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

[butchersapron]

She raised $3,218,525 during the election and spent $3,144,843.
You really think this is Green Party supporters suddenly finding deep pockets for Billary?

You, tell me what money we are on about.

 

[ferrelhadley]

Issue regarded as most important
.................Clinton...Trump
Foreign policy 60 34
Immigration 32 64
Economy 52 42
Terrorism 39 57
Community size
Cities (population 50,000 and above) 59 35
Suburbs 45 50
Rural areas 34 62

United States presidential election, 2016 - Wikipedia

On the whole people voted Heil Trump because of immigration and terrorism. There was a significant vote for Heil Trump on the economy but it was not the most salient feature of why people voted for him and Hillary seems to have beaten him on the subject.

One has to wonder at the motivations of people trying so very very hard to obfuscate this?

 

[butchersapron]

United States presidential election, 2016 - Wikipedia

On the whole people voted Heil Trump because of immigration and terrorism. There was a significant vote for Heil Trump on the economy but it was not the most salient feature of why people voted for him and Hillary seems to have beaten him on the subject.

One has to wonder at the motivations of people trying so very very hard to obfuscate this?

sOUTH PARK IS NOT REAL.

 

[butchersapron]

This is silly

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Glad to hear it, but the argument that some of us are making (which is in danger of being drowned out by all the bollocks about Russian vote rigging and other stuff you and others seem so keen to post up uncritically) is that it goes far beyond the Democrats' mishandling of the campaign (although that too is certainly a factor) and is more fundamentally about the rejection by various electorates of political elites and the way that has been exploited by rightist populists.

Nothing that you've posted here seems to show any recognition of that as an underlying theme.

I don't think there's much danger of your point of view being drowned out: there are a number of posters here doing a yeoman's job of posting any and every negative thing about Clinton and the Democratic campaign, backed up by op-ed pieces saying the same thing.

I suppose it depends on what one views as the function of a discussion board. If one thinks the function is to allow a forum for like-minded people to reinforce one another in their common belief, then you're right - there's no place for posts providing a different viewpoint.

If one thinks that the function is to create a space for the airing of different views and discussion about them, then there isn't much harm in posting articles about the effects of race, or even about the possibility of Russian influence on the election.

I understand your argument about the rejection of political elites. I agree that that aspect was a factor in the election However, I disagree that it was the only factor, or even the predominant factor. Because of that disagreement, I'm inclined to make posts that highlight a different point of view.

 

[Anju]

This is silly

This is silly

 

[J Ed]

Berlusconi and Trump | KPFA

A flamboyant billionaire, who used the media as his vehicle, presenting himself as an outsider, who could clean up politics; a person known for his populist promises, along with his sexist insults and scapegoating of immigrants. Donald Trump? No, Silvio Berlusconi — the media tycoon who dominated Italian politics in the 1990s and 2000s. Scholar and activist Laura Fantone discusses the lessons to be learned from Berlusconi’s rule. She also weighs in on whether Berlusconi and Trump are fascists.

Really interesting listen, particularly in regards to the media circus aspect of both Berlusconi and Trump. Fantone makes the point that Berlusconi, and now Trump, has made a real success of the tactic of directing media towards the discussion of bigoted but relatively trivial comments as a method of distracting societal gaze from policy positions.

 

[J Ed]

I don't think there's much danger of your point of view being drowned out: there are a number of posters here doing a yeoman's job of posting any and every negative thing about Clinton and the Democratic campaign, backed up by op-ed pieces saying the same thing.

I suppose it depends on what one views as the function of a discussion board. If one thinks the function is to allow a forum for like-minded people to reinforce one another in their common belief, then you're right - there's no place for posts providing a different viewpoint.

If one thinks that the function is to create a space for the airing of different views and discussion about them, then there isn't much harm in posting articles about the effects of race, or even about the possibility of Russian influence on the election.

I understand your argument about the rejection of political elites. I agree that that aspect was a factor in the election However, I disagree that it was the only factor, or even the predominant factor. Because of that disagreement, I'm inclined to make posts that highlight a different point of view.

Chem trails

 

[J Ed]

5 million dollars that could have been used to organise green stuff.

Where are the mouthy de niros, the durhams with the money now? It's a piffling amount.

Honestly I respect Stein more as a grifter than I did before

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I understand your argument about the rejection of political elites. I agree that that aspect was a factor in the election However, I disagree that it was the only factor, or even the predominant factor. Because of that disagreement, I'm inclined to make posts that highlight a different point of view.

To the extent that it was a factor, the part that depresses me most about this is that, if various vox-pops are to be given weight, this is the wrong thing to be angry about. Or at least, it is being angry about the representatives of capitalism and voting for an arch-capitalist instead, and indeed citing his capitalist credentials ('smart businessman') as the reason for voting for him. Setting aside the con he's pulled in convincing people that he's a smart businessman, it shows a complete absence of any questioning of the system in a deeper sense.

That genuinely depresses me, in a similar way to how so many people voted for Boris Johnson as mayor of London. Not only have they fallen for a con, they should have been rejecting the premise of the con anyway. It's a double-con. And that remains my worry for the US under Trump. He will inevitably fail to deliver on any of his promises to, for instance, coal miners. And then he'll seek scapegoats, and that will prove ugly. I only hope that the people who were conned by him over, for instance, coal come to realise they have been conned, rather than buying in to his scapegoat story.

 

[Raheem]

Honestly I respect Stein more as a grifter than I did before

I wonder what would happen if they don't manage to make the deadline in enough states to overturn the result, but the ones in which they do end up showing clear evidence that the machines were hacked.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I wonder what would happen if they don't manage to make the deadline in enough states to overturn the result, but the ones in which they do end up showing clear evidence that the machines were hacked.

They will accept the fraudulent result in the name of saving democracy. That's basically what happened in 2000. It will happen again. There is zero chance of this result being changed.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

the only hope of stopping Donald Trump carrying out a retrograde GOP agenda lies in Trump himself. He is erratic and dumb and interested only in himself, and I have zero faith in him ever doing the right thing. But that ego of his is all that's keeping him from being a rubber-stamping meat puppet for Congress. In theory, you can temper the danger Trump presents by surrounding him with mildly sane people who can essentially incept his feeble brain with good ideas that are hidden inside a big helping of flattery, like stuffing dog's worm pills inside a pound of raw hamburger.


And this is what America desperately needs Barack Obama to do. There are plenty of liberals out there willing to fight the Trump administration publicly: Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, etc. Obama will have to leave those duties to them while performing a far more delicate and exhausting task of his own. We need him to treat Trump like (GUHHHHHHH) an equal. A pal. A bud. Obama will have to eat with him and golf with him (golf helps) and advise him and welcome him to the Presidential club and essentially make him feel like one of the TRUE ELITE folks who—in Trump’s mind—have always shunned him. And then, once properly ingratiated, he will have to find a way to Jedi mind-trick Trump into not destroying the fucking world. He will have to become The Trump Whisperer.

We Need Barack Obama to Become Donald Trump’s Best Friend

 

[mather]

We Need Barack Obama to Become Donald Trump’s Best Friend

Liberal idiocy knows no bounds!

 

[kabbes]

United States presidential election, 2016 - Wikipedia

On the whole people voted Heil Trump because of immigration and terrorism. There was a significant vote for Heil Trump on the economy but it was not the most salient feature of why people voted for him and Hillary seems to have beaten him on the subject.

One has to wonder at the motivations of people trying so very very hard to obfuscate this?

Those numbers don't say what you think they say. Read them again.

 

[weltweit]

In Scotland, Trump Built a Wall. Then He Sent Residents the Bill.

 

[andysays]

No surprises
Trump election: Clinton campaign joins Wisconsin vote recount

A lawyer for Hillary Clinton's campaign says it will participate in a recount of US presidential election votes in the state of Wisconsin. Officials there are preparing to conduct the process, which was initiated by Green Party presidential nominee Jill Stein.

The Clinton campaign's general counsel, Marc Elias, said the Clinton team and outside experts had been "conducting an extensive review of election results, searching for any signs that the voting process had been tampered with".

He said there was no evidence to conclude the election was sabotaged, but "we have an obligation to the more than 64 million Americans who cast ballots for Hillary Clinton to participate in ongoing proceedings to ensure that an accurate vote count will be reported"... He said the campaign would join in "on principle" in the Midwestern states if Dr Stein follows through on her promise

This bit is worth considering

Dr Stein's campaign needs to raise millions of dollars to cover the fees for the vote recount in all three states. Her website says nearly $5.3m (£4.2m) has already been raised toward a $7m target. It says this is enough to fund the recounts in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.

I wonder how much of that $5.3m comes from from the Green Party and its supporters in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, and how much from other sources. I also wonder how much Stein is merely the figurehead for this bid and much it's being actively supported/driven by the Clinton campaign and/or the Democrat Party.

 

[NoXion]

What's the point in a recount? Hasn't it already been established that Clinton won the popular vote, and that the Trump victory was down to the anti-democratic Electoral College system?

 

[two sheds]

I presumed it would be to reverse the Electoral College votes for those states. Not sure whether that is right though, or whether that would be enough to change the result. You'd imagine it would be otherwise there's indeed no point.

 

[RhymnRzn]

No surprises
Trump election: Clinton campaign joins Wisconsin vote recount




This bit is worth considering

I wonder how much of that $5.3m comes from from the Green Party and its supporters in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, and how much from other sources. I also wonder how much Stein is merely the figurehead for this bid and much it's being actively supported/driven by the Clinton campaign and/or the Democrat Party.

forgive if others said so somewherelse but it does strike a bit odd how the clinton campaign was so quick to call in the concession: it being as close as it was made it seem like she didnt want to be president anyway. recount, double-check, because the people running this stuff aren't like eagles hovering over on top of every rule, every ballot, to be infallible, even if there is "no evidence of hacking or rigging the vote count".

to be certain i have no idea what is true along those lines, but i figured stein totally has a case and an interest in reforms through the entire process, if not, then slightly preferring the democrats lineup.

Did the GOP Strip & Flip the 2016 Selection?
this article is written by a green party guy who does not seem to play around when addressing high crimes

This year, Palast has reported that a new program called Crosscheck has been used by some 30 GOP Secretaries of State to strip more than 1.1 million predominantly black, Hispanic, Islamic and Asian-American citizens from the voter rolls.

Originating with far-right Republican Kris Kobach, Kansas's Secretary of State, Crosscheck eliminated more than enough minority voters in at least three swing states to flip the entire presidential election.

 

[J Ed]

What's the point in a recount? Hasn't it already been established that Clinton won the popular vote, and that the Trump victory was down to the anti-democratic Electoral College system?

I may not be a frog

but I am

Hopping mad

At these election results

 

[purves grundy]

A good hour-long audio interview with Leo Panitch on Trump and global capitalism.

Trump and the End of Neoliberalism? | KPFA

 

[J Ed]

While an obviously disgusting person, Bannon is very smart and I think has a very good grasp on what makes the other side tick. More importantly he is very aware of the feelings of disgust the other side induces in ordinary people and how to exploit that to maximum effect.

 

[brogdale]

Top trolling...

 

[J Ed]

Top trolling...

Worth listening to the kpfa podcast above that talks about Berlusconi doing basically this sort of thing for years on end in order to keep public discourse revolving around stupid controversial statements, and the associated culture war button pressing, rather than policy.

 

[J Ed]

Almost makes you think that there could be something to this recount thing

 

[brogdale]

Worth listening to the kpfa podcast above that talks about Berlusconi doing basically this sort of thing for years on end in order to keep public discourse revolving around stupid controversial statements, and the associated culture war button pressing, rather than policy.

Yep, in this week's LRB Jan-Werner Müller's piece "Capitalism in one family" touched on this as well...

Trump has called himself the Hemingway of the 140 characters. He has ‘the best words’. He loves Twitter, he says, because it’s like having one’s own newspaper, but without the losses. Twitter shares something of the echo-chamber effect of Facebook, but it also makes possible a form of direct identification between the individual citizen and the supposedly sole authentic representative of the people. It is hard to see how this might have been possible before, at least as a matter of daily experience: perhaps going to a party rally and feeling a direct connection with the leader while surrounded by others who feel exactly the same thing. Now, that sense of a direct link is just a click away, day and night: ‘Hey, I’m up at 3 a.m., and so is he, and he’s thinking exactly what I was just thinking!’

 

[J Ed]

 

[SpookyFrank]

What's the point in a recount? Hasn't it already been established that Clinton won the popular vote, and that the Trump victory was down to the anti-democratic Electoral College system?

The three states where they're looking at recounting, enough to hand Clinton the presidency if their electoral college votes were transferred to her after a recount (although who knows if this would actually happen, look at the farce that was the 2000 election and its aftermath) went to Trump by a total of just over 100,000 votes. In a country of 300 million people.