/baw/ - General Discussion

can we put this thread on hold? Other thread is still alive.

>>411112
No it isn't? 400 is the autosage.

>>411115
>>411118
It's not bumping, but it isn't being pushed down.

I do think it would be nice to keep all the election whining/flaming in one thread.

//youtube.com/watch?v=a0AbjnX4ojk
Full video has the guy being dragged with his arm caught in the car while the thieves drive off, but somebody put a rather uncreative song on it https://mobile.twitter.com/MiddleOfMayhem/status/796545047915331586/video/1
Doubt this is going to get much media attention since it's not white people doing the crime.

I would like to retract my earlier condemnation and attempt to capture even a sliver of the humility of those attempting to show graciousness in defeat.

>>411134
Fuck that, I'm sick of the Dems trying to take the high road and getting shit for it, and I'm sick of the poor whites spitting on every attempt to educate or care for them. Fuck that and fuck them. Now it's time to viciously claw for every inch and make the Right's lives as miserable as they intend to make ours.

I too am pissed of Trump winning, but for the life of mine I can't make sense of the protests. What is exactly the goal of protesting at this point, when the asshole isn't even the president? To repeat the elections or what? The whole #NotMyPresident thing is not how democracy works, it is not something that is good when your side wins but suddendly becomes awful when the other guys do. I will get out and strongly voice my disagreement next year when he actually is about to do something terrible (and I doubt it will take too much time to get there), but right now it's throwing a fit like sore losers, and that's the wrong way to start a political opposition.

>>411135
I seriously hope you are not trying to justify what happens in that video up there.

>>411136
Neonazis are already out there attacking people, the rednecks are attacking lgbtq people, all these forces he galvanized and used are taking this as justification for their actions.

>>411136
Being bitter is just too goddamned easy.

>>411137
No one should ever try to justify something like that, instead jump to 3 minutes in on this, it's what we should be trying to do.

//youtube.com/watch?v=ulOhoEpUTw8

>>411136

>I too am pissed of Trump winning, but for the life of mine I can't make sense of the protests.

Emotional release, aka catharsis.

>>411138
Like the old man Ghandi used to tay, an eye for an eye only ends up making the whole world go blind.

>>411134
>I would like to retract my earlier condemnation and attempt to capture even a sliver of the humility of those attempting to show graciousness in defeat.
We never expected it, everyone knows you fuckers are the scum of the earth :^)

>>411135
>Dems trying to take the high road
Is that what you call the sitting president taking time off his busy job to campaign for a candidate? He's supposed to be the president of 100% of Americans, not just the 40% that support Hilldawg.

He was literally being paid by conservatives taxes while he did that shit, just like every other liberal on welfare.

When Obama won, he didn't go into it actively campaigning on the intention to strip people of rights just given to them by the previous president, or take away health care they need to survive, or whip up a frenzy of bigotry resulting in emboldening hate crimes. And more importantly he actually won the damn popular vote.

But no, surely this will end well, especially with all branches of government now subject to either kowtow to the bratty orange bully or pass any heinous shit they want through him without resistance because he has no clue how to manage on his own.

>>411139
>Being bitter is just too goddamned easy.
Yes, extremely, when you've just been condemned to die by an ignorant electorate.

>>411147
I see, so you claim that organic protests never use mass-produced signage or public transportation?

>>411150
>When Obama won, he didn't go into it actively campaigning on the intention to strip people of rights just given to them by the previous president
>right
>given
Rights aren't given, moron.

And Obama went into it actively campaigning to take away rights Americans have had since before America existed as a country.

>>411151
>condemned to die
Jesus Christ can you be more melodramatic?

>>411152
Not if the mass produced signage came from violent astroturfing companies in the employ of the DNC.

>>411156
>Rights aren't given, moron.
But they are often taken.

>>411157
By Democrats.

California like "waaaah we gonna secede" and I'm like "quit teasing and do it bitch".

55 electoral votes for a parasite state full of human trash.

>>411159
what right have the democrats taken from you

>>411161
he isn't allowed to say nigger you see

>>411156
>Jesus Christ can you be more melodramatic?
The second most powerful man in the country is greatly in favor of forced conversion therapy for gays, which has at best a 50% surgical rate. The alt right skinheads, Nazis, and klansmen have been told that half of America thinks their actions ate acceptable. The president elect believes that black men accused, but proven innocent of crimes should be executed.

Yes, people have been condemned to death because of this. They're just people you don't see as people.

People talking about the electoral college breaking ranks and picking Hillary are wishing for a pipe dream but oh the beautiful constitutional crisis it would be

>>411161
First, second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, tenth.

If you want to talk natural or inherent rights, instead of constitutional, we can address those as well.

>>411165
And with an 8-person SCOTUS, no less.

>>411164
Technically, it was probably around a quarter of America, given estimates about the number of unregistered voters and the number of registered voters who didn't vote. …we’re all really fucked.

>>411165
Wouldn't be a constitutional crisis at all--it'd be a wakeup call about just how stupid the electoral college system is, but the constitution does not require electors to vote with the State's popular vote. That's down to State-level rules, and not all states have rules that require it.

Actually, that's the entire theory behind how we get rid of the Electoral College at the federal level through State-only action, a movement that's been going on for years. If enough states change their elector rules to be such that whoever wins the national popular vote gets all of the state's electors, then the electoral college is effectively removed as a consideration. That just has to add up to 270 electors.

http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/

Currently 165 electoral votes worth of states have agreed to it, and it will take effect if 105 votes' worth more agree.

>>411167

You're arguing as an anonymous jackoff on a barely-trafficked imageboard available to pretty much anyone in the US who has Internet access. Your 1A rights are pretty goddamned well-protected, son.

>>411167
>First, second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, tenth.
Impressive list. How are these threatened for you? Such widespread abuses must be well documented by many credible sources.

>>411167
>First, second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, tenth.

Democrats have taken none of those from you.

>>411168
>>411170
I wish, man oh man I wish, but they almost certainly won't do it.

>>411164
>The second most powerful man in the country
>second
By what fucking metric? Speakers in the house or senate outrank him and can do more damage. Anyone on the supreme court outranks him. Most of the secretaries outrank the VP.
And you think the VP has the power to what, force people at gunpoint to undertake dangerous surgery?
You're being a twat right now. Stop being a twat.

>The alt right skinheads, Nazis, and klansmen
>alt right
Yeah you're going to get a meme overdose.
>skinheads
Are a subculture of British punk, last i checked.
>nazis
Got crushed by us in WWII.
>klansmen
Number in the low tens. TENS. And they're all inbred hicks living in a swamp in Florida, so you're safe bro.

>Yes, people have been condemned to death because of this.
People have been condemned to ignorant twattery.

>They're just people you don't see as people.
No I see you as a twat.

I actually had a picture of a pussy I was going to post as added insult for your twat-like behavior, but I looked at it for a few moments, and realized this was a beautiful thing. This pussy doesn't deserve to be tainted by comparison with you, it's a marvel of nature.

>>411175
Alph do not repost dumb shit.

>>411176
>By what fucking metric?
By the metric that Trump is a stupid, lazy, and irresponsible fuck who's going to let Pence do all the decision making outside of vanity projects.

Also everything else just shows off why Trump won with the uneducated and lost with the educated.

>>411174
>I wish, man oh man I wish, but they almost certainly won't do it.

No, you're right, they won't. While it's not illegal for them to do so, the DNC and RNC both tend to make them sign contracts that levy fines and other penalties against them if they don't. It's not impossible that they'll go against it, but it's incredibly unlikely.

>>411179
It's all we've got.

>>411180
We've also got making it impossible for Trump to pass anything through political action. We may not have any presence in government, but we can make the lives of the people who do hell until they listen.

After all. As the popular vote shows, there are more of us than there are of them.

>>411178
>Trump is a stupid, lazy, and irresponsible fuck
Media spin, the same media that called him a clown and kept saying he wouldn't win for YEARS, right up until he did. The fact is that he's more capable than Hillary, so unless you want to claim Tim Kaine would be the power behind the throne there...

>>411181
Republicans hold the house, senate, and governorship. You can't even filibuster right.

>After all. As the popular vote shows, there are more voting machines than there are of them.
Fixt lol.

Hope you guys enjoy living under Russian rule:

http://boingboing.net/2016/11/10/russia-reveals-that-it-was-i.html

>>411183
>Media spin, the same media that called him a clown and kept saying he wouldn't win for YEARS, right up until he did.
Actually, it's all in his record of constant failure at business (which is why he hasn't paid taxes in decades), proving himself to be completely stupid every time he opened his mouth (in his commercials, on his reality show, and in debates), never paying debts, and every single thing he tweeted.

Look, just because he gives you cummies doesn't make him smart or capable.

>Republicans hold the house, senate, and governorship. You can't even filibuster right.
I didn't say filibuster, I said political action. That said, you're wrong about that--a true filibuster can be performed by even just one person, but even the procedural filibuster can be performed on many items as long as the side wanting to end it doesn't have a supermajority.

Funny how Trump supporters keep showing off that they know absolutely nothing about how anything works.

>>411186
>We can teach them to love gays
You would have a hard time, seeing as you hate them.

Don't spam the thread.

>>411197
>Contact anonex and provide the ability to post multiple images in one post then.

Alternately, you could stop posting these images that no one's bothering to look at because they're not entertaining to anyone with a high school diploma.

>>411197
There is a reason that function is not available. Go back to 7chan/etc. if you think it's important.

>anonex
He's not returning until September 2nd

>>411198
>look at how not bothered by you i am!
>im just responding so much because im ignoring you!
lol

>with a high school diploma
You only got a GED?

Reminder that one of the first things that happened this year was Alan Rickman and David Bowie dying (and last year ended with Lemmy dying).


2016 folks

we should have known

http://www.salon.com/2016/11/09/the-hillary-clinton-campaign-intentionally-created-donald-trump-with-its-pied-piper-strategy/
>Sanders, a self-described Democratic socialist, repeatedly warned in the primary that he would have a greater chance of defeating Trump. Poll after poll showed that he would have beaten Trump in the general election by wide margins. Instead, his candidacy was repressed — and now Clinton has lost to Trump.
Oh, and that DNC document has been available since June 15th: https://guccifer2.wordpress.com/2016/06/15/dnc/

Only Hillary could have lost to Trump.

Bernouts stupidly believing that the sort of people who voted for Donald Fucking Trump wouldn't have had a problem standing with a jewish socialist.

>>411205
No one who voted for Trump is a moderate. The word you're looking for is "idiots."

http://www.lehighvalleylive.com/education/index.ssf/2016/11/students_yelling_cotton_picker_heiling_hitler_at_this_local_school.html#incart_most-read_warren-county_article

http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/trailguide/la-na-updates-trail-guide-kkk-trump-north-carolina-1478822255-htmlstory.html

http://www.ksat.com/news/texas-state-university-police-seek-people-threatening-diversity-advocates

http://ktla.com/2016/11/10/muslim-latino-students-in-california-targeted-in-incidents-day-after-election/

"Trump's win doesn't empower racism and white nationalism," says lying crackers.

>>411207
no u

Maybe this will be a net positive in the end. Maybe, after 2 years of absolute hell, democrats will learn that midterms are important. Maybe Bernouts and "protest voters" will learn that elections aren't a fucking game. Maybe rural America and the rust belt will finally learn that the Republicans aren't their friends.

Until then, we have to deal with Newt calling for a new House Committee on Un-American Activities and yes he really is doing that

>>411214
>Maybe Bernouts
And maybe the DNC will learn that rigging the primaries will piss people off.

>>411214
>Newt calling for a new House Committee on Un-American Activities
That may be so, but can you give some citation?

>>411215

And maybe you’ll learn that not even Bernie Sanders could’ve won. (A Socialist Jew with a history of social activism? Trump’s campaign would’ve destroyed him in the long term.)

Trump trounced sixteen other Republicans — some qualified for the POTUS seat, the rest far from it — on his way to a showdown with Clinton. The GOP couldn’t stop Trump, and they did as much as they could to stop him. Sanders, Clinton, Warren — whoever the DNC tossed in Trump’s path likely would’ve lost.

>>411216

Trump and the GOP will inherit the national surveillance apparatus in their hands. The military will be in his control. The FBI, the CIA, and the other alphabet soup orgs will be working for him. The police might be emboldened by a “law and order” candidate-turned-President-elect to violate civil liberties. Omarosa, one of Trump’s campaign surrogates, has already said he has an “enemies list”. Trump’s campaign denied press credentials to damn near everyone who wanted to cover his first meeting with Obama, and you can likely expect more of that in the future. And there’s been all that talk about Trump “opening up” the libel laws so he can sue the press easier.

It's not hard to believe we’ll be seeing the GOP go after America’s “enemies within” — starting with the press and the protestors and the people who have ripped on Trump or the GOP for years.

Welcome to the new America.

>>411216

Oh, and here’s your citation: http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/14/politics/newt-gingrich-house-un-american-activities-committee/index.html

>>411217
Why wouldn't he have a problem with the media who have been constantly calling him a racist misogynist literally Hitler?

>>411204
>>411217
90% of the Trump voters i know (and i know quite a few, i live in the south) say they would have voted for Sanders if he were the candidate. They were less pro-Trump and more never-Clinton.

>>411220

And look where their precious political purity got us.

Fuck them. If they didn’t want to help stop the rise of Trump, they’re as complicit in his rise as the people who actively supported it. They better enjoy feeling morally superior to those of us who voted pragmatically; it might be all that keeps them warm at night once Trump takes office.

>>411219

It’s not about him having issues with the press. It’s about him actively trying to stifle the press’s job — reporting on what the President, his administration, and the federal government in general does on a daily basis — because his fee-fees got hurt by all the namecalling. From here on out, the press will either play ball with Trump (and all but become a state-sanctioned press in the process) or be shut out of even the most basic things they took for granted during every other administration.

A House Un-American Activites Committee, by the by, dredges up fears of McCarthyism — fears of ordinary Americans being called traitors and spies and “un-American” because of who they are, what they do, what they read, say, create. Nobody thought the original committee would go as far as it did because it was started with “good intentions”. But McCarthy twisted it into a witch hunt for “communists” and destroyed innocent people’s lives as a result. Nobody with any common sense wants to see that happen again. “Un-American” behavior will be defined by those doing the hunting, and right now, those doing the hunting can define that behavior broadly (thanks to Dubya and Obama doing what they did to define “terrorism” and expand the defintion, respectively).

>>411217
Mr Stone, are you saying that it was justified that the DNC employed shady tactics to torpedoe Bernie's chance at the primaries? Two wrongs make one right?

And Hillary was an equally bad candidate to put against Trump. Plenty of uneducated whites were pissed at Obama, and her representing a continuity of the Obama administration facilitated Trump to consolidate his base of electoral power among that sector of the population. Those people don't really care about political arguments, and Hillary made it easy to throw a simple message at them: You don't like Obama? Hillary more like Obama's Shillary. Trump thrived on that, and the result is clear.

>>411217
>Trump trounced sixteen other Republicans — some qualified for the POTUS seat, the rest far from it — on his way to a showdown with Clinton.
All of them severely underestimating him at the beggining, which let him ride on the wave of surprise that he wasn't immediately trounced while those sixteen other Rebublicans continued failing to realise that being so numerous just made it harder to draw any attention away from Trump until the primaries were almost over.

>>411223

>Mr Stone, are you saying that it was justified that the DNC employed shady tactics to torpedoe Bernie's chance at the primaries? Two wrongs make one right?

No, not in the least. But let’s not act like Bernie would’ve trounced Trump if the race had come down to those two. Trump’s campaign did everything possible to destroy Clinton, and they had years of shit to fling at her. But Sanders? Like I said: Socialist Jew with a history of social activism. Racist Trump supporters would’ve pegged him as part of the “globalist Jew conspiracy” and the Trump campaign would’ve done nothing to disavow anti-Semitic attacks against him. His socialist views would’ve been ripped to shreds by Trump’s surrogates. Angry white Trump supporters would’ve likely seen Sanders’s social activism as “anti-white” or “pro-minority”; stacked alongside his socialist leanings, they would've had him painted as the Anti-Christ of “white America”. I would’ve voted for Bernie if he had made it, but I’m not dumb enough to pretend he would’ve trounced Trump in the end. (If anything, a Sanders victory would probably have been as close as the actual election results.)

>>411225
I literally just said that, anecdotally, in my area of the south, Bernie was significantly more popular than Trump.

>>411226
Yes and you lie constantly so

>>411226

That’s nice, dear.

>>411227
You got any receipts yet?

http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37953528

In which the right begins to discover that they really HAVE elected a magic 8 ball

>>411220
>90% of the Trump voters i know (and i know quite a few, i live in the south) say they would have voted for Sanders if he were the candidate
Then they are idiots who know neither candidate's platform.

>>411234
That they may be, but don't run a national election strategy without looking for what can sway the idiot vote.

>>411235
Oh, no, I agree, this was a fuckup on the Democrats' part. I just want the people who voted for Trump to feel bad about themselves.

The republic won't fall to some fat old man who lost a fight with a tanning bed and his ghoulish shadow, nor to any of the worthless reds now in Congress. In fact, in a sense we will now see the truth of the Republican party: that they have no real policies, no real solutions, and no real spine. They've promised the rust belt and the flyover states the world and now have no democratic power to place the blame on when they fail to deliver. Rural America is poor and desperate, and has been taken in on a con man. What, oh I wonder, will happen when he fails to deliver?

already walking back the lies they've told to the poor schmucks they've walked across to get where they are now
http://www.kentucky.com/news/politics-government/article114197923.html

and oh hey, some plagiarism while we're at it!
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/trump-transition-website-non-profit-passages-duplicate-231261

>>411243
Also considering Sarah Palin as Secretary of the Interior.

Because you know, nothing says "Drain the swamp" like filling the swamp with your own insiders.

>>411244
Bannon on the chief of staff list is the real worrying one.

>>411241
>McConnell being right about anything.

That's a laugh.

>>411242
And last paragraph in the article shows the story is a nothing burger.


>>411243

Source or just more wishful thinking and salty tears.

>>411233

>one part that pretty much existed before the law and the other which nobody has problem with.

Yep massive U Turn

Shake that ball again maybe it'll be right this time.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/11/12/post-election-spate-hate-crimes-worse-than-post-911-experts-say/93681294/

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-elections/us-election-hillary-clinton-more-votes-popular-vote-any-candidate-barack-obama-donald-trump-a7413596.html

~democracy~

Yep representative democracy where everyone has an equal effect and everyone isn't subject to the will of the major metropolitan areas.

EC exact purpose has always been a block to mob rule politics.

Course if California wants to become its own nation (North Mexico) and remove themselves from the process I'm not going to stop them.

>>411267
>Yep representative democracy where everyone has an equal effect
No that would be if one person equalled one vote. The EC is national scale gerrymandering that gives areas with a small population more influence than they should have.

>>411268
>that gives areas with a small population more influence than they should have.

Hey man, if you metropolitan areas want to go segregate yourselves from the rest of "dumbfuckistan" we won't stop you (but we all know you won't do it because you're all a bunch of fucking pussies who won't even move to Canada despite making the shrill claim every time an election doesn't go your way). I hope you enjoy starving, though. I don't think you'd be able to find too many states to join your union when they'd have no influence on one of the three branches of federal government.

>>411269
>if you metropolitan areas
Metropolitan areas are not a hive mind anymore than the rural areas are.

>>411269

If anything, “Dumbfuckistan” — more politely known as “Middle America” — is the group of people segregating themselves from America. A not-zero number of people in “flyover states” act like the “coastal elites” are ruining the country with “political correctness” and “kowtowing to minorities”, but those same people often refuse to get out of their bubble and see other parts of the country/world for themselves.

Yes, part of the job “coastal elites” have to do is reach out towards those communities in a sympathetic way (though not in a way that undercuts support for demographic minorities). But it would be nice to see those communities do a little outreach of their own, too.

Iirc by the latest figures in order for the urban population to completely override the rural population, 87% of the former would have to vote as a bloc. That doesn't happen. Any successful campaign for the popular vote would have to target both urban and rural populations. Yes, it would have to target urban populations MORE, but that only makes sense because there are more fucking people there.

>>411267
>EC exact purpose has always been a block to mob rule politics.
>
Actually it's exact purpose has always been to keep the pro-slavery states with more power than the non-slavery states so as to maintain the supremacy of the white man over the black man. So you're 100% right in saying this election is an example of it working exactly as it was intended.

http://www2.nybooks.com/daily/s3/nov/10/trump-election-autocracy-rules-for-survival.html

>every election where the electoral vote trumps (SEE I MADE A FUNNY) the popular vote, the Democrat loses

So, why doesn't the Democratic party even try to do anything about it?

>>411285
Because as Stone so kindly put it, the coastal elites need to reach out and educate the unwashed masses but they wouldn't want to go to the flyover states to do so because they aren't worth the effort.

>>411285
Because math requires that there be at least SOME bipartisan support for any such amending and the Republicans will never agree to something clearly disadvantageous them.

>>411287
No, I said it is incumbent upon both “sides” — the “coast” and “Middle America” — to reach out to each other. There is only so much the “coastal elietes” can do on their own, especially if people in “Middle America” don’t want to reach out and learn about the world outside their own bubble.

>>411285
There is the movement to have “faithless electors” — Electors who are not bound by state law to vote for the candidate who won the majority vote in that state — vote for Clinton when the Electoral College meets in December. But that seems like a long shot. There’s also the movement to have states with enough electoral votes to band together and respect only the winner of the national popular vote so the popular vote will equal the electoral vote. That seems less a long shot, and it’ll likely have renewed strength as a movement in the next couple of years. But there’s another big three reasons Dems lost this year: the gutting of the Voting Rights Act, the passing of voter-supression-in-intent laws in states once covered by the VRA’s most stringent provisions, and the gerrymandering of electoral districts by State legislatures controlled by Republicans.

Britain here. Your fuckup makes our fuckup look less stupid, so thanks for that.

Meanwhile, Theresa May was in India for a week, trying to get a post-Brexit deal. She was, of course, told to fuck off, but pretended she had a productive time. Turns out student visas to the UK have dropped by 50% since Brexit... can't say I blame them.

There'll be an appeal against the High Court ruling that May can't just ignore the constitution because she feels like it in early December, and Farage has promised to lead 100,000 people to intimidate the judges into doing what they want, because that's all some Leave voters want: "Do what we want, or else we'll riot". Also, the woman who led the legal challenge has been told by police not to go outside, because there's a good chance she'd get killed.

Most political parties in Britain have said they'll block Brexit if there isn't a second referendum. Labour has said they won't (guy who hates Corbyn, go ahead and give me shit: you did indeed tell me so) because they want to get old people to vote for them.

And finally, of course, we have "Mr Brexit" himself to deal with. Farage joked about Trump groping May on their first visit, because of course he fucking did. Trump's said he'll support Britain if they go through with Brexit, making him the only world leader (I think?) to say he won't give us exactly what we deserve. This has given pro-Brexit politicians some ammunition, because being the bitch of a racist and suspected child molester is much better than staying within Europe's best peace project. There's a real fear that Trump and Brexit winning will make other far-right cunts in Europe gain power - Le Pen is pretty smug right now, and I don't blame her.

On a serious note, I am honestly pretty scared of the rise of neo-fascism and white supremacy in my country and America. Our generation has its Hitler (Putin), Mussolini (Trump), Stalin (Putin. Yes, I'm counting him twice.) and even a Lord Haw-Haw (Farage), but I don't see a Churchill or FDR stepping up to the plate.
>>411285
Because it's part of the US constitution, and any attempt to change that would not go down well, especially after this shit.

>>411290
>guy who hates Corbyn, go ahead and give me shit: you did indeed tell me so
He's a worthless fuck and always has been, but what do I know, we just voted for Donald Fucking Trump who, even if he's not actually what the Nazis and Evangelicals think they've won IS a racist, sexist, conartist pos.

>>411293

It might seem hypocritical and stupid to you, and maybe it is in the grand scheme of things, but guess what? People are allowed to have gut reactions and feel however they wish about things — especially reactions you might think are hypocritical and stupid. People are people, and they’re not perfect. Deal with it.

>>411293
Politics aside, I found it funny.

>>411295
Don't be tempted m8s, it may seem like an easy solution but it'll give you Tony Abbott as easily as Hillary Clinton.

>>411295

I support automatic registration, Election Day as a national holiday, and reforms to the overall voting process (Proportional Voting would be nice).

>>411298
Election day as a national holiday doesn't work out so well because, like every national holiday, the people who are forced to work those days tend to be the people at the bottom of society. Wal-Mart is not going to close on *any* day, regardless of its Holiday status, so the people who are going to lose out are going to be the people with the least seniority--and incidentally the poorest people, as they're also going to be the people who make the least money.

A better idea is to expand early voting and not even treat "Election Day" as anything other than the final day of voting. Tuesday is not the day you vote, it's your last chance to vote. Also make sure voting places are open well after business hours, from like 4 AM to 9 PM or something--if not straight up 24 hours for the, let's say, two weeks of voting.

>>411299

>expand early voting

That won't happen in any Republican-controlled states. The slashing of both the amount of early-voting hours/days and the number of polling sites in states like North Carolina had a direct effect on the number of voters who turned out to vote in those states this year. (I’m not going to say it cost Hillary the election, but it’s at least one factor as to why she only won the popular vote.)

>>411300
For that same reason, though, Republican controlled states / Republican congresscritters aren't going to vote in favor of a national election day holiday, either.

>>411301

I can acknowledge that fact and still support the idea, you know.

>>411285
The election process is direct democratic within a state, but outside the state the process becomes driven by representative democracy out of necessity. Because America isn't a single state, it's a union of states. Electorals are a check and balance put in place to ensure that low population states aren't disenfranchised, in fact the electoral voting system was how the country was formed in the first place. What state would ever join a union where they were sure to have zero say because of their low population?

As to their number.... electors are representatives of the congressmen from that state, who are in turn representatives of the people of that state. Electors are essentially stand-ins for congressmen, so congressmen don't have to travel home from washington every election (tough in the past). The number of senators is a pre-set two for every state, just in case one dies. The number of representatives in the House are decided by POPULATION, which determines the number of districts, and the number of seats. So it's almost a direct representation of the population of that state, low population states might get more impact because of the two Senator limit, but that's not really as significant as people think. All but one state have more representatives in the house than the senate.

tl;dr
1. The electoral college is completely democratic, just representatively so. It is also part and parcel of how America was formed, and what keeps it together.
2. It is difficult to win the popular vote yet lose the electoral, chances are 10:1 against it happening. Which is why we should probably wait until all the votes are counted before tearing down the pillars holding America together.

Uneducated, opinionated folk on this website smh.

>>411307
So you see nothing wrong with the fact that republicans in California and democrats in Texas effectively don't get to vote in Presidential elections? Or that once the threshold has been met, millions of voters can have their votes discarded because their state has already been decided?

This may be, broadly, "democratic," but it's not one-man-one-vote by any stretch of the imagination. It is inherently unfair, and easily the most powerful form of gerrymandering in the US system. The only reason you support this form of gerrymandering is because it happens to churn out results you like.

>>411307

You left out something important about the Electoral College’s history: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/electoral-college-slavery-constitution/

The American Jewish Committee and Islamic Society of North America have launched the Muslim-Jewish Advisory Council in the face of our incoming national nightmare.

>>411311
I honestly thought you were making a joke at first

>>411312
nooooooope

>>411308
>but it's not one-man-one-vote by any stretch of the imagination.

True.

>It is inherently unfair,

Not true. It is no more "unfair" than the Senate giving each state two representatives regardless of population.

>The only reason you support this form of gerrymandering is because it happens to churn out results you like.

Also not true, as I voted for Hillary in a red state. However, I am able to look at the broader picture and recognize the practical reasons for keeping the system. In fact, the Slate, hardly something I would call a "conservative" website, went through five practical reasons for keeping the system, if you wish to read it: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/view_from_chicago/2012/11/defending_the_electoral_college.html

>>411314
>Not true. It is no more "unfair" than the Senate giving each state two representatives regardless of population.
That is explicitly meant to be counterbalanced by the House (it isn't due to redistricting but oh well)
>Also not true, as I voted for Hillary in a red state.
Then you didn't get a vote.

The president is meant to be the leader of the whole nation, not a few hundred thousand people in PN, FL, and MI. One person, one vote, is the only fair system, the opposite has no non-partisan benefits.

>>411311
>>411312
>>411313
and it may indeed be needed
https://www.buzzfeed.com/hayesbrown/aipac-quietly-removes-two-state-solution-from-peace-process?utm_term=.ibyKLm39N#.dcVJ6XVAB

Seeing Swedish nazis march to celebrate Trump's victory really highlight the global nature of today's anti-globalism.

>>411314
>Also not true, as I voted for Hillary in a red state.
Then you didn't vote. There is no broader picture for you. Your vote was not counted.

>>411317
>swedish Nazis
That would be hilarious to witness.

>>411318

>Then you didn't vote.

Actually, he did. He voted for Hillary. A vote for the losing “side” is still a vote and it still counts.

>>411320
>Actually, he did. He voted for Hillary. A vote for the losing “side” is still a vote and it still counts.
No, it literally doesn't, not in the EC system of winner take all. A Republican in California will never count. A Democrat in Mississippi will never count. They might as well not exist.

>>411320
>Actually, he did. He voted for Hillary. A vote for the losing “side” is still a vote and it still counts.

He didn't vote for Hillary though. He voted for the elector who was pledged to vote for Hillary. Under the electoral college system, you don't get to vote for President, you only get to vote for electors. Which is why if your candidate loses, you don't get to vote for President. You only get to have a say in who the President is if your elector wins.

Effectively, the Electoral College makes it to where you must compete for the opportunity to vote.

>>411321
>>411322

He still voted. He cast a ballot for whom he believed his state’s Electors should vote for. His choice may have lost, but he still offered his opinion in the form of a voting ballot. If you don’t think that counts because his “side” lost, you’ll have to do a better job of persuading me to believe as you do.

>>411323
Why are you suddenly pro EC?

>>411324

I’m not pro-EC. I’m acknowledging how >>411314 said they voted despite other anons saying otherwise. That anon cast a ballot and thus expressed an opinion on who they wanted their state’s electors to vote for. That their vote didn’t lead to a victory for their expressed opinion doesn’t change the legal validity of their vote or somehow erase the objective fact that they went to a polling site on Election Day and cast a ballot. And the fact of their having cast a ballot is not undone by an opinion — mine or anyone else’s — about the Electoral College.

>>411323
Fine, he voted. Then his vote was discarded when it was determined not to matter because it was cast in the wrong state. If he wanted his vote to count he should've lived in Florida or something--Californians' votes are completely irrelevant to who becomes President.

So yes, you've made the pedantic point that he went down and filled out a form before they threw it away because he was born in the wrong place. Well done.

>>411325
Fine, he voted. Then his vote was discarded when it was determined not to matter because it was cast in the wrong state. If he wanted his vote to count he should've lived in Florida or something--Californians' votes are completely irrelevant to who becomes President.

So yes, you've made the pedantic point that he went down and filled out a form before they threw it away because he was born in the wrong place. Well done.

But you haven't changed the fact that there would have been no difference in the election if he had stayed home. He may have technically voted, but his vote was ignored just the same as it would have been if he had been a twelve year old casting it in a "Kids Choose The President" poll. It amounts to nothing more than a curiosity because how you vote is irrelevant unless you live in a swing state.

>>411326
>>411327
>his vote was discarded when it was determined not to matter because it was cast in the wrong state

No, what happened was their vote was counted along with all the others and helped determine which opinion on “Who should be President?” the Electors should follow. The vote was not “discarded” because it was for the “wrong candidate”. It had — still has — as much legal validity as a vote for Trump.

>you haven't changed the fact that there would have been no difference in the election if he had stayed home

So? Just because their opinion wasn’t listened to by the Electors doesn’t mean they didn’t voice it. Just because the state went red doesn’t mean votes for Hillary were nullified, disqualified, and disavowed. Was their vote “meaningless”? No. It was a fulfillment of their civic duty as a citizen of the United States and a clear expression of their opinion on the matter of the 2016 Presidential Election. Like I said: If you really want me to believe in the idea of “a losing vote means you didn’t actually vote because your vote didn’t fucking matter”, your current attempts at persuasion are not getting the job done.

>>411328
At this point you're basically arguing that gerrymandering isn't anti-democratic. California will always vote democrat. Being a Republican in California means you have no voice in national elections. You can be an apologist for voter disenfranchisement if you like, but don't try to pretend like these people's votes matter.

They don't get a voice. You're just arguing to keep them marginalized.

>>411329

>you're basically arguing that gerrymandering isn't anti-democratic

I’m saying that a vote is an opinion, and casting that opinion in favor of the side that ultimately loses does not invalidate that opinion — or that vote. If you live in a blue state and vote for a Republican (or a red state and a Democrat, respectively), your vote is still counted and tallied just like everyone else’s, and it stays tallied even if your side loses. More could be done to fix voter disenfranchisement issues — and hopefully will be done after Trump leaves office — but voting in a state that historically goes against your “side” is not disenfranchisement. You still get to vote. Your voice is still part of the opposing crowd. Even if your choice loses, the vote is not ultimately tallied as 100%–0% in favor of the winning side.

I cannot, in good conscience, refer to a vote as worthless if it was cast for the losing side. You may say what you wish about that; I bet you already have a response rolling around in your head. But I cannot say that a vote is worthless if it goes towards a failing effort; doing so dismisses every “failed” vote in every election my side won as worthless, and my side can’t afford to be that motherfucking condescending towards “the other side” any more.

>>411330
>but voting in a state that historically goes against your “side” is not disenfranchisement.
Then I suppose you don't see anything wrong with gerrymandering, either. The creation of "safe" districts to game the system and thereby invalidate the votes of millions of people, ensuring that people who have the least support are given the majority of the power. Which is exactly what happened in this election--the candidate with the least support now controls the entire government. Despite the fact that the majority of the country doesn't want him to--because the system was designed to make sure that Will of the People is ignored.

And people like you come in and act as apologists for this sort of political gamesmanship because you're so fixated on "Well they filled out a ballot" that you won't even acknowledge that there was never any universe in which their opinions mattered, or indeed *could* have mattered in any way other than as a curiosity.

Any form of district-based voting in single office runoffs is inherently undemocratic, whether you want to admit it or not. If there were 50 presidents being chosen, then it would be fine--the Senate is a perfectly reasonable setup (though it would probably be better if there were four senators per State, and about twice as many representatives--with the Representatives chosen via a proportional representation system to reduce the power of gerrymandering). But what you're espousing here guarantees oligarchy.

>>411331

>The creation of "safe" districts to game the system and thereby invalidate the votes of millions of people, ensuring that people who have the least support are given the majority of the power.

In terms of the national election, this happens because of partisan political divisions and liberals being more likely to live in the large cities within the bulk of the “blue states”. If more Republicans lived in the bastions of evil coastal elitism, perhaps they’d have more of a voice in those states. (The inverse holds true, too.) But the partisan splitting of blue and red states is not due to some devious form of gerrymandering that makes voting “districts” look like a goddamned hieroglyph.

>the candidate with the least support now controls the entire government

I’m pretty sure Jill Stein didn’t win the election.

>people like you come in and act as apologists for this sort of political gamesmanship

The Electoral College is the system we have in place until and unless it is done away with or enough states sign off on that Popular Vote Equals 270 Electoral Votes thing. It is the system we have to work within. My opinion on that matter — which is “the US should have Proportional Voting and no Electoral College” — does not change that fact. And I absolutely will not apologize for acknowledging a fact.

>you won't even acknowledge that there was never any universe in which their opinions mattered, or indeed *could* have mattered in any way other than as a curiosity

I can acknowledge it. But that doesn’t mean I believe an opinion is instantly trash because a majority decided to go with a different opinion. To put this in context: A Democrat vote within an ostensibly Republican state (or vice versa) may not win the day, but the vote is still counted all the same. If the vote is counted, it matters. Opposition to harmful or dangerous opinions matters, even if the opposition is a minority of voices. You can keep trying to convince me otherwise, but your efforts will be in vain.

>Any form of district-based voting in single office runoffs is inherently undemocratic

You say this, but offer no deeper backing argument for it. I want to see that backing argument.

>what you're espousing here guarantees oligarchy

Only if our checks and balances are tossed out of whack. Only if the general public allows it. Only if people decide that bellyaching on social media — and doing nothing else —  is preferable to doing political groundwork.

Ben Carson has refused a spot in Trump’s administration.

On the basis that he, a former wannabe candidate for President, has no government experience and doesn’t want to impede the incoming administration.

>>411333
>Only if our checks and balances are tossed out of whack. Only if the general public allows it. Only if people decide that bellyaching on social media — and doing nothing else —  is preferable to doing political groundwork.

It just happened, dude. Glad you're okay with it.

>>411339
>Ben Carson has refused a spot in Trump’s administration.
Thank gooooooood

>>411308
> effectively don't get to vote in Presidential elections?
Texas almost swung this election. Also Florida flipflopped. California is only solid due to race pandering, but the Mormons are finding an in there. States CAN change, through migration, aging of population, paradigm shifts.... Your party is not a race, it isn't something you're born with, a sizeable percentage of Democrats voted for Trump.

>it's not one-man-one-vote
Yes it is. The problem is you think you're voting with the entire country for who gets to be the president. This isn't true. You are voting with the people in your state for who gets to be the president. And then, when your state decides, it votes for the FEDERAL leader.

--------------- WARNING: ANTHRO TANGENT ------------------

You seem to be arguing for direct democracy which leads to rule by referendum, or mob rule.
This is the second most primitive form of government thought up by mankind. The moment we started organizing in larger groups we realized direct democracy doesn't work anymore, because the guy living near the river doesn't know what the guy living on the mountain needs or wants.
Same applies to the modern world, despite California having more people, the people living in California have no idea what the people in Kentucky need or want.
Hence, since about the Neolithic up to 380BC we have been trying methods of government that avoided direct democracy, because it clearly didn't work on the large scale.
In 380BC a guy called Plato came up with a form of rule that incorporated democracy but actually functioned on the large scalle. It was called a "republic", and we're living in one.
Republics can use representative forms of government, where different regions with different cultures/environments can still have their voices heard overall.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

tl;dr your ignorance would be amusing if it didn't point to a weak basic background in the arts, and a severe lack of critical thinking skills training for our kids

>>411345
Aw look, /pol/-kun is trying non-macro based forms of smokescreening!

>>411345
Your anthro tangent is stupid because it doesn't matter if California knows what Kentucky wants or not in the Head of State. The Head of State is the Head of State for everyone in America, not just for the people who live in Kentucky. As such, there's no reason that if more people want one person for President, regardless of their location, they be given that. The Senate is there to give Kentuckians a voice in the legislative procedure of the country, as well as State-level government. But John Q Kentuckian shouldn't get more votes for President than John Q Californian, which is the situation we're living in now.

>>411345
Doesn't electoral college just push down the mob rule problem to state level?

>>411354
Yeah, it's a turtles-all-the-way-down situation. People who support the Electoral College only do so when the gerrymandering falls in their favor.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/donald-trump-muslim-registry-immigrants-policy-kris-bobach-reinstate-wall-a7420296.html

>>411356
https://twitter.com/bad_takes/status/799079032499343360

Trump shows lack of transparency for having a lunch with his family.
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/aas-trump-leaves-press-behind-steak-dinner-incoming-admin-already-n684511?cid=public-rss_20161116

Trump is shirking his presidential responsibility to waste money.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/11/donald-trump-salary-george-washington-214458

>>411347
>The Head of State is the Head of State for everyone in America, not just for the people who live in Kentucky.
I think the fact that Obama campaigned for Hillary instead of Trump shows that's false.

>>411356
>>411357
>Japanese internment camps from WW II
How is this related to registering people who come in?

Here's an example that's recent, and also related:
>Such a programme would echo a registration system created under Mr Bush’s presidency, which Mr Kobach also helped design, and which required thousands of Arab and Muslim visitors and temporary US residents to register with the state, but was abandoned in 2011 after it was criticised for unfairly targeting immigrants from Muslim-majority nations.
So we've had this same thing and even Obama was ok with it for two years.

>>411363

>Trump is shirking his presidential responsibility to waste money.

Not to go all Godwin on this, but Hitler refused to accept a salary, too. And why would Trump need one when he can get his brats to run his businesses and essentially make him richer and richer?

>I think the fact that Obama campaigned for Hillary instead of Trump shows that's false.

Gee it’s almost as if Obama belongs to the same political party as Hillary. Imagine that.

>How is this related to registering people who come in?

It’s easy to believe Muslim immigrants will be held in special detainment centers while they’re vetted — “extremely” vetted, of course — and from there, it’s just a hop-skip-jump to putting Muslim Americans in those same centers while, to paraphrase our President-elect, “we figure out what’s going on”. It’s not just a religious test for citizenship (an unconstitutional act). It’s a precursor to religious and racial persecution (when people think “Muslim”, they think “someone from the Middle East”). Given how the groundwork is being laid for a defense of this shit with the comparisons to the Japanese internment camps, I take it on faith that the Trump administration will try to make some sort of Muslim interment camp system.

>>411364

Oh, and incidentally, the Korematsu case — the one that legalized those internment camps in the first place — is still a legal precedent that has never been overturned. Internment camps are still considered legal and constitutional. If you think the Trump administration won’t take advantage of that (especially in a “national emergency” situation), you have far more faith in that shitshow than they deserve.

Stone, I get that it's fun to argue, but please keep in mind that Trump's support base is made up 100% of trolls and that even treating them like they have actual political opinions worth debating is feeding them.

>>411367
You and people like you are basically why Hillary lost the election.

>>411369
cool meme bro

>>411375

>people have emotional reaction to authoritarian demagogue winning national election, ask for and receive distractions and places to help process their emotions

Why is this a story, again?

>>411367
>>411371
Except it appears to be entirely accurate?

Belittling the other side or treating Donald Trump as some sort of ridiculous boogeyman did not win the Dem Candidate the election.
And the continuing overreaction to Trump becoming the President is not doing anyone any good, its just making people continue to look deranged in this overblown tribal Us/Them reaction to the situation.

I certainly wouldn't have voted for his campaign if I was American but there needs to be a degree of perspective on these things.

>>411377

>And the continuing overreaction to Trump becoming the President is not doing anyone any good

He has a white nationalist on his transition team and will likely name said white nationalist to an important cabinet position. He has pledged to sign the First Amendment Defense Act, which would turn LGBT people into second-class citizens; there won’t be a need to overturn Obergefell when people can legally refuse to acknowledge legal same-sex marriages. Things he said about immigration — Mexicans and Muslims alike — appear to be one of the few promises he intends to keep. He has asked for his family to receive the proper security clearances necessary for hearing top-secret information. What I’m saying is this: There is no overreaction because the things Trump has done and has said he will do should be frightening to anyone paying attention.

>>411378

I can understand the emotional reaction despite Trump’s electoral win not being a school shooting. Pretty much anyone who isn't a straight white male got put “on notice” by a bigoted authoritarian demagogue and his supporters (which include white nationalist/white supremacist groups like the KKK). Now, we can argue whether the things being asked for in some colleges to help some students cope with the emotional gutpunch of the election’s outcome are necessary or even sensible. But I won’t argue about anyone’s feelings being “too much”. A person has every right to feel whatever emotion they want.

>>411382

>Monica Petersen was in Haiti working for the Human Trafficking Center and the Colorado Human Trafficking Council’s Data & Research Task Force. She was researching the Clinton Foundation's practices in Haiti when she died under suspicious circumstances, her friends and family (pic) still have no answers.

If there is any evidence of foul play directly associated with the Clintons, you might want to show it before you start sounding like all the other insane conspiracy theorists who think Bill and Hillary are Bonnie and Clyde.

>>411383
Hey if you can claim Comey is working for Republicans, then claim Comey is a great guy, then claim Comey is working for Trump, then claim Comey is a great guy, then claim Comey is working for Putin... if you can flipflop like that on dozens of conspiracy theories.... and if you can claim that Trump is working for Putin but also Trump will start a war with Putin, claim two completely contradictory conspiracy theories are true... then I should be able to insinuate a conspiracy theory that happens to be INTERNALLY CONSISTENT and PREDICTIVE.

HILLARY CLINTON SUPPORTERS DOXXING AND HARASSING ELECTORAL COLLEGE VOTERS
http://heatst.com/politics/hillary-clinton-supporters-doxxing-harassing-electoral-college-voters/
>Supporters of Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton have already gotten more than 4 million signatures on a petition asking the Electoral College to toss Donald Trump’s victory. But some, apparently, aren’t content to simply vent their frustrations online.

>According to reports out of Idaho and elsewhere, Clinton supporters have obtained Electoral College voters’ personal information and are harassing them with calls, Facebook messages, emails and even home visits, encouraging them to become “faithless electors,” and change their Trump votes to Clinton votes.

>another of Idaho’s electors told local media that the calls — some of them pre-recorded — were coming from across the country, from California, Massachusetts, Oregon, and New York, among other states.

>While Idahoans may be the most vocal about the harassment, lists of Electors, their home phone numbers, addresses and contact information began floating around social media Monday. POLITICO published a list of Electors last week*, and supporters clearly spent the rest of the weekend filling in necessary information.
*Clintonite publication.

>A Twitter account called “VoteHillary2016” was among those who Tweeted out the Google spreadsheet containing Electors’ personal information. The account has since deleted the Tweet, but others have already taken up the cause.

>>411386
>heatst.com
And do you have any real sources?

>>411386

If you have at least two more credible sources for this story — and I know you don’t like to use “credible” sources, but try it just this once — now would be the time to post them.

>>411384

I never claimed shit about Comey, especially that he’s a “nice guy”. Show the evidence that proves I did and I’ll concede the point, but I’ll gladly wager my credibility and say that you can’t because I know that I didn’t. (And besides, Comey was a dick for both making his original “we’re not charging her but she was a real dumbass” statement after the investigation and dropping his little “October Surprise” a couple of weeks before the election.)

And the whole “Russia/America war” thing is based on the idea of mutually assured nuclear annihilation in the event of Trump actually dropping a nuke, not on something silly and outlandish like America doing its World Police thing to help protect countries from Russian military takeover. (Besides, Trump is far more likely to buddy up to bear-fucking autocrat Vladimir Putin; Putin praises Trump to high heaven, and Trump is a slut for praise.)

>>411388
>>411387
Are you retarded.

http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2016/nov/14/idaho-trump-electors-report-barrage-of-harassing-m/

>>411389
>I never
Oh my god you are retarded. That was a plural YOU, referring to democrats.

>And the whole “Russia/America war” thing is based on the idea of mutually assured nuclear annihilation in the event of Trump actually dropping a nuke
Nope plenty of democrat commentators have said Trump will antagonize Putin into war. While at the same time saying Trump is in league with Putin.

>silly and outlandish like America doing its World Police thing
You mean like Clinton promising to shoot down Russian jets if they violate her no-fly zone over Syria, theby starting that global thermonuclear war you're so fake-worried about.

Your bullshit is so transparent NASA could use it as material for telescope optical lenses.

>>411391
>You mean like Clinton promising to shoot down Russian jets if they violate her no-fly zone over Syria, theby starting that global thermonuclear war you're so fake-worried about.
Because if there's one thing Putin cares about, it's Russian troops.

>>411392
One of these is a clearer threat to my future than the other.

1. MSM fever dream that Trump would drop a nuke for no reason, and then some Russian officer would mistake it for an attack on Russia, accidentally launching an attack on America, which would cause global thermonuclear war.
2. Hillary actually making campaign promises to start a war with Russia.

I'm going to believe Hillary Clintons policy proposals and campaign promises more than your personal beliefs on a chain of events that make Occam spin in his grave.

Britain again. Been kind of a slow week; a memo leak from Deloitte that our government hasn't actually got a plan, which sounds about right - May got shit in Prime Minister's Questions for saying that there totally is a plan, but nobody gets to know what it is, because reasons; Boris told a Ukranian newspaper more about the Brexit plan than he's told Parliament, and (allegedly) tried to talk shit to some Italian politician about prosecco; one of the judges for the Supreme Court court case said "Hey, you know you probably won't be able to just pass a bill, right? This shit will take at least a couple months, you know. I mean, it's not as if the referendum was binding...", which probably didn't go down well; speaking of the Brexit legal challenge, the Scottish and Welsh governments have been allowed to intervene, so they can highlight the importance of parliamentary sovereignty.

Of course, as my own dad pointed out to me a few days ago, the Tory party will be brought to heel and vote the whole sorry mess through with nary a murmur. This will mean that a lot of businesses, banks and scientists will Britain, so the countries I love will turn to shit over a 1.9% majority in an advisory referendum. I wish I could see the good things about Brexit, like my father does, but it's like seeing Bigfoot's dickpix... they're not there.

>>411377
cool rationalizing your meme, bro

>>411393
>Hillary actually making campaign promises to start a war with Russia.
You don't actually know how international politics work, do you?

>>411394
*will leave Britain

Sorry, my spiralling depression over my government's stupidity has clearly affected my proofreading skills.

>>411396
Let me guess, what a psychic says the candidate is thinking is actually more valid than what the candidate says.

Thanks for your contribution, fuck off back to kindergarten now.

>>411398
>actually more valid than what the candidate says
If your candidate's most recent action and statements are any indication, yes

It's been 28 years since the last time a non-incumbent Republican presidential candidate has had more votes than his opponents.

>>411400
Say what you will of GHW, man had class.

>>411401
On the other hand, given how hard it is for an incumbent to lose in a presidential election (or most elections, really), it's hard to deny that either he was profoundly disliked as a President, or Clinton was just a fantastic candidate, to take that victory from him.

>>411402
He just didn't have the Charisma that Reagan or Clinton did and ended up getting lost in the shuffle because of that, more or less.

Another silver lining of this disastrous election has been watching all the trump supporters going into damage control trying to explain why, no, really, this latest boneheaded move was a *good* sign. They never really wanted legalized marijuana anyway! And when they said get rid of Washington Insiders, they weren't talking about Rudy Giuliani and Reince Priebus and Sarah Palin and Jeff Sessions. And when they were talking about getting rid of government corruption, they weren't talking about a president with an unprecedented level of conflicts of interest in how he deals with foreign powers due to active business deals.

It's going to be hilarious watching as they continue trying to convince themselves that they didn't cut off their own noses to spite the rest of us for the next four years.

>>411404

Even “better”: Trump won, and yet Trump supporters are still pissed off, as evidenced by the #TrumpCup debacle.

>>411405
I haven't heard about #TrumpCup. Care to elaborate?

>>411406

Trump supporters are going to Starbucks and asking the baristas to write “Trump” on their cups of coffee. On the surface, it seems like a dumb thing to do, especially since the “average” Trump supporter probably wouldn’t be the kind of person to give a company like Starbucks their money — but it’s actually an insidious attempt to target minority baristas with a subtle form of harassment.

>>411404
Why is it ok to legalize marijuana but someone who's dying of infection still can't buy antibiotics when they need them?

>>411405
>and yet Trump supporters are still pissed off,
Probably because you keep rioting, beating up homeless people, dragging people out of their cars, assaulting passers by, and generally acting like uncivilized turds.

>>411407
THANKS FOR LEAVING OUT THE CONTEXT DOUCHEBAG!

Trump cup is in response of a Starbucks employee who called the police on a customer that was a Trump supporter.

>but it’s actually an insidious attempt to target minority baristas with a subtle form of harassment.
Fucking lol. Not only did you leave out context, but you're also outright lying and trying to trick people.

What a slimy piece of shit you are, buddy.

Oh and the man who got caught up in the Starbucks political bullshit is David Sanguesa, a man with Hispanic heritage who only looks white. Kind of like the opposite of George Zimmerman, who has a German name but looks Hispanic.
The baristas who called the cops were a white woman and a white man.

So it's kind of funny seeing the SlimyFossilizedTurdStone talk about "targeting minority baristas".

>>411408

>Trump cup is in response of a Starbucks employee who called the police on a customer that was a Trump supporter.

And wasn’t that because he was being a colossal douchecanoe?

>Probably because you keep rioting, beating up homeless people, dragging people out of their cars, assaulting passers by, and generally acting like uncivilized turds.

[citations needed]