The 2016 US American Election Thread

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by peter12

"Unleashed the deplorables." Okay, a bunch of dirt-poor, uneducated rural whites are going to destroy America. Okay.

Did you sort of miss this one?

http://www.kansas.com/news/local/cri...108705512.html

Increasing domestic terrorism isn't hard, not in a country with half a billion guns. All you need is crazies and the will. And as this election has shown there's enough crazies out there. Trump seems to be giving them their will sadly.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by nik-

They won't destroy America, but if someone gets shot after this election, I won't be surprised.

Maybe. Personally, I think crazy attracts crazy, and a lot of what is being reported in the media isn't a very good portrayal as to what is actually happening on the ground.

Sure, some Neo-Nazi gun nut might take a pot shot at the Secret Service, or someone might say something outrageous on television, but those aren't the real Trump supporters.

It's funny, but in terms of values, I am far more like someone in the elite. I have a graduate degree, I make over the median income, I live in a neighbourhood about 5km away from the nearest homeless person. The so-called Trump supporters aren't like me in any way. Their marriages fall apart, they do drugs, they can't keep a job. I am not like them in any way, and I have only disapproval for their pathetic way of life.

What I don't like is so many people like me cast these people in a light as if they are less than human or less than capable of participating in a free and open society.

They have real concerns. Their communities have completely fallen apart due to technology and free trade. They are told callously to leave, or go back to trade school or whatever. No one cares about their problems, and instead treats them with just the worst kind of arrogant scorn.

Sorry, but it makes me angry.

[photon]

"Voter fraud! Crooked Hillary Clinton even got the questions to a debate, and nobody says a word. Can you imagine if I got the questions?" - @realDonaldTrump

Um, does Trump understand what voter fraud is?

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by peter12

Congress is supposed to hold up the Presidency.

No, it's not. And it's ridicules to claim so... the US political system was designed for congress to act as a check on executive power in order to prevent tyranny/autocracy (AKA No Kings Allowed) not as a device for permanent impairment on his/her legitimate powers.

It's "Advice and Consent" not "Obstruct and Deny".

[nik-]

As far as the Amy Shumer thing, other comics get away with it because A: they're funny (except David Cross, he's ####) and B: they're consistent. Commentary is part of their schtick and has been for a long time.

Amy Shumer has made her entire career around basically being a Frat Boy. Her getting booed is basically the same thing that would happen to Dane Cook if he tried to go political.

[Drak]

LOL Dane Cook. Whatever happened to that guy?

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Did you sort of miss this one?

http://www.kansas.com/news/local/cri...108705512.html

Increasing domestic terrorism isn't hard, not in a country with half a billion guns. All you need is crazies and the will. And as this election has shown there's enough crazies out there. Trump seems to be giving them their will sadly.

Trump's true sin is that he has denied the US electorate a truly free discussion about real political alternatives.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Drak

LOL Dane Cook. Whatever happened to that guy?

He will be in the new American Gods TV series coming out in 2017. Should be a good one.

http://forum.calgarypuck.com/showthr...=american+gods

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Parallex

No, it's not. And it's ridicules to claim so... the US political system was designed for congress to act as a check on executive power in order to prevent tyranny/autocracy (AKA No Kings Allowed) not as a device for permanent impairment on his/her legitimate powers.

It's "Advice and Consent" not "Obstruct and Deny".

In this age of hyper-partisanship, there isn't much alternative.

But no, if your party holds Congress, you can do whatever you want, particularly when the Executive uses its political largesse to push things through the legislative process.

And don't pretend the Democrat's wouldn't do it either.

[direwolf]

Originally Posted by nik-

As far as the Amy Shumer thing, other comics get away with it because A: they're funny (except David Cross, he's ####) and B: they're consistent. Commentary is part of their schtick and has been for a long time.

Amy Shumer has made her entire career around basically being a Frat Boy. Her getting booed is basically the same thing that would happen to Dane Cook if he tried to go political.

Imagine if George Carlin was still around. He'd have an absolute field day with this election.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by nik-

As far as the Amy Shumer thing, other comics get away with it because A: they're funny (except David Cross, he's ####) and B: they're consistent. Commentary is part of their schtick and has been for a long time.

Amy Shumer has made her entire career around basically being a Frat Boy. Her getting booed is basically the same thing that would happen to Dane Cook if he tried to go political.

Yeah Schumer totally didn't build a career around subverting female roles or by lampooning female stereotypes. No politicization there. Nope.

[Red Slinger]

Originally Posted by peter12

Yes. This is pretty interesting.

It may be interesting but I don't think it's accurate. I still think that about 20% of the population (of both US and Canada, and most other western democracies) are racist, sexist, xenophobes...deplorables. The rest of Trump's support comes from those that would vote Republican if they dug up Adolph and gave him a stars and stripes pin on his lapel (same goes for the left btw). And the rest of his supporters I think are those similar to Ken Bone whose personal interests coincide with voting for Trump, eg. working in the coal industry, etc.

The rest of this post isn't.

You criticize him for being condescending and then you add this little nugget. Come on.

Rational people should move on, and start thinking critically about Clinton as POTUS, instead of acting like she is some kind of misunderstood progressive savior that will set everything right with America.

Rational people should understand that there are two choices in this election: Trump or Clinton. Playing Devil's Advocate against Clinton even though she is clearly superior does nothing but muddy the waters. Once she's in office she should be held to account for all of her actions. In the meantime, giving any credence to those that espouse conspiracy theories, hateful and violent rhetoric and willful ignorance doesn't move the conversation forward, it just helps to create strawdogs and false equivalencies.

Massive cleavages have opened up within the American electorate, and there are no signs of this tension dissipating whatsoever.

When exactly have there not been "massive cleavages" within the American electorate? (tee hee- cleavages)

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

When exactly have there not been "massive cleavages" within the American electorate? (tee hee- cleavages)

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

You mean Buster and Illiminaughty? Well then I guess I should focus more on powers of persuasion instead of powers of deduction.

And Peter12, recently, and also me and nik and others, though not by you specifically.

The point though is, why is it important to you that Buster and Illuminaughty tell you that they're secretly Trump supporters? You've repeatedly asked that they do so. They've made their views clear, and you can decide for yourself what parts you don't agree with (probably almost all), regardless of whether those views are tied to any particular candidate. You just want a label that you can apply to them.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Yeah Schumer totally didn't build a career around subverting female roles or by lampooning female stereotypes. No politicization there. Nope.

Yeah, 20 years after it was actually cutting edge.

Rosa Parks incarnate.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by peter12

It's funny, but in terms of values, I am far more like someone in the elite. I have a graduate degree, I make over the median income, I live in a neighbourhood about 5km away from the nearest homeless person. The so-called Trump supporters aren't like me in any way. Their marriages fall apart, they do drugs, they can't keep a job. I am not like them in any way, and I have only disapproval for their pathetic way of life.

This is a portion of Trump voters, not all of them. But Trump core supporters actually make more money that Hillary core supporters. That doesn't mean Trump doesn't have many supporters who are poor working class, but so does Hillary.

It’s been extremely common for news accounts to portray Donald Trump’s candidacy as a “working-class” rebellion against Republican elites. There are elements of truth in this perspective: Republican voters, especially Trump supporters, are unhappy about the direction of the economy. Trump voters have lower incomes than supporters of John Kasich or Marco Rubio. And things have gone so badly for the Republican “establishment” that the party may be facing an existential crisis.

But the definition of “working class” and similar terms is fuzzy, and narratives like these risk obscuring an important and perhaps counterintuitive fact about Trump’s voters: As compared with most Americans, Trump’s voters are better off. The median household income of a Trump voter so far in the primaries is about $72,000, based on estimates derived from exit polls and Census Bureau data. That’s lower than the $91,000 median for Kasich voters. But it’s well above the national median household income of about $56,000. It’s also higher than the median income for Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders supporters, which is around $61,000 for both.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/...class-support/

[direwolf]

You know it's looking bad for Trump when his favorite poll (USC Dornsife/LA Times) shows Clinton with a 4 point lead.

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/...ational-polls/

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by nik-

Yeah, 20 years after it was actually cutting edge.

Rosa Parks incarnate.

Your back must be pretty sore from moving those goalposts.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

The point though is, why is it important to you that Buster and Illuminaughty tell you that they're secretly Trump supporters? You've repeatedly asked that they do so. They've made their views clear, and you can decide for yourself what parts you don't agree with (probably almost all), regardless of whether those views are tied to any particular candidate. You just want a label that you can apply to them.

Actually it's because they deny they are Trump supporters despite the obvious evidence (like Dilbert denied it forever before finally admitting the obvious). Just embrace it, I don't give a #### if they actually support Trump. But it seems this way with many, like they are afraid of being labeled Trump supporters even if they agree with most or all of his positions. And I don't think anyone has thought of nik or you. peter is a little harder to get a read on, but I view him as hating Hillary more than anything, not really a Trump supporter. I pegged him for supporting Cruz more than anyone.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

Your back must be pretty sore from moving those goalposts.

let it out

[MissTeeks]

Originally Posted by Drak

LOL Dane Cook. Whatever happened to that guy?

He's actually in Calgary at the Jack Singer on November 13, lol.