uniting the country lmao
-
Most kinda already know this, but cliffnotes.
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-trump-executive-power-20161110-htmlstory.html
-
@Commander:
Apparently President Elect Trump won't give up on his midnight twitter rants:
Talk about uniting the country lmao
At least this is tame compared to the past. LOL
-
@The:
At least this is tame compared to the past. LOL
Now he's the president of the us he's supposed to give up on the conspiracy talk alltogether and unite
Saying people who protest against you are paid does nothing to dignify the office -
@Bilbo:
Keith Ellison is a black Muslim though. And I don't really think he'll convince white working class voters to come back to the Democrats.
Or was that not the point and I should have said African American instead?
What does being black and muslim have to do with any of this?
-
@MDL:
America certainly won't be fixed by assaulting fellow citizens like crazed hooligans.
What a bunch of cowardly thugs. I hope that the footage made its way to the police.Ah the beauty of political violence.
Nothing incities more potential for cruelty than a belief that what you are doing is just.
-
Uuuuuuggghhhhhhhh….
Welp, trump's gonna win again at this rate
-
Uuuuuuggghhhhhhhh….
Welp, trump's gonna win again at this rate
The establishment just doesn't get it, lol. This cycle has taught them nothing.
-
There is more than half of the electorate up for grabs, and there are 4 years now for a free for all to really get into the dems and do something.
Good god. President Trump. This is terrible.
-
[hide]@Bilbo:
If the Democrats are stupid enough to choose a black Muslim to run the DNC and nominate Kanye West in 2020 then Trump's re-election won't be an issue at all. The question will be: can he win NY and CA or just NY?
Hold it right there. This isn't okay. Stop while you're ahead.
Edit: Just to add, if you want to know why so many democrats are calling Trump Supporters* racists, this is a great example.
@Bilbo:
Keith Ellison is a black Muslim though. And I don't really think he'll convince white working class voters to come back to the Democrats.
Or was that not the point and I should have said African American instead?
Look. Your view is blatantly racist. You know exactly why that is.
What does being black and muslim have to do with any of this?
[/hide]
I think what he's trying to say is that electing Keith Ellison (the first Muslim to be elected to U.S. congress) as the new DNC chairman will lose Democrats the next election because America is even more prejudiced than we thought!? But I don't know what he's talking about with the left nominating Kanye West as their next presidential candidate. I mean…I know what he's talking about but it seems like he thinks that's not a joke. Even if Kanye West does throw his hat into the ring come 2020, that is not the left nominating him, that's just him deciding to run for president.
Anyway, I believe what Bilbo is implying is that half of America would never tolerate a party with an admitted Muslim as their DNC chairman, plus he's black. So Democrats would lose the next election because they're being all progressive and tolerant. The people who elected Trump would rise up again and make their anger known and put Trump back in the White House. Of course, this is all forgetting that Barack Obama, our first black president, won the election twice and some of the country, and many Trump supporters, still believes he's secretly Muslim. Being an open Muslim vs. being a "secret Muslim" will not be the deciding factor here in determining who will be our next president. And Obama ran for a much more public and scrutinized job and still won, twice. Why? Because more people voted him in, including the white working class voters.
LOL! This is the most accurate representation of events I've seen
-
Seemed to me at the time that it was a way of saying that democrats are stupid for nominating a black and/or muslim person because such a person is not fit for the job, and would also be stupid enough to nominate Kanye West in future years. But if it wasn't an intentionally racist comment then I'll take my accusation back.
Hidden:
-
The quote is what gets me.
Sent from my D5803 using Tapatalk
-
3DS FC: 0516-7666-3837
SW-4128-8032-0729
-
Old man beaten up for supporting Trump. People like this are the reason why people like this old man voted for Donald. How counterintuitive. -_-
@MDL:
America certainly won't be fixed by assaulting fellow citizens like crazed hooligans.
What a bunch of cowardly thugs. I hope that the footage made its way to the police.Ah the beauty of political violence.
Nothing incites more potential for cruelty than a belief that what you are doing is just.
Oh, this is great. Let's all jump on the assumption bandwagon and completely ignore the dented car in the background and the lady yelling "you're going to pay for my shit". Maybe the violence resulted from a physical altercation following a traffic accident. Maybe the people yelling about Trump are just being stupid and unfunny trying to create more drama than there actually is. Maybe they're about as clueless as anyone who just read and believed the sensationalist headline 'MAN BEAT UP FOR VOTING TRUMP!'…
Nah, this was definitely about politics!
Before we jump to conclusions based off of what some people are yelling while ignoring what another person is yelling in the same video maybe we should do a little bit more digging.
http://www.snopes.com/black-mob-beats-white-man-for-voting-trump/
http://www.thewrap.com/did-this-man-get-beaten-up-over-supporting-donald-trump-video/
We should look at sources that actually do a little investigating like talking to the cops and not ignoring other evidence (or lack thereof) in the video. Hey, better yet. Just completely ignore those 2 above links and let's go straight to the source. Straight to the man who was attacked.
Read that article carefully. Hell, all you gotta do is read the first paragraph. This was not political violence. This was a bunch of idiots beating up and a man over traffic accident. It's called road rage. It's a problem and it happens a lot. The only way "Trump" got brought into this was because the crowd were being a bunch of surly assholes. Was it wrong? Of course. Was it political? Yes, yes it was. If you're like the crowd and are trying to make it political.
Everything's Eventual…
-
-snip-
Yeah, let's just totally ignore what the people filming and beating him are all yelling. I'm sure the accident is their only motivation here.
-
Oh, this is great. Let's all jump on the assumption bandwagon and completely ignore the dented car in the background and the lady yelling "you're going to pay for my shit". Maybe the violence resulted from a physical altercation following a traffic accident. Maybe the people yelling about Trump are just being stupid and unfunny trying to create more drama than there actually is. Maybe they're about as clueless as anyone who just read and believed the sensationalist headline 'MAN BEAT UP FOR VOTING TRUMP!'…
Nah, this was definitely about politics!
Before we jump to conclusions based off of what some people are yelling while ignoring what another person is yelling in the same video maybe we should do a little bit more digging.
http://www.snopes.com/black-mob-beats-white-man-for-voting-trump/
http://www.thewrap.com/did-this-man-get-beaten-up-over-supporting-donald-trump-video/
We should look at sources that actually do a little investigating like talking to the cops and not ignoring other evidence (or lack thereof) in the video. Hey, better yet. Just completely ignore those 2 above links and let's go straight to the source. Straight to the man who was attacked.
Read that article carefully. Hell, all you gotta do is read the first paragraph. This was not political violence. This was a bunch of idiots beating up and a man over traffic accident. It's called road rage. It's a problem and it happens a lot. The only way "Trump" got brought into this was because the crowd were being a bunch of surly assholes. Was it wrong? Of course. Was it political? Yes, yes it was. If you're like the crowd and are trying to make it political.
Good to know that the political part was only an extra dash of gasoline on an average day trafic beating.
That only leaves the fact that people watching thought it was funny that a Trump supporter was getting beaten.
-
Yeah, let's just totally ignore what the people filming and beating him are all yelling.
Who is ignoring that? It's almost as if you don't read.
I'm sure the accident is their only motivation here.
You're sure, huh? Well, that's cool. I can tell you're being sarcastic. And I'm pretty sure I'm going to believe the man who was actually involved in the incident over some guy on the internet (I'm talking about you btw) posting a tweet which jumped to conclusions. The wrong conclusions.
-
When 50 million Trump voters admit they voted for a racist and deserve to share the blame for the numerous hate crimes that followed in just these last two days, liberals will say sorry for this instance of the people fighting back in a violent way.
-
Good to know that the political part was only an extra dash of gasoline on an average day trafic beating.
That only leaves the fact that people watching thought it was funny that a Trump supporter was getting beaten.
This I can agree with. The crowd was wrong for that but the fact remains the man was not beaten over being a Trump supporter which every sensationalist headline is using as a news story to show political violence in America against Trump supporters.
I'm sure it has happened against the mountain of blatant racism and feelings of (negative) validation from Trump supporters, but if we're going to share it, it has to be accurate.
-
When 50 million Trump voters admit they voted for a racist and deserve to share the blame for the numerous hate crimes that followed in just these last two days, liberals will say sorry for this instance of the people fighting back in a violent way.
Distancing oneself from stuff like this would be called being the bigger man. Not stooping to their level.
Justifying acts of violence is a slippery slope
-
I'm not justifying it. But you shouldn't be surprised that people lash out. Louis is just peddling for admittances that liberals are just as bad as Trump followers.
-
Because the far left/right leaning values of just a 3 states are not an accurate representation of our country as a whole.
I don't think it's stupid at all. It's definitely flawed and needs some tweaking, but as I said in my first post it's what allows for a broader perspective on how the country as a whole actually feels instead of just a couple of titan states values. Cali has a whopping 55 electoral votes up for grabs, so I think it evens out for the most part. Repubs have to pick up a lot more states to make up that difference.
Honestly though, the problem here is that you, view Califorina, Texas et al. not as a big number of people, but as anonymous states that always vote the same, and you don't want these couple of states to have more of a say in the election than any of the other states. Looking at it from this perspective, that seems fair: all the states should have equal say in who will be President.
But if you ignore state lines for a second and just look at the number of people, shouldn't 1/3 of the population not naturally also have 1/3 of the say in who becomes President, regardless of if they are Republicans, Democrats or whatever else? It just seems really strange and pretty undemocratic in my eyes to limit the influence regarding who is going to lead the country of the majority of U.S. citizens just because they live in a certain state.
The actual problem here though is imho not the existence of the Electoral Collage itself, but this crazy "The Winner Takes it All" mentality. A candidate can have literally 50 million people voting for him in a given state, but if the other candidate has just, like, 5 votes more, the votes of these 50 million people are just completely disregarded. This is just insane and completely ridiculous! No wonder many people feel their votes don't count. If you live in a state where majority usually votes differently than you, your vote really doesn't matter at all. This is not at all democratic! Get rid of this idiotic rule and instead divide up the chosen electors according to the percentage of voter turnout (i.e. 40 percent of Californian voters actually voted Republican = the Republican candidate will get 40 percent of the Electors, while the Democratic candidate will the majority of 60 percent) and voila, the process will be a lot fairer for every voter, plus voter apathy will also decline since every vote now actually does matter.
-
I'm not justifying it. But you shouldn't be surprised that people lash out. Louis is just peddling for admittances that liberals are just as bad as Trump followers.
Huh? Those people clearly aren't liberals if they don't respect the man's free will.
Honestly though, the problem here is that you, view Califorina, Texas et al. not as a big number of people, but as anonymous states that always vote the same, and you don't want these couple of states to have more of a say in the election than any of the other states. Looking at it from this perspective, that seems fair: all the states should have equal say in who will be President.
But if you ignore state lines for a second and just look at the number of people, shouldn't 1/3 of the population not naturally also have 1/3 of the say in who becomes President, regardless of if they are Republicans, Democrats or whatever else? It just seems really strange and pretty undemocratic in my eyes to limit the influence regarding who is going to lead the country of the majority of U.S. citizens just because they live in a certain state.
The actual problem here though is imho not the existence of the Electoral Collage itself, but this crazy "The Winner Takes it All" mentality. A candidate can have literally 50 million people voting for him in a given state, but if the other candidate has just, like, 5 votes more, the votes of these 50 million people are just completely disregarded. This is just insane and completely ridiculous! No wonder many people feel their votes don't count. If you live in a state where majority usually votes differently than you, your vote really doesn't matter at all. This is not at all democratic! Get rid of this idiotic rule and instead divide up the chosen electors according to the percentage of voter turnout (i.e. 40 percent of Californian voters actually voted Republican = the Republican candidate will get 40 percent of the Electors, while the Democratic candidate will the majority of 60 percent) and voila, the process will be a lot fairer for every voter, plus voter apathy will also decline since every vote now actually does matter.
Yeah, absolutely they should have 1/3rd the say, but only 1/3rd of the say. That's why those titan states have a massive amount of electoral votes on the table for the winner. Remember, 1/3rd of the population is still the minority and they do not represent the will of the remaining 2/3rd's. It should not come down to the 1/3rd to decide the leader of the country when the overwhelming majority of the other 2/3rd's has made it clear what they want.
That's not a terrible idea.
-
To be fair a the winners takes all and the losers deserve nothing mentality is pretty much what America is all about.
Or maybe i should say the way the American way of life is usually portrayed and idealized
-
Welp, trump's gonna win again at this rate
The big advantage that paid off for Trump this election was his position as the underdog. He won't have that as the incumbent, so if his massive gambles don't pay off, Tim Kaine could crush him.
-
The big advantage that paid off for Trump this election was his position as the underdog. He won't have that as the incumbent, so if his massive gambles don't pay off, Tim Kaine could crush him.
Ehh…
No one is really excited about Tim Kaine. If Dems want to reclaim the White House in four years they need to put forth an actual progressive that appeals to millennials.
-
A cardboard cutout of Joe Biden in aviators is a better candidate than Kaine
Set Art by Daily Rowlet -
When 50 million Trump voters admit they voted for a racist and deserve to share the blame for the numerous hate crimes that followed in just these last two days, liberals will say sorry for this instance of the people fighting back in a violent way.
OK… wow. Obama killed a ton of Muslims and deported a ton of Hispanic people during his tenure as president. Is everyone who voted for him responsible for every unrelated hate crime against those groups?
-
There are a wide range of emotions to this election, sure, but ultimately most people, regardless of political affiliation, are at peace with the result and each other. The Trump supporters' hate comments and the Hillary supporters' violent protests are a minority and are pretty much equal to each other. It's just that the media will of course focus on them since that draws attention and thus money.
Spoiler:
-
Ehh…
No one is really excited about Tim Kaine. If Dems want to reclaim the White House in four years they need to put forth an actual progressive that appeals to millennials.
Ideally yes, but if Trump's policies end up hurting voters, he'll have an uphill battle.
I'm not justifying it. But you shouldn't be surprised that people lash out. Louis is just peddling for admittances that liberals are just as bad as Trump followers.
We absolutely should be shocked and disgusted at any politically motivated hate crime, and I'm glad to hear that the car incident was just a misrepresentation.
-
Not exactly sure what point you're making, but that bar graph is quite flawed since it starts at 52 million instead of 0, creating an inaccurate size discrepancy.
-
The quote is what gets me.
[qimg]http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20161111/8be6e0076a8880f5ac51f9e182bc8c57.jpg[/qimg]
Sent from my D5803 using Tapatalk
16 chars of LOL .
I really should do that photoshop -
OK… wow. Obama killed a ton of Muslims and deported a ton of Hispanic people during his tenure as president. Is everyone who voted for him responsible for every unrelated hate crime against those groups?
Gosh, I must've forgotten those times during the '08 and '12 elections where Obama specifically campaigned and promised to wage drone wars in the Middle East and to deport all the Latinos.
Trump voters know who they went to bed with. And no, "he doesn't mean it like that, he will moderate" is not an excuse to vote for him, because these same people say he "tells it like it is!" and voted against Hillary and the establishment because they're liars with empty promises.
-
@Kaido:
Not exactly sure what point you're making, but that bar graph is quite flawed since it starts at 52 million instead of 0, creating an inaccurate size discrepancy.
That's not the point. The point is that this nightmare was not the result of more people voting Republican, but less voting Democrat. Of course the scale of it is relatively minuscule- hence Hillary still eking out the popular vote victory.
That said, there's no way to know the demographic breakdown from the bar graph alone. It's possible and likely that a bunch of 08/12 moderate Repubs stayed home, while 08/12 disaffected Rust Belt Dems switched sides. We wouldn't have seen what we did in Michigan and Wisconsin otherwise.@Kaido:
There are a wide range of emotions to this election, sure, but ultimately most people, regardless of political affiliation, are at peace with the result and each other. The Trump supporters' hate comments and the Hillary supporters' violent protests are a minority and are pretty much equal to each other.
Just…no. Wrong wrong wrong wrongitty wrong.
"Comments"? You're not reading the news.
Broken windows =/= hate crimes. -
@Kaido:
There are a wide range of emotions to this election, sure, but ultimately most people, regardless of political affiliation, are at peace with the result and each other. The Trump supporters' hate comments and the Hillary supporters' violent protests are a minority and are pretty much equal to each other. It's just that the media will of course focus on them since that draws attention and thus money.
Definitely not a piece with it. But I'm not going to riot either. Actually I'll be doing my best to not be visible.
-
-snip-
(But yes, I agree with you on the subject of first time assumptions being an issue.
Especially while the election results are still raw.) -
So, I think that we should start making efforts to stop Le Penn and WWIII.
3DS FC: 0516-7666-3837
SW-4128-8032-0729
-
Gosh, I must've forgotten those times during the '08 and '12 elections where Obama specifically campaigned and promised to wage drone wars in the Middle East and to deport all the Latinos.
Trump voters know who they went to bed with. And no, "he doesn't mean it like that, he will moderate" is not an excuse to vote for him, because these same people say he "tells it like it is!" and voted against Hillary and the establishment because they're liars with empty promises.
Actions > Words. And his approval rating that rarely ever drops below 50% indicates that his supporters are okay with the aforementioned military action and immigration/deportation policies enforced by Obama, so let's not pretend that their hands are clean.
@CCC:
Just…no. Wrong wrong wrong wrongitty wrong.
"Comments"? You're not reading the news.
Broken windows =/= hate crimes.All violence, regardless of whose supporters commits it is equally disgusting and should be condemned. No one side is more justified than the other.
-
So, I think that we should start making efforts to stop Le Penn and WWIII.
I think Austria has an election before that. And they've got one of those guys too
-
All violence, regardless of whose supporters it commits it is equally disgusting and should be condemned.
Agree to disagree, broseph.
I'll take 10,000 broken windows over 1 human killed or maimed in the name of bigotry. Just kidding. Why would 10,000 be the cutoff? Infinite broken windows. -
So, I think that we should start making efforts to stop Le Penn and WWIII.
Why? Should humanity survive we can tell conservatives "Told you so", right? Now wouldn't that be nice? :D
-
Actions > Words. And his approval rating that rarely ever drops below 50% indicates that his supporters are okay with the aforementioned military action and immigration/deportation policies enforced by Obama, so let's not pretend that their hands are clean.
All violence, regardless of whose supporters commits it is equally disgusting and should be condemned. No one side is more justified than the other.
Breaking a window is not equal to sexual assault.
-
@CCC:
Agree to disagree, broseph.
I'll take 10,000 broken windows over 1 human killed or maimed in the name of bigotry. Just kidding. Why would 10,000 be the cutoff? Infinite broken windows.Breaking a window is not equal to sexual assault.
I'm not talking about breaking windows. I mean actual violence.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/06/03/ugly-bloody-scenes-in-san-jose-as-protesters-attack-trump-supporters-outside-rally/ -
Could we please stop with the WW3 shit?
Trump will cause WW3 because he's a dipshit, Hillary would've caused it by proxy from being a war hawk, Bush should've caused it with his abysmal actions in the middle east, Obama meant certain doom as well
Every time when someone new becomes president it's the same thing -
5 months ago. Okay man, sure. I, too, condemn violence perpetrated against humans. Glad I had to clarify that.
Your guy won 3 days ago. We're talking about here and now and the explosion of race/gender related assaults and hatred since then. Not at rallies, not at protests, but in schools, subways, streets, workplaces, everywhere. It boggles the mind that anyone wouldn't be extremely distraught by all that, and instead try to equate it with, uh, literally anything else.
-
Actions > Words. And his approval rating that rarely ever drops below 50% indicates that his supporters are okay with the aforementioned military action and immigration/deportation policies enforced by Obama, so let's not pretend that their hands are clean.
His approval ratings were in the shitter for most of his presidency until this election. But when we talk about drone strikes, let's also remember the many times he has reached out to the Middle-East, refused to lose his shit over RADICAL ISLAMIC TERRORISM and made a deal with Iran, which lead to Republicans committing treason (remember that? Remember that, because the GOP is going to spend the next four years calling everything Dems to as "Un-American" and "unpatriotic" like they did during the Bush years). Let's also remember that while Obama did deport a lot of latinos, he also used executive action to save many young latinos from deportation.
Anyway, he wasn't elected on racist and xenophobic rhetoric, so your argument falls apart.
–- Update From New Post Merge ---
Good post:
rando: i want more machine guns
woman: if i get raped don't force me to carry the baby
white moderates: wow both sides are really hurtingwhite dude: brown people scare me
black mother: i fear for my child's life every day
white moderates: let's join together in mutual respectlgbt person: i would like to exist
conservatives: no
white moderates: wow how did this rhetoric get so nasty on both sides.
