Donald Trump, the road that might not lead to the White House!

[Johnny Canuck3]

Donald Trump's presidential election victory has already been cheered by Russian President Vladimir Putin, a constellation of right-wing European populists, a former Ku Klux Klan leader and a Middle Eastern strongman. But there's another curious constituency that seems to be happy about the new American president-elect.

Shortly after Trump was declared the victor, a number of prominent Salafist ideologues linked to jihadist outfits in the Middle East took to social media to cheer the prospect of a Trump presidency.

The remarks signaled the militants' apparent belief that the victory of a candidate like Trump, who has suggested potentially unconstitutional blocks on Muslim immigration and advocated torture, undermines the United States' moral standing in the world.


Social-media sites associated with both the Islamic State and al-Qaeda also hailed Trump’s success as the beginning of “dark times” for the United States, marked by domestic unrest and new foreign military campaigns that would sap the strength of the American superpower.

"Rejoice with support from Allah, and find glad tidings in the imminent demise of America at the hands of Trump,” said the Islamic State-affiliated al-Minbar Jihadi Media network, one of several jihadi forums to post commentaries on the results of the U.S. election.

"Trump’s win of the American presidency will bring hostility of Muslims against America as a result of his reckless actions, which show the overt and hidden hatred against them,” continued the essay, provided by the SITE Intelligence group, a private organization that monitors jihadists’ web sites.

Islamist extremists celebrate Trump’s election win

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

[Kremlin analyst] Markov also said it would mean less American backing for “the terroristic junta in Ukraine”. He denied allegations of Russian interference in the election, but said “maybe we helped a bit with WikiLeaks.”

Trump during the election:

“I can tell you I think if I came up with that they’d say, ‘Oh, it’s a conspiracy theory, it’s ridiculous,’” Trump told CBS4’s Jim DeFede during an interview at his golf resort in Doral. “I mean I have nothing to do with Russia. I don’t have any jobs in Russia. I’m all over the world but we’re not involved in Russia.”

Surprise! Trump was a Putin puppet all along

Liar liar, pants on fire.

 

[little_legs]

Answers like : 'Make America Great Again!'

'Build A Wall!

'Deport Muslims!'

'Punish Women Who Have Abortions!'

Roger Aisles is such a great guy.
Let Russians handle Syria.
Grab them by the pussy.
Global warming is a myth.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Garrison Keillor:

To all the patronizing B.S. we’ve read about Trump expressing the white working-class’s displacement and loss of the American Dream, I say, “Feh!” — go put your head under cold water. Resentment is no excuse for bald-faced stupidity. America is still the land where the waitress’s kids can grow up to become physicists and novelists and pediatricians, but it helps a lot if the waitress and her husband encourage good habits and the ambition to use your God-given talents and the kids aren’t plugged into electronics day and night. Whooping it up for the candidate of cruelty and ignorance does less than nothing for your kids.

Don’t be cruel. Elvis said it, and it’s true. We all experienced cruelty back in our playground days — boys who beat up on the timid, girls who made fun of the homely and naive — and most of us, to our shame, went along with it, afraid to defend the victims lest we become one of them. But by your 20s, you should be done with cruelty. Mr. Trump was the cruelest candidate since George Wallace. How he won on fear and bile is for political pathologists to study. The country is already tired of his noise, even his own voters. He is likely to become the most intensely disliked president since Herbert Hoover. His children will carry the burden of his name. He will never be happy in his own skin. But the damage he will do to our country — who knows? His supporters voted for change, and boy, are they going to get it.

Trump voters will not like what happens next

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

You could at least credit the official Remain campaign when you copy their "but they are all thickos" theory.

What's your description of a society where Fox News is number 1 in the ratings of cable news networks?

Fox News was the most-watched network in cable in both primetime and total day viewers last week, beating CNN and MSNBC combined in primetime — where MSNBC beat CNN for the third consecutive week.

Fox News has now finished No. 1 in primetime for 10 out of the last 11 weeks, averaging 2.14 million viewers for the week of August 15-21. MSNBC averaged 1.06 million primetime viewers and CNN averaged 746,000.

Cable Ratings: Fox News Beats CNN and MSNBC Combined in Primetime

 

[SpineyNorman]

What would be your description of the 72% of Republicans who still have doubts about Obama's birthplace?

Mine would be that theyre racist but we already knew that before the election and since they always have voted republican theyre not the reason trump won and romney didnt.

This is a disaster, it's terrifying. Race relations in the US were already beyond crisis point and this can only make things far worse. I fear not just for the US but for the world. I think we agree on that, as does everyone else here with maybe one or two exceptions. I've spent most of my time since joking about it because to be honest I don't know how else to deal with it.

But at some point we need to look at it and work out how we got here so we can work out where we go now. To overlook the disasterous Clinton campaign in that exercise would be idiotic.

You're on a politics board asking people not to talk about politics. Stop it.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

OK, so that just happened. Donald Trump always enjoyed massive support from uneducated, low-information white people. As Bloomberg Politics reported back in August, Hillary Clinton was enjoying a giant 25 percentage-point lead among college-educated voters going into the election. (Whether that trend held up remains to be seen.) In contrast, in the 2012 election, college-educated voters just barely favored Barack Obama over Mitt Romney. Last night we saw something historic: the dance of the dunces. Never have educated voters so uniformly rejected a candidate. But never before have the lesser-educated so uniformly supported a candidate. Trump supporters might retort: “That’s because Trump supports the little guy and Clinton helps the already privileged college grads.” But that’s false: Trump supporters in the primaries had an average income of about $72,000 per year. They aren’t rich, but make more than the national average and more than Clinton supporters.

Trump owes his victory to the uninformed. But it’s not just Trump. Political scientists have been studying what voters know and how they think for well over 65 years. The results are frightening. Voters generally know who the president is but not much else. They don’t know which party controls Congress, what Congress has done recently, whether the economy is getting better or worse (or by how much). In the 2000 U.S. presidential election, most voters knew Al Gore was more liberal than George W. Bush, but significantly less than half knew that Gore was more supportive of abortion rights, more supportive of welfare-state programs, favored a higher degree of aid to blacks, or was more supportive of environmental regulation.

Just why voters know so little is well-understood. It’s not that people are stupid. Rather, it’s that democracy creates bad incentives.

Consider: If you go to buy a car, you do your research. After all, if you make a smart choice, you reap the rewards; if you make a bad choice, you suffer the consequences. Over time, most people learn to become better consumers.

Not so with politics. How all of us vote, collectively, matters a great deal. But how any one of us votes does not. Imagine a college professor told her class of 210 million students, “Three months from now, we’ll have a final exam. You won’t get your own personal grade. Instead, I’ll average all of your grades together, and everyone will receive the same grade.” No one would bother to study, and the average grade would be an F.

Trump Won Because Voters Are Ignorant, Literally

 

[Yossarian]

I'm not surprised if voters in swing states could be called badly-informed, they had a steady diet of shitty campaign ads for a year.

 

[Idris2002]

They have put out the eyes of the people and complain of them that they cannot see.

 

[SpineyNorman]

Trump Won Because Voters Are Ignorant, Literally

What do you think about the article? What bits do you agree with? The implied answer of the author is to do away with democracy, I'm not sure that's the answer myself.

Where does this ignorance come from? Why were they more taken in by Trump's lies than Clinton's? Would it have helped if during the campaign a voice that didn't deny their concerns and offered positive solutions instead of pointing to scapegoats hadn't been deliberately silenced as much as possible by the democratic party apparatus?

Let's say they are ignorant. They're not so ignorant they don't know they've been shat on from a great height. So they're not going to vote for someone whose shit they're still wiping off their shoulders - they're not ignorant enough not to know what she's been doing these last few decades (they've been reminded of this by Clinton supporters at every turn - shitting on people from office for long periods of time makes you 'qualified' - if they weren't so ignorant they'd know that). Especially when she's telling them she's actually been constipated for 40 years - nobody shat, nobody was shat on (America is already great).

What might have been better would have been having a guy who would have said yes, you've been shat on. This is who did the shitting (both party establishments, banks, health insurance companies, employers etc) and this is what I intend to do about it (universal healthcare, stricter financial regulation, higher minimum wage, etc). That might have cut through some of that ignorance, if you think ignorance is the problem (and since you posted the article without comment I can only assume you agree with it).

Instead the only credible voice (the only one not denying the one thing they, in their ignorance, could not be ignorant of - their own experience) was one that would only spread more ignorance.

This isn't important because you should feel sorry for them. It's important because unless you understand what is driving support for trump you're not going to understand what needs to be done to put things right (have a read of that Malik piece, it's excellent - if you look at it in terms of swings rather than static figures you get a clearer picture - the swing from dem to rep among black and Latino voters, as groups, was higher than white voters as a group - got to assume they're not more racist surely, so are they more ignorant? Or is there something else driving this below the surface?)

The problem isn't Hillary Clinton, it's much deeper than that. Much harder to understand. But her history makes her a symbol of that problem - of the establishment that created it. The Democrats failure to understand that has brought us Donald Trump as president.

Or you can refuse to ask yourself those questions and forget about politics altogether because there's nothing remotely political in saying 'the bad guys won cos stupid bad guys voted for the manipulative bad guy' irrespective of whether that statement is true.

 

[andysays]

Trump Won Because Voters Are Ignorant, Literally

So what's the answer Johnny, make sure all Americans can go to college so they'll all be educated enough to understand how great Clinton is?

Introduce some some of qualifying test to ensure those without an appropriate level of education, intelligence or knowledge of politics aren't allowed to vote?

Or are you and others planning on just calling those who didn't vote for Clinton ignorant racists until the next election and be surprised when that hasn't worked, again?

 

[andysays]

This isn't important because you should feel sorry for them. It's important because unless you understand what is driving support for trump you're not going to understand what needs to be done to put things right (have a read of that Malik piece, it's excellent - if you look at it in terms of swings rather than static figures you get a clearer picture - the swing from dem to rep among black and Latino voters, as groups, was higher than white voters as a group - got to assume they're not more racist surely, so are they more ignorant? Or is there something else driving this below the surface?)

The problem isn't Hillary Clinton, it's much deeper than that. Much harder to understand. But her history makes her a symbol of that problem - of the establishment that created it. The Democrats failure to understand that has brought us Donald Trump as president.

Those swings are really significant, although they're obviously not the whole story, and since some people seem to be ignoring them, let's spell out just what they were



There was a net swing of 7% from D to R among Black voters, of 8% among Hispanic/Latino voters, of 11% among Asian voters and 1% among "other" voters, whatever that means. There was only a swing of 1% from D to R among white voters.

Those swings cannot be explained by the "ignorant white racists" thesis.

And as I understand it, the swings were caused less by Black, Asian and Hispanic voters actually switching from D to R, but mostly by Clinton being unable to persuade many Black, Asian and Hispanic voters who voted for Obama for her, so they simply didn't vote. This is despite much of her campaign being based on attacking Trump for being racist etc, which her campaign team must have thought would be enough to get those voters out for her.

If the Democrats want to truely understand why they lost, and to have any chance of winning next time, they need to at least recognise that this is an issue, before they can consider how best to deal with it, but all the indications so far seem to be that they can't and won't.

Looking forward to another winning Democrat campaign in 2020

 

[bimble]

And as I understand it, the swings were caused less by Black, Asian and Hispanic voters actually switching from D to R, but mostly by Clinton being unable to persuade many Black, Asian and Hispanic voters who voted for Obama for her, so they simply didn't vote.

Whilst of course it isn't the whole story, and lots of people clearly didn't vote for Clinton because they just didn't support her, I think it's important not to ignore voter suppression as a tactic openly employed by the Trump campaign, and new barriers to voting which directly acted to reduce the numbers of black and minority voters this time.

Southern states have closed down at least 868 polling places for the 2016 election
http://civilrightsdocs.info/pdf/reports/2016/poll-closure-report-web.pdf
After cuts to early voting, black turnout is down in North Carolina
The GOP’s Attack on Voting Rights Was the Most Under-Covered Story of 2016

 

[andysays]

Whilst of course it isn't the whole story, and lots of people clearly didn't vote for Clinton because they just didn't support her, I think it's important not to ignore voter suppression as a tactic openly employed by the Trump campaign, and new barriers to voting which directly acted to reduce the numbers of black and minority voters this time.

Southern states have closed down at least 868 polling places for the 2016 election
http://civilrightsdocs.info/pdf/reports/2016/poll-closure-report-web.pdf
After cuts to early voting, black turnout is down in North Carolina
The GOP’s Attack on Voting Rights Was the Most Under-Covered Story of 2016

Sure, that's a factor too, although it's difficult to assess how much of a factor. That (pre-election) article is based on predictions rather than actual data of how turnouts were affected in those areas, and how it might have affected the final result.

Also worth pointing out that attacks on (minority) rights to vote are not exclusively a Trump thing (the Supreme Court decision which made this possible dates from 2013), although they're clearly likely to have benefitted him.

 

[gosub]

Trump Sexual Assault Accuser Summer Zervos Tears Up During Press Conference: ‘I Refuse to Be Intimidated Into Silence’

Grim to watch.

 

[brogdale]

On notable aspect of the immediate aftermath of Trumps's election has to be repeated MSM reassurances that the population/wider world should not be panicked because there will be so many constraints upon President Trump. Granted, some analysis has centred on the constitutional restraint afforded by a constitution founded upon separation of powers but other commentators have been more candid about limitations upon his ability to use his office. I suppose what I'm getting at is that this last few days has been one of those rare periods in which the reality of the deep state has to be made apparent to the populace. Perhaps a little like the base/superstructure pattern within the political superstructure, with the Military Industrial complex/fincap/big oil hegemony deliberately exposed to persuade the electorate that the demagogue will not be permitted to do anything that threatens their interests.

 

[brogdale]

Meanwhile....Oakland rarely disappoints...

 

[J Ed]

On notable aspect of the immediate aftermath of Trumps's election has to be repeated MSM reassurances that the population/wider world should not be panicked because there will be so many constraints upon President Trump. Granted, some analysis has centred on the constitutional restraint afforded by a constitution founded upon separation of powers but other commentators have been more candid about limitations upon his ability to use his office. I suppose what I'm getting at is that this last few days has been one of those rare periods in which the reality of the deep state has to be made apparent to the populace. Perhaps a little like the base/superstructure pattern within the political superstructure, with the Military Industrial complex/fincap/big oil hegemony deliberately exposed to persuade the electorate that the demagogue will not be permitted to do anything that threatens their interests.

I think some of it can be attributed to the fetishisation of the US state, its structures and the role it plays as a national myth. People actually believe that the American founding fathers were the most intelligent people to get together in history and what they created was perfect, designed for eventualities like Trump. Though, of course the same people often said that the way the US was founded ensured that someone like Trump could not be elected. Ignoring much wore people like Andrew Jackson and Alexander Hamilton.

It also must be a desperate attempt to curry favour.

A GOP office was vandalised in Virginia a couple of days ago and the state Democrats tried to start a gofundme which the GOP later rejected. I honestly think that if Trump set up death camps on his first day of office these people would do the same thing again if they were vandalised.

 

[brogdale]

I think some of it can be attributed to the fetishisation of the US state, its structures and the role it plays as a national myth but also as a desperate attempt to curry favour.

A tricky one for capital; the populace simultaneously have to believe and disbelieve in their democracy.

 

[J Ed]

A tricky one for capital; the populace simultaneously have to believe and disbelieve in their democracy.

The ship is rudderless, they have lost control. Good thing that a big strongman is coming to fix that.

 

[J Ed]

I didn't know until today that Paul von Hindenburg's electoral slogan was 'with him'...

 

[bimble]

'I'm with her' was a really shit slogan, as was 'stronger together'.
Slogans with verbs in are much better, calls to action, like Make ... Great Again (not at all new but if it ain't broke etc) or the stroke of genius that was Take Back Control.

 

[Idris2002]

I'll just leave this here:

 

[CRI]

On notable aspect of the immediate aftermath of Trumps's election has to be repeated MSM reassurances that the population/wider world should not be panicked because there will be so many constraints upon President Trump. Granted, some analysis has centred on the constitutional restraint afforded by a constitution founded upon separation of powers but other commentators have been more candid about limitations upon his ability to use his office. I suppose what I'm getting at is that this last few days has been one of those rare periods in which the reality of the deep state has to be made apparent to the populace. Perhaps a little like the base/superstructure pattern within the political superstructure, with the Military Industrial complex/fincap/big oil hegemony deliberately exposed to persuade the electorate that the demagogue will not be permitted to do anything that threatens their interests.

That's rubbish. There's hella lot he can do, especially with a GOP majority in both houses and soon to be right wind dominated Supreme Court. Checks and balances my ass.

 

[CRI]

I'll just leave this here:

In dreams

 

[redsquirrel]

Trump Won Because Voters Are Ignorant, Literally

Why have you posted this? Just for a conversation piece or do you agree with it? And if you do agree, what then?

 

[CRI]

White House Reviewing Democratic Coalition Report On Trump’s Russian Ties That FBI Ignored

Well surprise, surprise, he's got more links there than a chain link fence.

I know there were plenty Russian sock puppets on social media, egging on Trump as a saviour, etc. Most you could spot with their not completely convincing affectations of good old "down home boys and girls." But, I don't think it was just these folk that I noticed Putin and his approach as being just what America needs.

I'm old, all my formative years were during the cold war, and the very whiff of an idea that anything Russian wasn't the antithesis of American values would have been rejected in any political discussions amongst ordinary folk. Okay, that was American propaganda that got under our skins collectively and Russians weren't demons - some of us knew that. But, I find this seemingly genuine willingness to embrace totalitarian proto-communist values and ways now both very weird and unsettling. I wasn't expecting that.

 

[J Ed]

totalitarian proto-communist values

??????????????????

 

[redsquirrel]

??????????????????

Mad.

 

[bimble]

Trump's not going to actually do the job he just got is he. If he tries to do the job of president he'll hate it because it's hard but I doubt he'll even try. He doesn't read and has the attention span of a 3 year old. So for all the showmanship he'll probably be a very weak and absent leader and question is who will really be in power, making the decisions.