• US Election Results 2016 v2 - P̲U̲T̲ ̲H̲I̲L̲L̲A̲R̲Y̲ ̲I̲N̲ ̲J̲A̲I̲L̲ ̲A̲L̲R̲E̲A̲D̲Y̲!!! M̲A̲G̲A&#818
    2,502 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Mattk50;51341725]This was a negative campaign, i think the majority of people voted against the opposing candidate than for their own candidate's views. Hillary represented corruption, trump represented being deplorable, but while calling trump supporters deplorable doesnt win them over to your side, pointing out hillary's corruption does win people over. Most people vote on a very base level without considering policy as unfortunate as it is. Things like LGBT rights, people simply saw it as not as important as fighting hillary's kind of corruption. Maybe we'll get a new corruption, i don't know. Its just way too easy to handwave everyone who voted a different way as "oh they're stupid" and its what won trump the election. You NEED to engage, you NEED to give those people a place to speak with you where you can convince them, "quarantine them" (reddit) ban them (twitter) or limit their accounts (youtube) while yelling at them and you get a situation where you no longer have an opporunity to win people over...[/QUOTE] I'm pretty sure most of the people who supported Trump did so because they actually believed the things he said, the people on this forum are not representative of the population of the united states. Facepunch is one of the most open and multi-opinionated forums out there. Unlike reddit or whatever, people only get banned for shitposting and not for presenting an opinion. People have defended pedophilia and bestiality on this forum and only gotten banned when they started shitposting. When you look at places like /r/thedonald and see how they ban anyone who has dissenting opinions, you begin to realize that they're just as bad as the 'SJWS' they claim to be against. The difference is that, from what I can tell, the only actual 'SJWs' are small groups of idiot college students while the arseholes on the other end are considered an actual political force. Nobody who holds these kinds of beliefs wants to engage with people 'on the other side', in fact, there are no 'sides', there's just arseholes everywhere who don't want to listen, it's not a political problem, it's a human problem.
I'm still seeing people giving Nate Silver shit even though he was far more correct than anyone else by warning of the chance of a polling error this whole time.
[QUOTE=Splarg!;51343027]I'm still seeing people giving Nate Silver shit even though he was far more correct than anyone else by warning of the chance of a polling error this whole time.[/QUOTE] And he called out HuffPost explicitly saying their prediction was wrong. His tweet last night "this sure doesn't look like a 99% chance election"
[QUOTE=Splarg!;51343027]I'm still seeing people giving Nate Silver shit even though he was far more correct than anyone else by warning of the chance of a polling error this whole time.[/QUOTE] People who didn't understand how polling or statistics work before now have their biases confirmed by the election.
[QUOTE=Zyler;51340084]Is it possible that you might be projecting some of your own opinions onto the rest of the population?[/QUOTE]I thought about that and it's a fair question, but no, I don't think so. Pages back I paused and reviewed my interactions with people on here, elsewhere, and among people offline, I think Facepunch is a lot more disconnected with the actual reality of what goes on but in general? Nah, the Democrats on here are a lot like Democrats elsewhere. [QUOTE]Is it possible that people who voted for Trump did it because they actually liked Trump and people who voted for Hillary did it because they actually liked Hillary?[/QUOTE]Oh [I]absolutely[/I] it's possible, and it's true for a large chunk of both voters. Those people who absolutely disliked either candidate enough to feel entirely unrepresented but still detested the others likely went third party. I mean shit, I agree with Donald Trump's words on a few topics but I know he's a RINO so I don't trust him to actually commit to those policies. What really concerns me, really, really concerns me, is the abortion discussion that took place. If we lose abortion you can full stop thank Clinton for that, out-right denying that partial birth abortion was [I]ever[/I] okay and then [I]telling a bold-faced lie on national television about when it was criminalized[/I] sealed the deal for that shit. Just so she could take credit for that herself, that's all it was. When people get curious, as they often do, they check up on these things and let me tell you even I was unaware that this shit was [I]ever[/I] okay. I really thought that abortion was the ending of this little sea monkey but [I]haha sometimes it is [U]not[/U] that at all.[/I] Finding more about the issue made me sympathize heavily with the pro-life side, I've seen some real shit over the years (farm life, car accidents, etc) and a video of a partial birth abortion traumatized and disgusted me to my core. One of those times where somebody can't just turn off their senses, I've got heeby jeebies just thinking of it. Now imagine a housewife with two kids seeing that same video, instant pro-lifer, along with her husband. That was not something women's rights needed brought up at all, and it was mishandled completely. [QUOTE=DogGunn;51340471]This is a terrible day for America because Trump wields more power than any President in modern history.[/QUOTE][QUOTE=cheezey;51340176]The worst part is that Trumps Party also controls the house and the senate, last time this happened was in 1928. I'm not an expert on American politics but doesn't this make him, theoretically speaking, one of the most powerful presidents in history?[/QUOTE]No, that president was FDR. There's some agencies and practices today that stem from his presidency and they came from FDR just arbitrarily giving himself more power and congress was too afraid of losing their jobs to tell him to fuck off. You have to remember that at the time he was seen as [I]the guy who defeated the Great Depression[/I] by nearly all of the country. If you think Trump has a cult of personality I want you to take what he has, multiply it by a hundred, and then make him a badass orator. That was FDR. [QUOTE=Kyle902;51341707]Ive made that argument before and people just go and say "but that could never happen here". I must point out that prior to uts dissolution Germany was pretty damned liberal for its time. Im pretty sure people thought it couldnt happen there either.[/QUOTE]This must be how Ron Paul feels because I've been saying this shit is possible for about a decade and a half now. I WARNED YOU, KYLE. I WARNED YOU THIS COULD HAPPEN! YOU WILL REGRET THIS!!!!
[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;51343336]I thought about that and it's a fair question, but no, I don't think so. Pages back I paused and reviewed my interactions with people on here, elsewhere, and among people offline, I think Facepunch is a lot more disconnected with the actual reality of what goes on but in general? Nah, the Democrats on here are a lot like Democrats elsewhere. Oh [I]absolutely[/I] it's possible, and it's true for a large chunk of both voters. Those people who absolutely disliked either candidate enough to feel entirely unrepresented but still detested the others likely went third party. I mean shit, I agree with Donald Trump's words on a few topics but I know he's a RINO so I don't trust him to actually commit to those policies. What really concerns me, really, really concerns me, is the abortion discussion that took place. If we lose abortion you can full stop thank Clinton for that, out-right denying that partial birth abortion was [I]ever[/I] okay and then [I]telling a bold-faced lie on national television about when it was criminalized[/I] sealed the deal for that shit. Just so she could take credit for that herself, that's all it was. When people get curious, as they often do, they check up on these things and let me tell you even I was unaware that this shit was [I]ever[/I] okay. I really thought that abortion was the ending of this little sea monkey but [I]haha sometimes it is [U]not[/U] that at all.[/I] Finding more about the issue made me sympathize heavily with the pro-life side, I've seen some real shit over the years and a video of a partial birth abortion traumatized and disgusted me to my core. Now imagine a housewife with two kids seeing that same video, instant pro-lifer, along with her husband.[/QUOTE] It's a matter of priorities really. My first instinct was to respond to your post asking whether the abortion stuff is more important than LGBT rights and people being able afford the medication they need to live through obamacare, but that would be exactly the same as a trump supporter who responds to a list of reasonable arguments with "emails, corruption, LOCK HER UP". When I said that the people who voted for Trump actually liked Trump and the people who liked Hillary actually liked Hillary, I actually should have said people liked their stances and not that they liked the candidates as people. I think people despised both candidates equally, not disliked or disapproved of, but actual full-blown despised. The most effective rhetoric was this general notion that "they're both exactly the same", which I feel was completely false. It basically made it so nobody even tried to defend their chosen candidate. It was always about who was worse, yet it was basically assumed that no matter what Trump did, Clinton was secretly just as bad because [i]reasons[/i]. People choose what they want to believe and then find evidence to support it, not the other way around. If you want to believe something badly enough, you can always find something to support that belief. The general meme of "they're just as bad as each other" was so compelling because it puts the believer above the entire political system. It essentially makes it so that you can look down on everybody else and say "Look at those silly people who believe things. Look at those Trump supporters. Look at those Hillary supporters. Everybody but me is mindlessly accepting things and arguing for one of two side of the same coin. Only I am clever enough to see through all the lies and delusion; how this election is a sham and the two sides are exactly the same." Once you choose this belief, you start seeing 'evidence' for it everywhere. Just take any instance of anyone on any political 'side' doing something wrong and say "aha, see I knew everybody but me is stupid!" With this premise, it makes sense to vote for Trump- because both candidates are exactly the same except one is the wildcard and might bluster his way into success somehow. This is why nobody could defend Trump's policies or even his character, it was never about that to begin with.
[QUOTE=Zyler;51343434]It's a matter of priorities really. My first instinct was to respond to your post asking whether the abortion stuff is more important than LGBT rights and people being able afford the medication they need to live through obamacare, but that would be exactly the same as a trump supporter who responds to a list of reasonable arguments with "emails, corruption, LOCK HER UP".[/QUOTE]Well, yeah, it is more important for a big reason: on CSPAN there's Republicans talking about defunding Planned Parenthood [I]right this goddamn minute.[/I] I just heard it. There is simply no LGBT equivalency here, I'm sorry but if you can give me a good reason why some nebulous "but the gay rights???" is more important than, "we can finally defund planned parenthood," being announced, I might concede the point. This affects [I]everyone[/I] instead of just a minority population, so... yeah. If you want to talk about priorities, there is that. [QUOTE]When I said that the people who voted for Trump actually liked Trump and the people who liked Hillary actually liked Hillary, I actually should have said people liked their stances and not that they liked the candidates as people.[/QUOTE]I was talking about the same thing. [QUOTE]I think people despised both candidates equally, not disliked or disapproved of, but actual full-blown despised. The most effective rhetoric was this general notion that "they're both exactly the same", which I feel was completely false. It basically made it so nobody even tried to defend their chosen candidate. It was always about who was worse, yet it was basically assumed that no matter what Trump did, Clinton was secretly just as bad because [i]reasons[/i]. People choose what they want to believe and then find evidence to support it, not the other way around. If you want to believe something badly enough, you can always find something to support that belief.[/QUOTE]Well sure there was some serious bias and then justification for it, but I think this election has shown it to be a symptom of a real problem: American people are not represented by their political parties. Anyone who said, "well you're not going to be [I]totally[/I] represented," in defense of either candidate missed a vital point: third party was either a rebellious protest vote, or it was because we payed careful attention to the actual candidate's words and stances. I supported Johnson because he really did represent me best, and then I changed my vote last minute to McMullin because he represented me [I]a little more.[/I] [QUOTE]The general meme of "they're just as bad as each other" was so compelling because it puts the believer above the entire political system. It essentially makes it so that you can look down on everybody else and say "Look at those silly people who believe things. Look at those Trump supporters. Look at those Hillary supporters. Everybody but me is mindlessly accepting things and arguing for one of two side of the same coin. Only I am clever enough to see through all the lies and delusion; how this election is a sham and the two sides are exactly the same."[/QUOTE]I'll end it here because I need to run to town, but this is how independents feel [I]all the time.[/I] We point out faults, we get shouted down, we try to ask questions, we get snake oil bullshit, at some point we're going to dismiss [I]all[/I] of you as the retarded lemmings you appear to be. That might not be true in a lot of cases but people get caught up in the moment and what their peers are doing, and honestly the larger a crowd gets the dumber it gets. Shit happens. I like to look at this critically and take in the situation piece by piece, but maybe sometimes I can't see the forest through the trees. I have to wonder though if it's even worth it, since the entire forest seems to be comprised of the nastiest or dumbest shit.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;51343053]People who didn't understand how polling or statistics work before now have their biases confirmed by the election.[/QUOTE] Honestly this annoys me so much. Not only did it attribute Trump a pretty good chance (considering the actual polling results) of winning due to polling error, but Nate Silver's model gave a 10% chance of Hillary winning the popular vote, but losing the electoral college. Look what happened. But no, no, let's do like a meme team and call him Nate Pyrite and go on about how he's an idiot because he didn't think Trump would win back in the spring.
[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;51343559]Well, yeah, it is more important for a big reason: on CSPAN there's Republicans talking about defunding Planned Parenthood [I]right this goddamn minute.[/I] I just heard it. There is simply no LGBT equivalency here, I'm sorry but if you can give me a good reason why some nebulous "but the gay rights???" is more important than, "we can finally defund planned parenthood," being announced, I might concede the point.[/QUOTE] The president gets to pick the next supreme court justice and there's genuine concern about whether the gay marriage precedent is going to be overturned. The Planned Parenthood debacle is also serious and so is government corruption and supposed leaked emails or election fraud or whatever else people care about. They're all serious issues, the point I'm making is that when we prioritize certain issues over others, we are making the implicit argument that the things we believe in are more important than the things the other person believes in. You did it just now when you said that my concerns about LGBT rights were 'nebulous', you didn't even know what I was referring to, you just made the implicit assumption that whatever I was talking about wasn't important enough to warrant a response. I'm wasn't talking about you personally doing this though, my point is that everybody does this all the time and it's the reason why can't have a clear discussion about anything. [QUOTE]This affects [I]everyone[/I] instead of just a minority population, so... yeah. If you want to talk about priorities, there is that.[/QUOTE] Minorities tend to be the worst hit by stuff like this for exactly that reason, they're a minority so they can't threaten to vote somebody out if they get stepped on, so they aren't an issue for whoever's in power. Suffice to say, I doubt gay people are going to be affected by defunding planned parenthood as much as some others, but in general people tend to disregard minority groups for the exact reason you've described. [QUOTE]Well sure there was some serious bias and then justification for it, but I think this election has shown it to be a symptom of a real problem: American people are not represented by their political parties. Anyone who said, "well you're not going to be [I]totally[/I] represented," in defense of either candidate missed a vital point: third party was either a rebellious protest vote, or it was because we payed careful attention to the actual candidate's words and stances. I supported Johnson because he really did represent me best, and then I changed my vote last minute to McMullin because he represented me [I]a little more.[/I][/QUOTE] I don't think it's possible for two major political parties to represent everyone, they have to compromise in order to appeal to the diverse range of different opinions and viewpoints that make up their constituency. [QUOTE]I'll end it here because I need to run to town, but this is how independents feel [I]all the time.[/I] We point out faults, we get shouted down, we try to ask questions, we get snake oil bullshit, at some point we're going to dismiss [I]all[/I] of you as the retarded lemmings you appear to be. That might not be true in a lot of cases but people get caught up in the moment and what their peers are doing, and honestly the larger a crowd gets the dumber it gets. Shit happens. I like to look at this critically and take in the situation piece by piece, but maybe sometimes I can't see the forest through the trees. I have to wonder though if it's even worth it, since the entire forest seems to be comprised of the nastiest or dumbest shit.[/QUOTE] I think you have an expectation of other people that's a bit unfair, not because of something wrong with you personally (in fact I think it's a trait that indicates that you're a good, passionate person who believes strongly about things), but you expect people to be [i]too good[/i]. You expect people to be kind and reasonable when most people aren't, not because they're bad people but because they're scared shitless all the time and none of us really know what's going on.
[QUOTE=Ona;51341691]This is probably one of the most telling parts of just how absolutely fucked this election is. I mean, the whole "reverse gay marriage" thing is... literally hatred. Like there are no positives to taking away the rights of people. It doesn't benefit straight people at all because the laws [I]don't fucking affect them.[/I] All it does is hurt people who have already undergone far too much suffering, not just in recent history, but for literally [I]hundreds of years.[/I] And yet, it's apparently "okay" for a presidential candidate to launch on a platform that blatantly says "if I'm president I will move to take rights away from people for no fucking reason because ew gay people amirite fellas?" without said candidate being fucking barred from politics. Imagine, if you will, that he'd said the same thing about literally any other group of people. Like, imagine if he'd wanted to make mixed race marriage illegal. Remember when [I]that[/I] was a thing? I don't know what's worse, honestly, the fact that the person now in power actively wants to take rights away from millions of people [I][B]for literally no reason[/B][/I], or the fact that half the country (or at least the drooling lunatics in the Electoral College) is 100% behind that. The last time the leader of a country launched a political platform with a basis of literal hate speech, [I][B]it resulted in the fucking nazis.[/B][/I][/QUOTE] The thing is people are convinced that it DOES affect them because "the Good Book says so". You have people in this world, in the 21st century, non-ironically blaming disasters on gay rights movements pissing God off.
[QUOTE=Zero-Point;51344031]The thing is people are convinced that it DOES affect them because "the Good Book says so". You have people in this world, in the 21st century, non-ironically blaming disasters on gay rights movements pissing God off.[/QUOTE] I am not kidding, but the Italian Catholic radio blamed our latest earthquake as punishment for allowing civil gay marriage
he's not even in office yet.., arent you guys being a little bit [I]sensational[/I]
[QUOTE=Zyler;51343682]The president gets to pick the next supreme court justice and there's genuine concern about whether the gay marriage precedent is going to be overturned. The Planned Parenthood debacle is also serious and so is government corruption and supposed leaked emails or election fraud or whatever else people care about. They're all serious issues, the point I'm making is that when we prioritize certain issues over others, we are making the implicit argument that the things we believe in are more important than the things the other person believes in.[/QUOTE]That's fine, you can believe they're more important all you like and honestly I can see why. They're simply the most relevant thing from your perspective, constitutional rights are a massive priority for me, more so than everything we've described. Those affect quite literally everyone involved though, so I'm not going to trot out some debate over where privacy and security and individual protection and the needs of society begin or end. Social issues like LGBT rights [I]I personally consider[/I] to be human rights but a lot of people don't, so it's one of those things that rely on people's opinions and perspectives and any argument for or against is a moral debate that's hard to pin down. Abortion too is the same thing, ultimately it boils down to an ethical debate over where personhood begins and ends and personally I think the current legislation is a [I]bit[/I] hypocritical in that regard. (stab a pregnant woman and it's a double murder, but abortion doesn't count? That doesn't add up) Opinions on what's acceptable in our society are all we have here, I think that's part of the reason why the Bill of Rights even exists, and why Madison was wary of even having one because they might be seen as [I]the only rights[/I] which has somewhat happened with the 4th Amendment. That's a different discussion though. [QUOTE]You did it just now when you said that my concerns about LGBT rights were 'nebulous', you didn't even know what I was referring to, you just made the implicit assumption that whatever I was talking about wasn't important enough to warrant a response. I'm wasn't talking about you personally doing this though, my point is that everybody does this all the time and it's the reason why can't have a clear discussion about anything.[/QUOTE]They [I]are[/I] nebulous though, precisely don't implicitly know what you're talking about. Are you talking about marriage rights? Employment? DADT in the military? All of it? Other stuff? Some of the stuff? None of the above? I don't know, and so far the only things really commented on by Trump specifically are returning marriage decisions back to the states; everyone seems to be more concerned about Mike Pence. Yeah I'm [I]well aware[/I] of his stance on homosexuality and his support for the so-called conversion camps which have been deemed illegal for good reason in several states. I get it. He's offensive. Thing is Pence isn't at all in any position to force any of those views other than nagging Trump, who could quite literally tell him to fuck off and shoo him out of the room. Addressing the supreme court is another issue, yeah Trump will pick the new justices but I'm inclined to believe they'll actually [I]do their jobs[/I] instead of yukking it up with Donny boy. That argument didn't really convince me when Trump supporters tossed it out there, whoever Clinton would have appointed would still be a supreme court justice. [QUOTE]Minorities tend to be the worst hit by stuff like this for exactly that reason, they're a minority so they can't threaten to vote somebody out if they get stepped on, so they aren't an issue for whoever's in power. Suffice to say, I doubt gay people are going to be affected by defunding planned parenthood as much as some others, but in general people tend to disregard minority groups for the exact reason you've described.[/QUOTE]You brought up priorities, so using that metric looking at the reproductive rights of half the population that affects the rest of the population is clearly a bigger issue simply because of the number of people affected. That argument is a double-edged sword, the issues are [I]all[/I] big as you said so if Trump is the one to [del]bring balance to the Force[/del] audit the entire government and fight corruption, and is the [U]least[/U] corrupt, then surely the equally important but less pressing issues of LGBT rights are okay to set aside for now. Right? I mean if that's truly what happened in this election, and I'm not saying it did, then those people have just as much merit in voting for Trump as you have in being opposed to it. [QUOTE]I don't think it's possible for two major political parties to represent everyone, they have to compromise in order to appeal to the diverse range of different opinions and viewpoints that make up their constituency.[/QUOTE]My point was their compromises don't adequately represent the majority in the first place, what we need is a party that combines the issues most popular from both parties. [QUOTE]I think you have an expectation of other people that's a bit unfair, not because of something wrong with you personally (in fact I think it's a trait that indicates that you're a good, passionate person who believes strongly about things), but you expect people to be [i]too good[/i]. You expect people to be kind and reasonable when most people aren't, not because they're bad people but because they're scared shitless all the time and none of us really know what's going on.[/QUOTE]I feel that way precisely because people aren't bad, or they don't think they're bad. Most people will, if forced, do the right thing for whatever reason and most people tend to avoid things bad for themselves. I believe in firearm ownership because your common thug is an ambush predator, like any prowling creature they will flee when confronted. It's just a no-win situation if the victim is willing to kill them when there's so many other victims out there, and indeed common sense would dictate that if you know somebody is armed actively initiating conflict with them is genuinely a bad idea. That's not prescribing altruism on the part of the attacker, it's simple risk aversion that we're all equipped with at birth. Raise the risk to a certain point and [I]anyone[/I] will back down. So with that said this election was a gigantic game of chicken, fear mongering, smear campaigns, shit slinging galore just to make the other person look terrible. Two forces careening toward each other, caution discarded a few miles back, and we're all supposed to just sit in the back seat and cheer them on? Vote for the one that's less sleazy? Looking at it that way I think it's a no-brainer that Clinton lost because she had far more force to sling far more shit, so for those of us on the sidelines is it really so difficult to see why some of us went for Trump? This entire election was a [B]disgraceful[/B] display of the grotesque beast that American politics has become, if anything I feel a bit shameful having even witnessed it. This is what we've become? Voting between two disgusting assclowns? A liar versus a blowhard? Meme magic versus mainstream media? No, Zyler. I'm not expecting people to be too good or extraordinarily reasonable, I've expected them to act in self-interest which they evidently did.
[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;51344186]That's fine, you can believe they're more important all you like and honestly I can see why. They're simply the most relevant thing from your perspective, constitutional rights are a massive priority for me, more so than everything we've described. Those affect quite literally everyone involved though, so I'm not going to trot out some debate over where privacy and security and individual protection and the needs of society begin or end. Social issues like LGBT rights [I]I personally consider[/I] to be human rights but a lot of people don't, so it's one of those things that rely on people's opinions and perspectives and any argument for or against is a moral debate that's hard to pin down. Abortion too is the same thing, ultimately it boils down to an ethical debate over where personhood begins and ends and personally I think the current legislation is a [I]bit[/I] hypocritical in that regard. (stab a pregnant woman and it's a double murder, but abortion doesn't count? That doesn't add up) Opinions on what's acceptable in our society are all we have here, I think that's part of the reason why the Bill of Rights even exists, and why Madison was wary of even having one because they might be seen as [I]the only rights[/I] which has somewhat happened with the 4th Amendment. That's a different discussion though. They [I]are[/I] nebulous though, precisely don't implicitly know what you're talking about. Are you talking about marriage rights? Employment? DADT in the military? All of it? Other stuff? Some of the stuff? None of the above? I don't know, and so far the only things really commented on by Trump specifically are returning marriage decisions back to the states; everyone seems to be more concerned about Mike Pence. Yeah I'm [I]well aware[/I] of his stance on homosexuality and his support for the so-called conversion camps which have been deemed illegal for good reason in several states. I get it. He's offensive. Thing is Pence isn't at all in any position to force any of those views other than nagging Trump, who could quite literally tell him to fuck off and shoo him out of the room. Addressing the supreme court is another issue, yeah Trump will pick the new justices but I'm inclined to believe they'll actually [I]do their jobs[/I] instead of yukking it up with Donny boy. That argument didn't really convince me when Trump supporters tossed it out there, whoever Clinton would have appointed would still be a supreme court justice. You brought up priorities, so using that metric looking at the reproductive rights of half the population that affects the rest of the population is clearly a bigger issue simply because of the number of people affected. That argument is a double-edged sword, the issues are [I]all[/I] big as you said so if Trump is the one to [del]bring balance to the Force[/del] audit the entire government and fight corruption, and is the [U]least[/U] corrupt, then surely the equally important but less pressing issues of LGBT rights are okay to set aside for now. Right? I mean if that's truly what happened in this election, and I'm not saying it did, then those people have just as much merit in voting for Trump as you have in being opposed to it. My point was their compromises don't adequately represent the majority in the first place, what we need is a party that combines the issues most popular from both parties. I feel that way precisely because people aren't bad, or they don't think they're bad. Most people will, if forced, do the right thing for whatever reason and most people tend to avoid things bad for themselves. I believe in firearm ownership because your common thug is an ambush predator, like any prowling creature they will flee when confronted. It's just a no-win situation if the victim is willing to kill them when there's so many other victims out there, and indeed common sense would dictate that if you know somebody is armed actively initiating conflict with them is genuinely a bad idea. That's not prescribing altruism on the part of the attacker, it's simple risk aversion that we're all equipped with at birth. Raise the risk to a certain point and [I]anyone[/I] will back down. So with that said this election was a gigantic game of chicken, fear mongering, smear campaigns, shit slinging galore just to make the other person look terrible. Two forces careening toward each other, caution discarded a few miles back, and we're all supposed to just sit in the back seat and cheer them on? Vote for the one that's less sleazy? Looking at it that way I think it's a no-brainer that Clinton lost because she had far more force to sling far more shit, so for those of us on the sidelines is it really so difficult to see why some of us went for Trump? This entire election was a [B]disgraceful[/B] display of the grotesque beast that American politics has become, if anything I feel a bit shameful having even witnessed it. This is what we've become? Voting between two disgusting assclowns? A liar versus a blowhard? Meme magic versus mainstream media? No, Zyler. I'm not expecting people to be too good or extraordinarily reasonable, I've expected them to act in self-interest which they evidently did.[/QUOTE] Yea, I think you're right. It's too early to tell what's going to happen with the Trump presidency. Although I disagree with some small parts of what you're saying, the general gist of it rings pretty true.
Honestly the only comfort I can find is that from what I saw during the campaign, many Republicans in power don't like him either, which means hopefully we'll see some congressional stone-walling so that he can't do anything too destructive.
[QUOTE=Zyler;51344223]Yea, I think you're right. It's too early to tell what's going to happen with the Trump presidency. Although I disagree with some small parts of what you're saying, the general gist of it rings pretty true.[/QUOTE]I hope I'm right, I feel like it makes sense when I think about it, but as I said before I have been wrong in the past. Maybe we're both wrong, who knows? You're right, it's just too early to tell what will or won't happen, but I am not a fan of the shit being mumbled into microphones by the Republican lackeys drunk on their victory. Whatever happens we probably deserve it as a country, up until we decide to fix it. [editline]9th November 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Zero-Point;51344228]Honestly the only comfort I can find is that from what I saw during the campaign, many Republicans in power don't like him either, which means hopefully we'll see some congressional stone-walling so that he can't do anything too destructive.[/QUOTE]I think you're right on a few things, but if Trump does want to come out with some amazing alternative to Obamacare and [I]it actually turns out to be good[/I] I hope enough Republicans can make it happen.
[QUOTE=Zero-Point;51344228]Honestly the only comfort I can find is that from what I saw during the campaign, many Republicans in power don't like him either, which means hopefully we'll see some congressional stone-walling so that he can't do anything too destructive.[/QUOTE] It depends on what one see's as destructive. 90% of Trump's platform aligns with the Republicans. If you don't want Republican policies I got real bad news for you. [QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;51344341] I think you're right on a few things, but if Trump does want to come out with some amazing alternative to Obamacare and [I]it actually turns out to be good[/I] I hope enough Republicans can make it happen.[/QUOTE] I don't mean to be a dick but if you don't like being called crazy and insane maybe don't suggest the possibility that Trump is going to come out with an amazing alternative to healthcare when his plans for healthcare are pretty clear.
[QUOTE=magicman1234;51344141]he's not even in office yet.., arent you guys being a little bit [I]sensational[/I][/QUOTE] The best part is I'm willing to bet the backlash from trump supporters if Hillary won wouldn't be this embarrassing to watch.
[QUOTE=Oizen;51344422]The best part is I'm willing to bet the backlash from trump supporters if Hillary won wouldn't be this embarrassing to watch.[/QUOTE] oh how embarrassing people are worried that their rights are in danger because the man who said he was going to go after their rights is now president backed by a congress who's platform literally endangers those rights. I'm positively cringing at how disingenuous you are.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;51344448]oh how embarrassing people are worried that their rights are in danger because the man who said he was going to go after their rights is now president backed by a congress who's platform literally endangers those rights. I'm positively cringing at how disingenuous you are.[/QUOTE] No one is going to believe that Trump will fuck them up until he hammers the railroad spike into their ass. Even as he displays the spike, and brags about what he's going to do with it and how painfully it'll hurt they'll just continue chuckling obliviously.
[QUOTE=Oizen;51344422]The best part is I'm willing to bet the backlash from trump supporters if Hillary won wouldn't be this embarrassing to watch.[/QUOTE] Given how volatile The_Donald is, I disagree.
[QUOTE=Oizen;51344422]The best part is I'm willing to bet the backlash from trump supporters if Hillary won wouldn't be this embarrassing to watch.[/QUOTE] Hahaha repealing obama care hahahha i need that to live Right to marry? Who needs that its not like i was plannijg on marrying right guys? Legalized descrimination of lgbt people die to religious belief? Just go to another restaurant /bar/pharmacy/gym/anything Hahaha we sure are fucking embarassing right
[QUOTE=Raidyr;51344448]oh how embarrassing people are worried that their rights are in danger because the man who said he was going to go after their rights is now president backed by a congress who's platform literally endangers those rights. I'm positively cringing at how disingenuous you are.[/QUOTE] No you don't understand how can America be great with all those gay people and mexicans in it. Wonder how long idiots are going to keep milking this 'le epic librul salty tears' thing. It's already embarrassing enough they voted a pompous dickhead to lead their country, but apparently that humiliation isn't enough for them so now they just spam cringy 'salt' posts.
[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;51344341] I think you're right on a few things, but if Trump does want to come out with some amazing alternative to Obamacare and [I]it actually turns out to be good[/I] I hope enough Republicans can make it happen.[/QUOTE] [B]If it is genuinely better[/B], there will be no problems. The main problem with the "repeal the ACA" people has been that they haven't suggested any alternatives, suggesting we go back to the system that leaves people with pre-existing conditions in the cold.
[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;51344186]They [I]are[/I] nebulous though, precisely don't implicitly know what you're talking about. Are you talking about marriage rights? Employment? DADT in the military? All of it? Other stuff? Some of the stuff? None of the above? I don't know, and so far the only things really commented on by Trump specifically are returning marriage decisions back to the states; everyone seems to be more concerned about Mike Pence. Yeah I'm [I]well aware[/I] of his stance on homosexuality and his support for the so-called conversion camps which have been deemed illegal for good reason in several states. I get it. He's offensive. Thing is Pence isn't at all in any position to force any of those views other than nagging Trump, who could quite literally tell him to fuck off and shoo him out of the room. Addressing the supreme court is another issue, yeah Trump will pick the new justices but I'm inclined to believe they'll actually [I]do their jobs[/I] instead of yukking it up with Donny boy. That argument didn't really convince me when Trump supporters tossed it out there, whoever Clinton would have appointed would still be a supreme court justice.[/QUOTE] hey. here's a list of the way lgbt rights will be directly affected according to how trump has described his policy: 1) the most obvious one: donald trump has the opportunity to appoint at least one (and possibly three) supreme court justices. [URL="http://www.foxnews.com/transcript/2016/01/31/ted-cruz-attacks-donald-trump-financial-record-trump-responds/"]he has promised these justices will attempt to repeal nationwide marriage equality[/URL]. 2) trans employment protections are currently in the balance. the obama administration is currently pursuing legal cases to ensure access to these facilities (the legal strategy is to defend trans people under the language of sex discrimination laws). [URL="http://www.foxnews.com/transcript/2016/04/21/donald-trump-accuses-his-rivals-buying-delegates/"]trump wants to leave it to the states[/URL], [URL="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-north-carolina-bathroom-bill_us_571a50c5e4b0d912d5fe6dc1"](2)[/URL] and would likely end these cases. (this is also in line with trump's general stance toward the other gains of the obama presidency: [URL="http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/11/09/president-obama-election-clinton-trump/93201172/"]"Trump has pledged to repeal every one of [Obama's executive orders.]"[/URL]) if private groups pick up the mantle, cf point one. precedents set by the trump supreme court will not be beneficial for trans people. (also worth mentioning: discrimination against people based on sexual orientation/gender identity is already legal in many states. a trump presidency would both embolden lawmakers to continue these policies, as well as make it difficult for groups like the ACLU to combat these laws) 3) mike pence's presence in the vice presidential seat is scary enough even symbolically - that the man who fought to move money for HIV research to conversion therapy (resulting in a public health crisis) and provided the framework for bills like the HB2 is a leading figure of this new government is terrifying. trump is not as pro-lgbt as you think; he doesn't need pence to "pester" him into enacting lgbt legislation. (this, not noting that trump promised pence he would be the most powerful vp in history) ([URL="http://www.hrc.org/2016RepublicanFacts/donald-trump-opposes-nationwide-marriage-equality"]See also this article put together by the HRC[/URL]) and something to note too, based on how trump may be arranging his cabinet: transgendered people who don't change the gender on their passport within the next two months may be unable to leave the country. this is because the policy for changing the gender on a passport is decided by the secretary of state (currently looking to be Gingrich) the argument against most of these is the one you're running with, that trump probably won't manage anything in the end to harm lgbt people (even leaning at times to the more ridiculous idea that trump is lgbt neutral or even pro-lgbt). the claim is ridiculous. there is going be a triple-stacked GOP government this time next year, and it is not exaggeration to say that the lgbt victories of recent memory are now very much ephemeral. of the three victories you've listed (DADT, marriage rights, employment rights) I would say DADT is secure, and one of them (employment rights) already doesn't really exist. [editline]0:00[/editline] if you're wondering what employment rights looks like atm, [url=http://www.lgbtmap.org/equality-maps/non_discrimination_laws]this map[/url] will be helpful.
[QUOTE=Oizen;51344422]The best part is I'm willing to bet the backlash from trump supporters if Hillary won wouldn't be this embarrassing to watch.[/QUOTE] Considering Trump himself was calling the election rigged when people predicted Hillary would win I seriously doubt it.
[QUOTE=Anderan;51344531]Considering Trump himself was calling the election rigged when people predicted Hillary would win I seriously doubt it.[/QUOTE] And considering the number of Trump supporters I've seen who supported the idea of revolt or civil war if he lost...
[QUOTE=magicman1234;51344141]he's not even in office yet.., arent you guys being a little bit [I]sensational[/I][/QUOTE] [url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1540956&p=51340621&viewfull=1#post51340621[/url]
[QUOTE=Raidyr;51344403]I don't mean to be a dick but if you don't like being called crazy and insane maybe don't suggest the possibility that Trump is going to come out with an amazing alternative to healthcare when his plans for healthcare are pretty clear.[/QUOTE]You know what? I have no goddamn idea why I even read your posts because it's this shit every time. Suggesting the possibility of something and implying it's incredibly unlikely (and I believe saying flat-out it's almost definitely not going to happen in other posts) isn't crazy, because I believe this election has made it [I]painfully fucking clear[/I] that strange things happen. If you don't mean to be a dick [I]then don't be a dick.[/I] Your posts are more often than not complete trash and I'm done with them. [QUOTE=Zero-Point;51344495][B]If it is genuinely better[/B], there will be no problems. The main problem with the "repeal the ACA" people has been that they haven't suggested any alternatives, suggesting we go back to the system that leaves people with pre-existing conditions in the cold.[/QUOTE]I doubt there will be any real alternative, there have been suggestions but they've either been complete shit or just unpopular, so anything that comes along has to be both good and favored. Will the Republicans do that? [I]Highly[/I] unlikely, but maybe the shift in demographics we're starting to see in the GOP will result in something we can at least stomach. What I don't like about the ACA is it's the result of "compromise" and political hacks trying to drive it through, yeah it's helped people but it's also [I]hurt[/I] people. Paul Ryan's on TV talking about this right now, being able to pass something and put it on the president's desk, but I guess we'll have to wait and see what comes up. Let's hope I'm right in that Trump's a RINO and would want something that benefits all of us, it's really all we can do right now. [QUOTE=AngryToad;51344497]hey. here's a list of the way lgbt rights will be directly affected according to how trump has described his policy:[/QUOTE]Somewhat fair points on one and two, and this clarification makes your concerns [I]not[/I] nebulous, but point three? Really? More shit about Pence? "Trump is not as pro-LGBT as you think?" I don't think anything, that's the point. I know nothing's happening right now and I know about a third of Republicans actually care about this, so I'm not at all terrified about this as I am about other things. I commented about abortion and Planned Parenthood being defunded because that's an agenda being pushed [I]right now[/I] before Trump even taking office. That's a real, identifiable threat. What you're discussing is hearsay and campaign promises, I do [I]not[/I] trust Trump either way.
[QUOTE=Oizen;51344422]The best part is I'm willing to bet the backlash from trump supporters if Hillary won wouldn't be this embarrassing to watch.[/QUOTE] yeah fuck people who want to marry who they want yeah fuck people who need medicine to live and now won't be able to get it yeah fuck people who are lgbt and want to be treated like human fucking beings you are a disgusting excuse for a fucking person, congrats on being validated for once in your life along with the rest of the trumpet assholes [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Flaming" - Jaanus))[/highlight]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.