2016 Presidential Election

[pangloss]

Clinton could take office while under two criminal investigations...

I don't know where you heard or read that, but Fox News has apologized for incorrectly reporting Clinton faces indictment.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/fox-news-apologizes-for-falsely-reporting-that-clinton-faces-indictment/2016/11/04/8fd56f20-a2b7-11e6-8d63-3e0a660f1f04_story.html

[LA Ute]

I don't know where you heard or read that, but Fox News has apologized for incorrectly reporting Clinton faces indictment.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/fox-news-apologizes-for-falsely-reporting-that-clinton-faces-indictment/2016/11/04/8fd56f20-a2b7-11e6-8d63-3e0a660f1f04_story.html

Both the email issue and the Clinton Foundation are open investigations. I didn't say anything about an indictment.

My wife is a former journalist. Anyone who goes with a story based on a single anonymous source ought to be shot. It wasn't even allowed when she was working in news (1980s). They had editors then.

[concerned]

Both the email issue and the Clinton Foundation are open investigations. I didn't say anything about an indictment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I thought the FBI said officially that there is no foundation investigation, that the leaks were wrong. I could be misremembering, however.

[LA Ute]

I thought the FBI said officially that there is no foundation investigation, that the leaks were wrong. I could be misremembering, however.

The guy in the Wall Street Journal (news, not opinion) said 4 FBI field offices are involved in investigating the Foundation. I think it was Monday or Tuesday morning.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[concerned]

The guy in the Wall Street Journal (news, not opinion) said 4 FBI field offices are involved in investigating the Foundation. I think it was Monday or Tuesday morning.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I thought they threw cold water on that, but I am not sure.

[LA Ute]

Interesting piece in Vanity Fair:

MAYBE THE RIGHT-WING MEDIA ISN’T CRAZY, AFTER ALL

After Trump, can the media escape the confirmation bias trap that it has set for itself?

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/11/the-right-wing-media-isnt-crazy

(Note: I don't read Breitbart and never have, at least consciously.)

[USS Utah]

It boils down to this I guess with this election: Which bothers you more, admitted sexual assault or the possibility of compromised classified email?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Considering that one of them is going to win, I would prefer Hillary, but that doesn't mean I can vote for her.

[USS Utah]

This election is like playing a game of "Would You Rather" where both options are bad, but you still have to pick one for the sake of the game.

Inasmuch as this election is not a game, I don't actually have to vote for one of the two major candidates, and I have other options, to include writing in a candidate, even if said candidate isn't registered as a write in candidate.

[NorthwestUteFan]

Fox News's sources are as good as all of the 'BYU to the Big 12' sources.

[UtahsMrSports]

My newsfeed on facebook just promoted an article saying that melania trump wants to fight cyber bullying as first lady.

Gotta wonder if her first act will be to ban her husband from Twitter.

[LA Ute]

Fox News's sources are as good as all of the 'BYU to the Big 12' sources.

There are good journalists there, outside of the opinion shows (which I don't watch, so I can't really comment). Baer gave them all a black eye.

[U-Ute]

One has to ask why our enemies, in particular the Russians have such an interest and motivation to tamper with our election (and who the tampering favors). I don't believe Trump is a Putin puppet but I do believe our enemies see the devastation a Trump Presidency would be for our country.

This sort of stuff is unprecedented.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My belief is that Putin sees Trump much easier to manipulate than Clinton. He is prone to emotional, impulsive decisions.

[U-Ute]

Is that why his speaking fee doubled when Hillary became Secretary of State? :fight:

I heard Majerus say once about his speaking fees that if he didn't charge them he'd be inundated with requests.

[LA Ute]

Public Service Announcement #1:
The New York Post take-down of Trump:

Bury Trump in a Landslide

http://interactive.nydailynews.com/2016/10/daily-news-editorial-bury-trump-in-landslide/

Public Service Announcement #2:

Their take-down of Hillary Clinton:

The case against Hillary Clinton

http://interactive.nydailynews.com/2016/11/op-ed-case-against-hillary-clinton/

You're welcome.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[concerned]

Public Service Announcement #1:
The New York Post take-down of Trump:

Bury Trump in a Landslide

http://interactive.nydailynews.com/2016/10/daily-news-editorial-bury-trump-in-landslide/

Public Service Announcement #2:

Their take-down of Hillary Clinton:

The case against Hillary Clinton

http://interactive.nydailynews.com/2016/11/op-ed-case-against-hillary-clinton/

You're welcome.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You saw that your favorite magazine the National Review endorsed Clinton tonight? Surely as a good conservative you're going to follow what the National Review said. An impeachable Clinton will do less damage been a crazy Trump. What better reason could you have to vote for a president.to

[LA Ute]

You saw that your favorite magazine the National Review endorsed Clinton tonight? Surely as a good conservative you're going to follow what the National Review said. An impeachable Clinton will do less damage been a crazy Trump. What better reason could you have to vote for a president.to

Wow, that's another of Trump's amazing accomplishments -- he got NR to endorse Hillary Clinton. Alas, I've already voted and I left the presidential section blank. BTW, I also read The New Republic and The Atlantic. Those two seem to pollute my thinking and to reduce NR's hold over my free will.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ma'ake]

Interesting piece in Vanity Fair:

MAYBE THE RIGHT-WING MEDIA ISN’T CRAZY, AFTER ALL

After Trump, can the media escape the confirmation bias trap that it has set for itself?

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/11/the-right-wing-media-isnt-crazy

(Note: I don't read Breitbart and never have, at least consciously.)

It's impossible not to have bias. I think the media, being college graduates, have (general) biases consistent with that demographic.

I also think big parts of the media have tacitly decided that Trump is so disgusting and dangerous, it's become a moral imperative to not let him become President, informally allied with the NeverTrump Republicans and in general alignment with Republicans who were hoping Trump could be removed as a candidate, after he kept attacking the Muslim Gold Star veteran's parents.

(To be sure, the media still have to chase clicks and eyeballs, so they'll carry anti-Clinton stories, when they puncture the news cycle.)

A more extreme case on the road to Autocracy is Rodrigo Duterte, who declare recently that journalists are "not immune to assassination", but I would expect a President Trump to pull the press credentials of a lot of the media - or at least issue the threat - and half of the nation would applaud, loudly.

If Clinton wins, we'll see more people concluding that ALL of our institutions are "rigged", and as the woman who told Pence at a campaign event in Iowa last month, movements will begin toward revolution by force. The divisions in the FBI may become more pronounced and radicalized, and will feed the discord, or be inclined to look the other way, "they have a 2nd Amendment right".

One - perhaps consequential - way of looking at this election is which candidate is more likely to refuse to leave office and usher in a dictatorship? If Trump wins and gets a majority of the military and FBI to agree that "something needs to be done, we need to restore order", it's not outside the realm of possibility that we'll see support for an autocratic dictatorship rise.

Regardless of who wins, I think we may see Red States and Blue States further separate in their world views, and more serious talk about how the nation might be reasonably split into multiple smaller nations will occur.

[U-Ute]

My dad got a laptop and discovered Facebook in the last couple of years. Recently he has been on a tear of posting 18-24 anti-Clinton articles a day on it. Every once in a while I have engaged him about some of the inaccurate (or downright wrong) content of some of these posts. He generally argues back that we shouldn't have a criminal running the country.

When I reply with the long list of issues that follow Trump, he argues back to vote for "issues, not character"

The funny thing is that while he will admit to how anti-HRC he is, he won't actually come out and say he supports Trump.

I feel like this is one of those situations where someone is too ashamed or scared to admit they are gay when everyone around them knows they are.

[Diehard Ute]

My dad got a laptop and discovered Facebook in he last couple of years. Recently he has been on a tear of posting 18-24 anti-Clinton articles a day on it. Every once in a while I have engaged him about some of the inaccurate (or downright wrong) content of some of these posts he will argue back that we shouldn't have a criminal running the country.

When I reply with the long list of issues that follow Trump, he argues back to vote for "issues, not character"

The funny thing is that while he will admit to how anti-HRC he is, he won't actually come out and say he supports Trump.

I feel like this is one of those situations where someone is too ashamed or scared to admit they are gay when everyone around them knows they are.

I'm truly amazed how many intelligent people I know who post pro-Trump things. Things that are often completely inaccurate.

Many of them are so entrenched in their need to be Republican they've lost their ability to think for themselves on this.

My brother in law posts or likes at least 2 Benghazi related things every week, but despite having a daughter has absolutely no issue with Trump's treatment of women. I can't understand it so I've given up trying.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Ute]

Wow.


http://youtu.be/blxzfpc6IdI

As a non-voter at the presidential level I am still enjoying the panic among HRC diehards.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[U-Ute]

Wow.


http://youtu.be/blxzfpc6IdI

As a non-voter at the presidential level I am still enjoying the panic among HRC diehards.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It seems like that if Trump wins, it would be a monumental collapse for HRC, no?

[Diehard Ute]

It seems like that if Trump wins, it would be a monumental collapse for HRC, no?

Should we all start learning Russian just in case? ;)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Irving Washington]

Wow.


http://youtu.be/blxzfpc6IdI

As a non-voter at the presidential level I am still enjoying the panic among HRC diehards.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think the panic extends be them.

[LA Ute]

I think the panic extends be them.

A lot of people are like me: just wondering what the world will look like on November 9. After all that has happened this time around, I really have no idea. And I'm not willing to predict anything.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ma'ake]

One of my research colleagues is Jewish. Her husband is from Austria. She admitted yesterday they've talked about going to Austria, or maybe even Israel, partially because the plight of academic researchers has eroded so much, but "a President Trump might be the push we need".

Another research couple are long time residents, from Canada. Fantastic people, high achievers. I asked him why they never pursued citizenship, and he joked, "I prefer not to burn bridges". Then he got a bit more somber: "The older I get, the less I want to go back to the cold, but there are enough guns and enough crazies down here, we might have to".

A couple of years ago, David Brooks outlined the case for optimism for America, a big part of which included being an attractive place for talented immigrants to come to.

I can tell you the mood of the talented immigrants I work with is not so bullish on America, as it was.

[Diehard Ute]

One of my research colleagues is Jewish. Her husband is from Austria. She admitted yesterday they've talked about going to Austria, or maybe even Israel, partially because the plight of academic researchers has eroded so much, but "a President Trump might be the push we need".

Another research couple are long time residents, from Canada. Fantastic people, high achievers. I asked him why they never pursued citizenship, and he joked, "I prefer not to burn bridges". Then he got a bit more somber: "The older I get, the less I want to go back to the cold, but there are enough guns and enough crazies down here, we might have to".

I've always found it interesting - perhaps revealing - that liberals have places they would consider moving to.

Which is interesting as there are people on the other side. Many of the doctors my mom works with at the U are from Canada, and they have no desire to ever return.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ma'ake]

Which is interesting as there are people on the other side. Many of the doctors my mom works with at the U are from Canada, and they have no desire to ever return.


Physicians are unquestionably at the top of the food chain, in healthcare, perhaps below insurance executives and Big Pharma stars. In the US, that position is higher than in Canada, without question.

Your mom's observation is true, I believe, and part of what's happening in academic healthcare are the tensions between research and clinicians, where one part of the pie is shrinking (based on my observations) and the other part is doing pretty well. (Totally off topic)

[U-Ute]

794928249826672640

[Ma'ake]

A lot of people are like me: just wondering what the world will look like on November 9. After all that has happened this time around, I really have no idea. And I'm not willing to predict anything.


I think the optimistic scenario would be nothing changes too much, sports and computer games help keep things kind of how they are now, with most people having checked out of this worrisome topic, altogether.

"The whole system is corrupt, politicians are used-car salesmen, what else is on TV?"

If Trump is elected, I think we'll see some of his supporters harassing minorities or immigrants, like after Brexit, and they'll get impatient that forceable deportations aren't occurring, en masse. At that point does Trump encourage vigilantes? Or does he wilt?

After a couple of years, when Trump doesn't bring the manufacturing jobs back from China, what will be the response?

If Hillary hangs on and wins, I think Chaffetz will honor his vow to endlessly attack her, I think she hangs in there for a couple of years, and then maybe hangs it up for health reasons, letting Tim Kaine return us back to a period of less volatile presidential figures.

Trump doing something similar - ie, passing the torch to Pence - seems less likely, because his supporters are really expecting massive changes.

[Rocker Ute]

Many of them are so entrenched in their need to be Republican they've lost their ability to think for themselves on this.



Both sides are incredibly guilty of this. I have a weird mix of friends on Facebook that consists of a lot of uber right and uber left and the similarity in their posts are astounding.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Diehard Ute]

I think the optimistic scenario would be nothing changes too much, sports and computer games help keep things kind of how they are now, with most people having checked out of this worrisome topic, altogether.

"The whole system is corrupt, politicians are used-car salesmen, what else is on TV?"

If Trump is elected, I think we'll see some of his supporters harassing minorities or immigrants, like after Brexit, and they'll get impatient that forceable deportations aren't occurring, en masse. At that point does Trump encourage vigilantes? Or does he wilt?

After a couple of years, when Trump doesn't bring the manufacturing jobs back from China, what will be the response?

If Hillary hangs on and wins, I think Chaffetz will honor his vow to endlessly attack her, I think she hangs in there for a couple of years, and then maybe hangs it up for health reasons, letting Tim Kaine return us back to a period of less volatile presidential figures.

Trump doing something similar - ie, passing the torch to Pence - seems less likely, because his supporters are really expecting massive changes.

Trump would never step down.

Trump is driven by ego. Everything he does in life is to make himself feel good about himself, usually by putting others down




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Ute]

I think the optimistic scenario would be nothing changes too much, sports and computer games help keep things kind of how they are now, with most people having checked out of this worrisome topic, altogether.

"The whole system is corrupt, politicians are used-car salesmen, what else is on TV?"

If Trump is elected, I think we'll see some of his supporters harassing minorities or immigrants, like after Brexit, and they'll get impatient that forceable deportations aren't occurring, en masse. At that point does Trump encourage vigilantes? Or does he wilt?

After a couple of years, when Trump doesn't bring the manufacturing jobs back from China, what will be the response?

If Hillary hangs on and wins, I think Chaffetz will honor his vow to endlessly attack her, I think she hangs in there for a couple of years, and then maybe hangs it up for health reasons, letting Tim Kaine return us back to a period of less volatile presidential figures.

Trump doing something similar - ie, passing the torch to Pence - seems less likely, because his supporters are really expecting massive changes.

I am a little surprised at myself, but it just now crossed my mind that whichever of the two is elected, perhaps a massive heart attack would solve the problem for the country. At least Pence and Kaine are normal people.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Diehard Ute]

I am a little surprised at myself, but it just now crossed my mind that whichever of the two is elected, perhaps a massive heart attack would solve the problem for the country. At least Pence and Kaine are normal people.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They're both career politicians. By definition they're far from normal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[concerned]

I am a little surprised at myself, but it just now crossed my mind that whichever of the two is elected, perhaps a massive heart attack would solve the problem for the country. At least Pence and Kaine are normal people.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

With all the loose talk about somebody putting a bull's-eye on Clinton, etc, I think there is a genuine heightened risk of assassination.

[LA Ute]

With all the loose talk about somebody putting a bull's-eye on Clinton, etc, I think there is a genuine heightened risk of assassination.

Probably a risk for both of them, wouldn't you think? Both of them are hated people.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Ute]

They're both career politicians. By definition they're far from normal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good point. Maybe we should say "normal, for politicians."


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[concerned]

Probably a risk for both of them, wouldn't you think? Both of them are hated people.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, but nobody has been talking about shooting Trump to my knowledge

[Diehard Ute]

Yes, but nobody has been talking about shooting Trump to my knowledge

Trump's rhetoric encourages violence. Couple that with his statements of election fraud and not accepting defeat and I'd say you're correct, Clinton would face a greater risk.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Ute]

Yes, but nobody has been talking about shooting Trump to my knowledge

I'm sticking with deus ex machina.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Ute]

Yes, but nobody has been talking about shooting Trump to my knowledge

Google says:

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/08/despite-death-threats-donald-trump-will-fly-mexico-city-meet-president-nieto/

http://www.westernjournalism.com/insider-reveals-shocking-way-donald-trump-handles-death-threats-its-not-what-you-think/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pangloss]

For about seven decades Republicans have accused their political opponents of being Russian or Communist dupes. With no evidence, John Kennedy, Eleanor Roosevelt, Jimmy Carter, Humphrey Bogart, and Shirley Temple were all accused of being communist dupes. Even now, the Breitbart site accuses Franklin Roosevelt of being a dupe.

In the third debate Clinton said "We've never had a foreign government trying to interfere in our election. We have 17—17 intelligence agencies, civilian and military, who have all concluded that these espionage attacks, these cyberattacks, come from the highest levels of the Kremlin and they are designed to influence our election."

Trump got defensive, even though he wasn't accused of anything, and responded "She has no idea whether it's Russia, China or anybody else. ...And our country has no idea. ... Yeah, I doubt it. I doubt it. ... She doesn't like Putin because Putin has outsmarted her at every step of the way." This was after Trump had been briefed by the CIA. At the time, I thought Trump was trying to goad Clinton into disclosing something she heard in her CIA security briefing. Now, I don't know.


This Newsweek article presents a compelling argument that Trump is a Russian dupe, at best.

http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-russia-hillary-clinton-united-states-europe-516895

[USS Utah]

My dad got a laptop and discovered Facebook in the last couple of years. Recently he has been on a tear of posting 18-24 anti-Clinton articles a day on it. Every once in a while I have engaged him about some of the inaccurate (or downright wrong) content of some of these posts. He generally argues back that we shouldn't have a criminal running the country.

When I reply with the long list of issues that follow Trump, he argues back to vote for "issues, not character"

The funny thing is that while he will admit to how anti-HRC he is, he won't actually come out and say he supports Trump.

I feel like this is one of those situations where someone is too ashamed or scared to admit they are gay when everyone around them knows they are.

I don't like Hillary and don't trust her. But I am fairly certain that you have to be convicted of something in order to be a criminal -- that whole innocent until proven guilty thing -- and just being investigated or even indicted is not enough. I hated the Clintons so much during the 1990s that I am shocked now to find myself having sympathetic emotions regarding Hillary because of all the anti stuff on social media.

[Diehard Ute]

Google says:

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/08/despite-death-threats-donald-trump-will-fly-mexico-city-meet-president-nieto/

http://www.westernjournalism.com/insider-reveals-shocking-way-donald-trump-handles-death-threats-its-not-what-you-think/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That last article makes me chuckle.

I wear a vest 4 days a week. Is it the most comfortable thing? Nope.

But seeing the media reports that the "bulky vest" has left him spent is comical.

A standard vest weighs 5 pounds. Rifle plates weigh more but I'm highly doubtful he's wearing one. Perhaps Trump should spend more time in the gym.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[USS Utah]

For about seven decades Republicans have accused their political opponents of being Russian or Communist dupes. With no evidence, John Kennedy, Eleanor Roosevelt, Jimmy Carter, Humphrey Bogart, and Shirley Temple were all accused of being communist dupes. Even now, the Breitbart site accuses Franklin Roosevelt of being a dupe.

In the third debate Clinton said "We've never had a foreign government trying to interfere in our election. We have 17—17 intelligence agencies, civilian and military, who have all concluded that these espionage attacks, these cyberattacks, come from the highest levels of the Kremlin and they are designed to influence our election."

Trump got defensive, even though he wasn't accused of anything, and responded "She has no idea whether it's Russia, China or anybody else. ...And our country has no idea. ... Yeah, I doubt it. I doubt it. ... She doesn't like Putin because Putin has outsmarted her at every step of the way." This was after Trump had been briefed by the CIA. At the time, I thought Trump was trying to goad Clinton into disclosing something she heard in her CIA security briefing. Now, I don't know.


This Newsweek article presents a compelling argument that Trump is a Russian dupe, at best.

http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-russia-hillary-clinton-united-states-europe-516895



I recall the outrage when Obama was heard on a hot mic telling Medvedev that he would have more flexibility after the 2012 election. Many of those outraged seem to be completely unconcerned about possible Russian connections to the Wikileaks attacks on Hillary.

[LA Ute]

Tom Nichols: What Trump has already cost America


At this point, the brief against Donald Trump becoming President of the United States has been well rehearsed. There is no point in rehashing Trump's positions or policies: He doesn't have any.

And so rather than make the case that Trump would be a bad President (something accepted even by many of those nominally supporting him), we should look at the damage Trump has already done to our nation even by running. We need no clearer warning of a Trump presidency than to look at what he has already inflicted on us as a country and as a people....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Ute]

This will convince no one here (and I have already voted "no" to both of those people) but I remain fascinated by the cases people are making for Trump. Jim Talent is a smart guy and I don't buy his argument here, but it is at least principled:

http://spectator.org/a-conservative-vote-for-donald-trump/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Diehard Ute]

This will convince no one here (and I have already voted "no" to both of those people) but I remain fascinated by the cases people are making for Trump. Jim Talent is a smart guy and I don't buy his argument here, but it is at least principled:

http://spectator.org/a-conservative-vote-for-donald-trump/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

People can convince themselves of most anything

Saying Trump would nominate qualified Supreme Court candidates is already a laugher. He had Mike Lee on his list.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pangloss]

This will convince no one here (and I have already voted "no" to both of those people) but I remain fascinated by the cases people are making for Trump. Jim Talent is a smart guy and I don't buy his argument here, but it is at least principled:

http://spectator.org/a-conservative-vote-for-donald-trump/

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Talent's first argument for Trump is defense. He starts with the assumption that the military is in need of rebuilding. He gives nothing to support or backup the assumption. The decreases in military spending have come from the cessation of the wars and sequestration. Avoid sequestration in the future and the military's funding issues will not return.

Here's a commentary in the WSJ by Gen. Petraeus & Michael O'Hanlon, "The Myth of a U.S. Military 'Readiness' Crisis. http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-myth-of-a-u-s-military-readiness-crisis-1470783221

In the first debate (?) Trump was asked about changing the country's first-use policy. His answer was ridiculous, claiming "Russia has been expanding their -- they have a much newer capability than we do. We have not been updating from the new standpoint." It is not true. Trump didn't understand the issue, and it's kind of important.

On Trump's defense web site page it presents a goal to "Rebuild the U.S. Navy toward a goal of 350 ships" The U.S. Navy has 430 ships in active service or reserve.

His site also says he will "Provide the U.S. Air Force with the 1,200 fighter aircraft they need" The Air Force has about 13,000 aircraft, of which 2,300 are fighters/interceptors. China and Russia have about 2,000 to 3,000 planes each, of all types. And the US planes are qualitatively superior. One F-22 is much more deadly than a handful of the most modern Russian jets.

In one of the primary debates, Hugh Hewitt asked, "what (is) your priority among our nuclear triad?" His answer displayed no understanding of what the triad is, let alone whether he has a priority among the three legs. Hewitt tried to press him on it, "Of the three legs of the triad, though, do you have a priority?" Trump responded, "I think – I think, for me, nuclear is just the power, the devastation is very important to me." He doesn't know the basic concepts of the country's defense posture.

Joe Scarorough said he was told Trump was meeting with a foreign policy expert and said "why can't we use nuclear weapons?" Chris Matthews tried to press him on nuclear weapons use and he said "Then why are we making them? Why do we make them?" That ought to scare the piss out of folks.

Talent's rationalization for Trump is well written and addresses serious issues (unlike nearly all of this awful campaign season). He's just mistaken on Trump's defense policy. In his stump speech Trump claims he will 'be the best on defense'. Scratch the surface on this and nearly every other issue and he is exposed as ill informed and not even curious. He doesn't know what he doesn't know and he's surrounded himself with nitwits.

[Rocker Ute]

Talent's first argument for Trump is defense. He starts with the assumption that the military is in need of rebuilding. He gives nothing to support or backup the assumption. The decreases in military spending have come from the cessation of the wars and sequestration. Avoid sequestration in the future and the military's funding issues will not return.

Here's a commentary in the WSJ by Gen. Petraeus & Michael O'Hanlon, "The Myth of a U.S. Military 'Readiness' Crisis. http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-myth-of-a-u-s-military-readiness-crisis-1470783221

In the first debate (?) Trump was asked about changing the country's first-use policy. His answer was ridiculous, claiming "Russia has been expanding their -- they have a much newer capability than we do. We have not been updating from the new standpoint." It is not true. Trump didn't understand the issue, and it's kind of important.

On Trump's defense web site page it presents a goal to "Rebuild the U.S. Navy toward a goal of 350 ships" The U.S. Navy has 430 ships in active service or reserve.

His site also says he will "Provide the U.S. Air Force with the 1,200 fighter aircraft they need" The Air Force has about 13,000 aircraft, of which 2,300 are fighters/interceptors. China and Russia have about 2,000 to 3,000 planes each, of all types. And the US planes are qualitatively superior. One F-22 is much more deadly than a handful of the most modern Russian jets.

In one of the primary debates, Hugh Hewitt asked, "what (is) your priority among our nuclear triad?" His answer displayed no understanding of what the triad is, let alone whether he has a priority among the three legs. Hewitt tried to press him on it, "Of the three legs of the triad, though, do you have a priority?" Trump responded, "I think – I think, for me, nuclear is just the power, the devastation is very important to me." He doesn't know the basic concepts of the country's defense posture.

Joe Scarorough said he was told Trump was meeting with a foreign policy expert and said "why can't we use nuclear weapons?" Chris Matthews tried to press him on nuclear weapons use and he said "Then why are we making them? Why do we make them?" That ought to scare the piss out of folks.

Talent's rationalization for Trump is well written and addresses serious issues (unlike nearly all of this awful campaign season). He's just mistaken on Trump's defense policy. In his stump speech Trump claims he will 'be the best on defense'. Scratch the surface on this and nearly every other issue and he is exposed as ill informed and not even curious. He doesn't know what he doesn't know and he's surrounded himself with nitwits.

But Pangloss, there are 30,000 missing emails among Anthony Weiner's errr... selfies.

Plus I read part of a Facebook post about Hillary having over 30 people killed who opposed her. Sure most of those people aren't even remotely connected to her, nor are their deaths even slightly suspicious, but doesn't that just show you how good she is at covering it all up?




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Ute]

As I've said many times, I am a politics junkie. One of my cardinal rules since college (one I learned at the University of Utah) is that people who disagree with me on politics are not stupid or evil. A few might be stupid, and a few might be evil, but there are great numbers of reasonable people on both sides of American political issues, including candidates. I can't stand Donald Trump and would never vote for him, but I do not think his supporters are stupid or evil. We're talking about almost half the voters in current polls supporting him, showing Trump running close to neck and neck with Hillary Clinton. So it is with some amazement that I read posts here suggesting that there's not a single principled reason to vote for Trump, and that everybody who votes for him is wrong or crazy or evil. I can't wait for this election to be over.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Devildog]

Between Trump and Hillary. Hillary is unacceptable at all.


http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww59/RuggedH2/Killary_zpsmwpbgs6m.jpg (http://s705.photobucket.com/user/RuggedH2/media/Killary_zpsmwpbgs6m.jpg.html)

[Rocker Ute]

As I've said many times, I am a politics junkie. One of my cardinal rules since college (one I learned at the University of Utah) is that people who disagree with me on politics are not stupid or evil. A few might be stupid, and a few might be evil, but there are great numbers of reasonable people on both sides of American political issues, including candidates. I can't stand Donald Trump and would never vote for him, but I do not think his supporters are stupid or evil. We're talking about almost half the voters in current polls supporting him, showing Trump running close to neck and neck with Hillary Clinton. So it is with some amazement that I read posts here suggesting that there's not a single principled reason to vote for Trump, and that everybody who votes for him is wrong or crazy or evil. I can't wait for this election to be over.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not saying people are stupid either, but seriously what is a principled reason to vote for Trump? Pangloss cited just one reason why he is wholly unqualified and outright dangerous to be president. This isn't a, "I think he'd be a horrible president" issue, it is a this-man-is-as-equally-unqualified-to-fly-a-fighter-jet-as-he-is-to-be-president sort of thing.

This is like hiring a drunk on the street to be your attorney. Can he legally represent you? Sure. Should you do it? Uh no.

I don't like Hillary Clinton, I don't agree with most of her policy positions. She is qualified to be president. I despise Ted Cruz more than Trump. He is qualified to be president. I don't even know who Evan McMullen really is, but what I know indicates he is more qualified to be president than Trump.

And since Trump is wholly unqualified he should also be disqualified from serious consideration. And because of that I honestly can't see a principled reason to vote for him.

And I don't mean to jump on you, I sincerely would like to know what you think those principled reasons are.

One further clarification, people can be woefully wrong and not stupid or evil.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Utah]

As I've said many times, I am a politics junkie. One of my cardinal rules since college (one I learned at the University of Utah) is that people who disagree with me on politics are not stupid or evil. A few might be stupid, and a few might be evil, but there are great numbers of reasonable people on both sides of American political issues, including candidates. I can't stand Donald Trump and would never vote for him, but I do not think his supporters are stupid or evil. We're talking about almost half the voters in current polls supporting him, showing Trump running close to neck and neck with Hillary Clinton. So it is with some amazement that I read posts here suggesting that there's not a single principled reason to vote for Trump, and that everybody who votes for him is wrong or crazy or evil. I can't wait for this election to be over.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think Trump supporters are evil or stupid.

I think they are either single issue voters, "I vote republican no matter what" or just uninformed (i.e., they watch FOX News or read news from places like Drudge).

When I talk to them, they just don't understand the real issue or just don't want to understand.

Here in Utah, I talk to people about Trump a lot. I ask further questions, and they don't have the answers. They come back with "Make America Great Again" (which is crazy because the is the best America has ever been) or some other slogan.

I'm not mean, nor do I attack at that point, I let it drop on move on, because I used to be one of those people. It's too bad how bad our media has become and how much we watch yet how little we actually know.

[Devildog]

I'm not saying people are stupid either, but seriously what is a principled reason to vote for Trump? Pangloss cited just one reason why he is wholly unqualified and outright dangerous to be president. This isn't a, "I think he'd be a horrible president" issue, it is a this-man-is-as-equally-unqualified-to-fly-a-fighter-jet-as-he-is-to-be-president sort of thing.

This is like hiring a drunk on the street to be your attorney. Can he legally represent you? Sure. Should you do it? Uh no.

I don't like Hillary Clinton, I don't agree with most of her policy positions. She is qualified to be president. I despise Ted Cruz more than Trump. He is qualified to be president. I don't even know who Evan McMullen really is, but what I know indicates he is more qualified to be president than Trump.

And since Trump is wholly unqualified he should also be disqualified from serious consideration. And because of that I honestly can't see a principled reason to vote for him.

And I don't mean to jump on you, I sincerely would like to know what you think those principled reasons are.

One further clarification, people can be woefully wrong and not stupid or evil.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What makes Hillary "qualified" in your opinion to be President? Her blatant corruption? Her lies? What exactly has she accomplished that makes you feel she is qualified to be the President?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1jeJmeeMjs

[U-Ute]

My dad (presumably since he won't admit it) voted Trump with the idea that he'll be so terrible it'll basically take all of the teeth out of Federal power.

An interesting perspective for sure, but even with how lousy Trump would be, I don't think that will happen. But that's just my opinion.

[Rocker Ute]

What makes Hillary "qualified" in your opinion to be President? Her blatant corruption? Her lies? What exactly has she accomplished that makes you feel she is qualified to be the President?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1jeJmeeMjs

Well first of all she can make a coherent answer about our nuclear policy and strategies that have been maintained and supported by both parties since WWII. She understands the basics of foreign and domestic policy and economic policy.

Those are all things that every president has understood even if they have different opinions on what and how things should be accomplished. Trump has demonstrated time and time again he doesn't understand it and as some have said, "Isn't even curious to find out." To date the only coherent policy he has made is to build a wall on the Mexican border and ban Muslim's "until we figure this thing out." If you read his site he has non answers for most policy questions or they are factually incorrect.

You can find Clinton's policy ideas. Like I said, I don't agree with many of them but at least she has some that she can explain.

I'm not defending her "corruption" and "lies" (although I will note that independent fact checkers have said Trump lies at the greatest pace of any presidential candidate since they started checking) but it is hard to argue that she doesn't know what it takes to be president or that she'll deviate from basic policy that has guided our national security and kept us safe for decades upon decades.

So back at you. We know how you feel about Clinton, what is a principled decision to vote for Trump. On his own, what makes him qualified to be president?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Ute]

Michael Barone:

2016: The demise of small-r republican politics


Among the many complaints I have seen about this squalid presidential election—the most dismal choice of major party nominees since 1856—there’s one that I find missing: That it shows how our politics has become less republican.

That’s republican with a small r, in contrast to royalist. This is not an entirely new trend, but it is one that has reached a dismal culmination.

In his magisterial book “The Origins of Political Order,” Francis Fukuyama shows how the progress toward good government—”getting to Denmark” is his phrase—involves a change from the familial to the institutional. Progress comes when a nation has a competent state, the rule of law and public accountability.

The course of this election can be seen as more familial than institutional, with key roles played by the Clinton family, the Bush family and the Trump family.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/2016-the-demise-of-small-r-republican-politics/article/2606539


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Ute]

I don't think Trump supporters are evil or stupid.

I think they are either single issue voters, "I vote republican no matter what" or just uninformed (i.e., they watch FOX News or read news from places like Drudge).

When I talk to them, they just don't understand the real issue or just don't want to understand.

I think this is a remarkable way to view nearly half the voters in the USA. It misses the significance of what's going on with the country and the two candidates we are stuck with.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[UTEopia]

I think this is a remarkable way to view nearly half the voters in the USA. It misses the significance of what's going on with the country and the two candidates we are stuck with.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, but is it incorrect? IMO, the same can be said about many Democrats or those who consistently vote Democrat. The two party system run by the extreme right and the extreme left have purposely driven 30-40% of eligible voters from participating in the simple act of voting. They have further eliminated the moderates in their own parties from meaningful participation in formulating policy and platform. They have engaged in a zero sum game where winning and power take priority over service and acting for the benefit of the country. They will do whatever it takes, take whatever position is necessary, support whoever they must support, oppose the opposition regardless of merit, refuse to compromise, refuse to discuss, refuse to do their constitutional mandated jobs because in the end, winning and maintaining power is all that matters to them. That is why we have the two candidates we have.

[pangloss]

Oh hell, here's one more. At least Trump is consistent.

In 1987 Trump took out a full page advertisement complaining that Japan and Saudi Arabia were getting a free ride militarily from the U.S. and the world is laughing at us. The titile is "There's nothing wrong with America's Foreign Defense Policy that a little backbone can't cure." Ronald Reagan had been president for seven years at the time.

In the second paragraph, he writes "...last week (Saudi Arabia) refused to allow us to use their mine sweepers (which are, sadly, far more advanced than ours) to police the gulf." Sounds a lot like his speeches today, doesn't it.

I know a bit about Saudi Arabia and was surprised to read their mine sweepers were more advanced than the US sweepers in 1987 since they have no military ship building yards, then or now. Well, the Saudi mine sweepers weren't more advanced. I found an article in the Chicago Tribune in 1987 that describes the Saudi mine sweepers. They had four MSC 322 ships, described as "They are relatively slow ships, with a top speed of 13 knots, and carry a crew of 39. ... All four ships are 10 years old." The MSC 322 ships were built in the US.

From 1987 till now, Trump has consistently lied

Here's the ad.
.https://img.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeed-static/static/2015-07/10/17/enhanced/webdr02/enhanced-12123-1436563120-13.png?no-auto

Here's the Chicago Tribune article.
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1987-07-29/news/8702250398_1_mine-sweepers-saudi-arabia-mine-sweeping

[U-Ute]

The latest Clinton scandal is that they are preparing to declare victory and have a party at 9:30 in NYC before voting booths close in the west. The implication being they will be influencing western Republicans against voting.

[USS Utah]

As I've said many times, I am a politics junkie. One of my cardinal rules since college (one I learned at the University of Utah) is that people who disagree with me on politics are not stupid or evil. A few might be stupid, and a few might be evil, but there are great numbers of reasonable people on both sides of American political issues, including candidates. I can't stand Donald Trump and would never vote for him, but I do not think his supporters are stupid or evil. We're talking about almost half the voters in current polls supporting him, showing Trump running close to neck and neck with Hillary Clinton. So it is with some amazement that I read posts here suggesting that there's not a single principled reason to vote for Trump, and that everybody who votes for him is wrong or crazy or evil. I can't wait for this election to be over.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think there are many Trump and Hillary supporters that are experiencing target fixation. When a pilot gets fixated on his target he can get tunnel vision, which often results in him slamming into his target, or into the ground. Even smart, capable pilots have experienced target fixation.

[USS Utah]

What makes Hillary "qualified" in your opinion to be President? Her blatant corruption? Her lies? What exactly has she accomplished that makes you feel she is qualified to be the President?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1jeJmeeMjs


I hated the Clintons with a passion in the 1990s. While I have tried to let of the hate -- because I didn't like what it was doing to me -- I still don't like them, and I still don't trust them or agree with them on much. However, during the last 8 years, as a contrast to Obama -- who I think I succeeded in not hating -- I have found some measure of respect for Bill and Hillary. Bill was able to make some deals with the Republican Congress, he knew that he had to, while Obama hasn't seemed to grasp that fact. Hillary at times has exhibited a moderate or realist foreign policy, enough to have people in her base damn her as a hawk.

Again, I don't like Hillary, don't fully trust her, don't want her to be president, I cannot vote for her, but I will take her over Trump.

Trump is a clown, a buffoon. He, who never wore the uniform, thinks he knows more about strategy and tactics than those who have served in combat. Hitler -- and I am not saying Trump is Hitler -- thought he knew more than his generals, and unlike Trump, he actually served in combat. Germany had one of the best armies in the world, yet the Nazis waged war with startling incompetence.

[LA Ute]

Yes, but is it incorrect? IMO, the same can be said about many Democrats or those who consistently vote Democrat. The two party system run by the extreme right and the extreme left have purposely driven 30-40% of eligible voters from participating in the simple act of voting. They have further eliminated the moderates in their own parties from meaningful participation in formulating policy and platform. They have engaged in a zero sum game where winning and power take priority over service and acting for the benefit of the country. They will do whatever it takes, take whatever position is necessary, support whoever they must support, oppose the opposition regardless of merit, refuse to compromise, refuse to discuss, refuse to do their constitutional mandated jobs because in the end, winning and maintaining power is all that matters to them. That is why we have the two candidates we have.

I think you and I agree that there's something wrong with the body politic. My point is that dismissing all those who support a particular candidate as people who simply don't understand the issues, are uninformed, or are single-issue voters is part of the problem, IM0. Utah (our fellow poster, not the state) actually proved my point.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Ute]

How I Might Be Wrong

If you can read this and still not believe that smart, principled conservatives are not agonizing over how to vote Tuesday then I give up.

https://ricochet.com/386528/how-i-might-be-wrong/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pangloss]

Predict the election

Pick the winner and the electoral vote count. Tie breaker, winner's %

My prediction: Clinton wins, 322 electoral votes. 49.3%

[pangloss]

How I Might Be Wrong

If you can read this and still not believe that smart, principled conservatives are not agonizing over how to vote Tuesday then I give up.

https://ricochet.com/386528/how-i-might-be-wrong/

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk The author predicts "...John Bolton Secretary of State" under Trump. That is supposed to be a positive factor for Trump. The author may be conservative and troubled by his support of Trump. But he is nuts.

In the runnup to the Iraq war, remember Bolton saying, "We are confident that Saddam Hussein has hidden weapons of mass destruction and production facilities in Iraq" He was a war mongering hawk among the neocon hawks that got us into Iraq.

How about his more recent advocacy to bomb & invade Iran with Israel. He didn't learn squat, he was nuts in 2002, he's nuts now, he would be a disaster as Sec. of State on a scale of Trump in the White House.

cheers

[Devildog]

I hated the Clintons with a passion in the 1990s. While I have tried to let of the hate -- because I didn't like what it was doing to me -- I still don't like them, and I still don't trust them or agree with them on much. However, during the last 8 years, as a contrast to Obama -- who I think I succeeded in not hating -- I have found some measure of respect for Bill and Hillary. Bill was able to make some deals with the Republican Congress, he knew that he had to, while Obama hasn't seemed to grasp that fact. Hillary at times has exhibited a moderate or realist foreign policy, enough to have people in her base damn her as a hawk.

Again, I don't like Hillary, don't fully trust her, don't want her to be president, I cannot vote for her, but I will take her over Trump.

Trump is a clown, a buffoon. He, who never wore the uniform, thinks he knows more about strategy and tactics than those who have served in combat. Hitler -- and I am not saying Trump is Hitler -- thought he knew more than his generals, and unlike Trump, he actually served in combat. Germany had one of the best armies in the world, yet the Nazis waged war with startling incompetence.

Trump will support our troops far better than Hillary will. You never wore a uniform either but you consider yourself a military history expert. Trump never let our servicemen die while stating "what difference does it make?" Hillary has proven herself deadly incompetent at foreign policy.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2Tzn5Vh4Ow

[USS Utah]

Trump will support our troops far better than Hillary will. You never wore a uniform either but you consider yourself a military history expert. Trump never let our servicemen die while stating "what difference does it make?" Hillary has proven herself deadly incompetent at foreign policy.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2Tzn5Vh4Ow

While I have been studying military history for 30 years, I would not call myself an expert. At the risk of being immodest, I am smart and I do know a thing or two about the subject.

I wanted to go to Annapolis and become a Naval Aviator. I had neither the grades nor the eyesight. So I went down other paths. I know full well that I cannot understand what it is like to be in combat because of my lack of first hand knowledge and experience. Nonetheless, I have always sought to put myself in the boots of the soldier, I have tried to see things from their perspective, while still being fully aware of the limitations and obstacles I faced in doing so. Because of this, I think I am smart enough to say that I do not know more than the professionals who saw combat and rose through the ranks.

For the life of me I cannot think why I should expect Trump to do anything better than just about anyone you can name. I doubt whether I can trust even a single word he says, so I definitely do not feel that I can take for granted that he will do certain things, whether he says he will do them or not, just because he is running as a Republican. The man has a history of supporting Democrats, including the Clintons, yet he then runs as a Republican? Why any conservative or Republican trusts him is beyond me.

As for Benghazi, what happened there was a debacle, but not for the reasons the right and left claim. A diplomatic post that likely should have been closed months earlier -- after the assassination attempt on the British ambassador -- instead was left with obviously inadequate security. Some people in the State Department really blew it when they denied requests for more security. Whether that call went all they way up to Hillary -- or even Obama -- has not been established. It is entirely likely that a lower level official or officials made that call.

Once the attack was underway, the closest possible responders were in Tripoli, and it took them until the next morning to fly to Benghazi, where they got stuck in the airport for a few hours, before they could get to the CIA annex. No other ground forces could have gotten there sooner. The next best option were F-16s based at Aviano AB in Italy, but they did not have the tanker support to get to Benghazi and back. Therefore, no one left anybody to die. No one knew, btw, that the attack would last 13 hours when it started.

The debacle was the result of inadequate security in a post that probably should have been closed earlier. It was not about people sitting on their hands. And it definitely was not about talking points after the fact.

[Devildog]

So back at you. We know how you feel about Clinton, what is a principled decision to vote for Trump. On his own, what makes him qualified to be president?


Trump will support our country's military. He will support our country's police. He will not sell out every single thing he supposedly stands for. The media hates him and they lead the masses by the nose... don't be so easily led.

[Devildog]

USS UTAH Wrong.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/nov/16/delta-force-marine-awarded-navy-cross-fight-cia-an/

[Devildog]

I know full well that I cannot understand what it is like to be in combat because of my lack of first hand knowledge and experience. Nonetheless, I have always sought to put myself in the boots of the soldier

I think I'd like to be a fawkin astronaut. Doesn't mean shit because I'm not, and cannot relate on an equal footing no matter how much I try. But you are smart though.

[USS Utah]

USS UTAH Wrong.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/nov/16/delta-force-marine-awarded-navy-cross-fight-cia-an/

So, the Tripoli team got there a few hours sooner than my comments might have suggested, and that means I was wrong? The landed at 1 am but did not get to the annex until 5 am, in time for one of the last attacks by mortars.

The article also mentioned some people in Croatia, but they couldn't have gotten there in time, despite what the critics say.

[USS Utah]

I think I'd like to be a fawkin astronaut. Doesn't mean shit because I'm not, and cannot relate on an equal footing no matter how much I try. But you are smart though.


I believe that is what I said genius.

[Devildog]

So, the Tripoli team got there a few hours sooner than my comments might have suggested, and that means I was wrong? The landed at 1 am but did not get to the annex until 5 am, in time for one of the last attacks by mortars.

The article also mentioned some people in Croatia, but they couldn't have gotten there in time, despite what the critics say.

Where was the extra security the ambassador requested days in advance?

[USS Utah]

Where was the extra security the ambassador requested days in advance?

Some idiot at the State Department turned it down.

[Devildog]

Some idiot at the State Department turned it down.

The buck always stops at the top. It's called responsibility.

[Devildog]

I believe that is what I said genius.

I might not be as smart as you.... but I am more a "soldier" than you'll ever fucking be.

[USS Utah]

The buck always stops at the top. It's called responsibility.

While true it is still different being the one who actually made the decision.

[USS Utah]

I might not be as smart as you.... but I am more a "soldier" than you'll ever fucking be.

Dude, calm down, I never said you were dumb. I never claimed to be better than you. I never claimed to be an expert. But, sorry, I do have some self confidence and think I am pretty smart.

[Devildog]

While true it is still different being the one who actually made the decision.
Who made the decision? Oh and your ignorance of basic military understanding... couldn't be more obvious than in this specific example. See yourself how you will... but you have zero frame of reference. You earn that shit, you don't award it to yourself... go do the work.

[Devildog]

I am so sick of the sycophant Hillary goofs. Rationalize away America. If you can make a way for yourself to vote for her... then you deserve her.

[USS Utah]

Who made the decision? Oh and your ignorance of basic military understanding... couldn't be more obvious than in this specific example. See yourself how you will... but you have zero frame of reference. You earn that shit, you don't award it to yourself... go do the work.


I haven't awarded myself a damn thing. I have, however, worked very hard to learn history. I work very hard to get things right when I do research and write about history. You got a problem with that, you know where you can go.

The leader at the top is responsible for what happens in their organization (admirals and ship captains get relieved, generals not so much). But that does not mean every decision reaches the top, or that the person at the top is aware of every decision at the time they are made. The larger the organization the more that is the case. In some cases, subordinates deliberately keep information away from those at the top.

I filled out my ballot today. I wrote in a candidate for pres.

[Solon]

Alright, fellas. Take it easy.
As Michael Keaton said in ​The Other Guys, "Shake your dicks. This pissing contest is over."

[USS Utah]

Bye, Bye UB5

[Devildog]

Bye, Bye UB5

Exactly.... and zero surprise... no intestinal fortitude whatsoever... gets slightly rough? Yeah just quit and make a big show of quitting. Keep telling yourself that you understand the military. It's no surprise that you almost signed up. You don't join the Marines... you become one. One of the first lessons they sink home... never quit.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Ns2FkZNTC0

[USS Utah]

Exactly.... and zero surprise... no intestinal fortitude whatsoever... gets slightly rough? Yeah just quit. Keep telling yourself that you understand the military.

Tell yourself that if it helps.

Strangely, you're the second soldier, current or retired, who took issue with the fact that I study military history and try to put myself in the shoes of those who served. I didn't realize that was a bad thing.

Fact is, I didn't serve, I don't have a college degree, I am not a lawyer or a doctor. I clearly don't fit in here, just as I didn't at whatever cougar site preceded this one.

I am so sick of social media and discussion groups which have degenerated in the last few years to nothing but contention crap fests. The internet is where the worst thing you can do is stand up for yourself and your beliefs. Who needs that?

I don't have to accept crap from anyone.

[Devildog]

Ok USS Utah... I'm sorry. I have been being a dick. I apologize. The politics make me so mad... that isn't your fault, and I'm sorry that I put all of that on you. I hate Hillary with a passion. I do not want her to be my kids commander in chief... I don't think she deserves it.


My oldest son is in this picture of Marines.

http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww59/RuggedH2/1st%20platoon_zps4ekl8imt.jpg (http://s705.photobucket.com/user/RuggedH2/media/1st%20platoon_zps4ekl8imt.jpg.html)

[Devildog]

http://i705.photobucket.com/albums/ww59/RuggedH2/Force_zpsq9aqho6f.jpg (http://s705.photobucket.com/user/RuggedH2/media/Force_zpsq9aqho6f.jpg.html)

[Solon]

Tell yourself that if it helps.

Strangely, you're the second soldier, current or retired, who took issue with the fact that I study military history and try to put myself in the shoes of those who served. I didn't realize that was a bad thing.

Fact is, I didn't serve, I don't have a college degree, I am not a lawyer or a doctor. I clearly don't fit in here, just as I didn't at whatever cougar site preceded this one.

I am so sick of social media and discussion groups which have degenerated in the last few years to nothing but contention crap fests. The internet is where the worst thing you can do is stand up for yourself and your beliefs. Who needs that?

I don't have to accept crap from anyone.

C'mon, USS. You fit in fine. Just like Devildog fits in too.
People can disagree.

What we really need is that ASU game to get here.

[Irving Washington]

I might not be as smart as you.... but I am more a "soldier" than you'll ever fucking be.

Something that should be of interest to you. My son just got back from his sixth deployment in either Iraq or Afghanistan. He's very conservative, but says if Trump wins he will leave the Army. He could not serve with Trump as his Commander in Chief. He says a lot of his joes feel the same way. I haven't had a chance to talk to him about it, but I suspect they are pissed that Trump has basically trashed the military, saying he knows more than the generals do.

[Ma'ake]

I second the motion for USS Utah to stick around.

On yesterday's big news, I don't envy Comey, but I respect what he was trying to do in the past 2 weeks. He got lit up in a personal way by his fellow Republicans early in the summer after concluding there wasn't enough to prosecute Clinton.

When the laptop was found 2 weeks ago, he tried to give a heads up to Congressional leaders that he's not closed minded on the evidence, and would take a look at it, and Jason Chaffetz immediately used the gesture as political lighter fluid.

Trying to restore the FBI's good name, their scoured the laptop for new information, found none, and now on the public political stage, felt obligated to announce their findings, yesterday. (Hopefully none of you buy Trump's claim it's impossible to dissect that amount of data in 5 days. Hint: the same technology that makes it possible to scour that amount of data is presenting a serious challenge to our employment landscape.)

Comey's a good man who tried to do the right thing, and got sucked into the political tornado of this year's campaign.

I could offer my opinion on Chaffetz, but less rancor is what this nation needs, IMV.

[NorthwestUteFan]

I agree that Comey is not necessarily the bad guy here. But he does need to figure out what is happening inside the FBI. In particular it will be interesting to learn more info on the potentially hacked Twitter account that released misinformation about an investigation into Clinton. The Hatch Act applies to any data release affecting election, regardless of intent.

And it is also ironic that Jason 'Planned Parenthood Killed My Parents' Chaffetz also uses a private email server, as do a large number of other elected or appointed people on Capitol Hill. Further evidence that you just can't trust a friggin byu football player.

[LA Ute]

Comey's had quite a ride. He's gone from a hero to Hillary's supporters, to a tool of the GOP, to once again being a hero and wise man. Meanwhile, the former prosecutors and former FBI agents I know tell me that in their experience his behavior has simply been bizarre. Some of them are Dems and are happy with what he's done but they concede the way he's done it has been weird.

[Rocker Ute]

It has been weird and bungled in my opinion. I think I mentioned that he is in an impossible spot: Wait to announce you've found more emails after the election and be accused of suppressing info, do it before and be accused of swaying the election. I am glad they reviewed all of it and came out beforehand with a verdict although it is probably too late. The announcement put Trump back on the rails.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Solon]

C'mon, USS. You fit in fine. Just like Devildog fits in too.
People can disagree.

What we really need is that ASU game to get here.

By the way, the idea that the history of some kind of group can only truly be "done" by people who belong to the group is not only silly, it's stupid. Sometimes it takes outside perspective to really do a topic right. I see this sometimes when women decry men for trying write about women's history, or non-Greeks investigating ancient Greek history (nevermind that modern Greeks have about as much ethnically/culturally/religiously in common with the ancient Greeks as I do). In fact, arguably the most important ancient-history breakthrough in the last 75 years was achieved by an architect named Michael Ventris in the 1950s. He deciphered Linear B, the language of Bronze Age Greece.

On the other hand, insiders have a leg-up in understanding contexts and rationale that outsiders do not. Experience matters. But it's not necessarily the end-all. I would value opinions on Benghazi & everything else in this category from folks with both military and non-military backgrounds.

This isn't a shot at Devildog (the Benghazi stuff is far too recent to be 'historical', in my opinion), but just a reminder for everyone to be friendly. People can disagree and still both be smart people (this was, after all, the fundamental achievement of the US Constitution, which contravened every Enlightenment trend towards an absolute, empirical answer and built in Compromise & Amendments from the get-go).

Politics sucks.

Let's crush ASU.

[Rocker Ute]

I've joked that the Internet has provided us with all of the world's knowledge and none of its wisdom.

I really think that is true. I'm no historian but the books I read that I enjoy and understand most are the ones that not only provide facts but context and perspective.

I think I've shared here about years ago visiting the Dachau concentration camp when I was in college. It was a life-changing experience for me but the disturbing part was seeing that the camp was right in town. I'd always assumed these atrocities happened out of sight of the General public.

So I came home wonder how in the world that could even be. I'm of German descent, how could my people sit by and watch that? Context and perspective helped me understand that a bit. Fear and propaganda over the course of years is how it is achieved.

It doesn't necessarily forgive the people for it, but it does help understand.

(As an aside, what I've learned about that black time in history is what makes me so afraid of Trump).

Point is, I agree with Solon, all perspectives can be welcome.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sullyute]

I clearly don't fit in here...

USS Utah, you fit in great here. Stick around. I like your insights.

[pangloss]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2Tzn5Vh4Ow

The youtube of Hannity was from a broadcast a few days after the attack. It shows a couple pictures of Ambassador Stevens' body. Hannity and Fox, with no basis, said the pictures were of Stevens body which was later 'dragged through the streets of Benghazi'.

Laura Ingraham said "The ambassador's body was dragged through the street. Okay? It was beyond heartbreaking and beyond infuriating."

She was right, it would be infuriating. If it were true. It is not.

The Senate Select Committee report, the report of the Accountability Review Board chaired by Admiral Mullen and Tom Pickering, and the report of Republican controlled House Oversight and Government Reform Committee all agree on this point - the ambassador's body was taken by 'good Samaritans' from the compound to a hospital in an attempt to save his life. CNN spoke to the Libyans who found Stevens. The video is of those people pulling his body through the window of the building where he died of smoke inhalation.

So, you have three government reports and an independent press account that diametrically contract Hannity's attempt to politicize the event without waiting to learn the facts.

That video in particular and Hannity in general are offensive.

[pangloss]

It has been weird and bungled in my opinion. I think I mentioned that he is in an impossible spot: Wait to announce you've found more emails after the election and be accused of suppressing info, do it before and be accused of swaying the election. I am glad they reviewed all of it and came out beforehand with a verdict although it is probably too late. The announcement put Trump back on the rails.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would very much like to know if Director Comey made courtesy calls the the Congressional committee chairmen informing them of the PC and email. I would like to know if the chairmen pressured Comey into issuing the original letter.

I want to believe Comey knew issuing the letter so close to the election violated the established practice of staying out of elections, would cause the shit storm that resulted, and would harm his reputation and the reputation of the FBI. Comey is no fool. I think it is very plausible that he tried to make courtesy calls to the chairmen to cover his post-election ass, and one or more of the chairmen told him to put it in writing or he, the chairman, would leak it. It's the sleazy sort of thing my congressman, Jason Chaffetz, chairman of the House oversight committee would do.

[Brian]

I clearly don't fit in here

I hope you'll stick around. I, and many others here, believe in a big tent Ute family.

[pangloss]

Predict the election

Pick the winner and the electoral vote count. Tie breaker, winner's %

My prediction: Clinton wins, 322 electoral votes. 49.3%

OK, so no one wants to predict the outcome for a sporting diversion.

I'll add a prize. I will give at least $20 to the winner's favorite tax deductible charity. If I like the charity, the prize might be more than $20.

[LA Ute]

Nothing I have expected to happen in this presidential election cycle has happened, so I am abstaining from any further predictions.

[Solon]

Nothing I have expected to happen in this presidential election cycle has happened, so I am abstaining from any further predictions.

In the words of Clubber Lang: "My prediction? Pain."

[Ma'ake]

I would very much like to know if Director Comey made courtesy calls the the Congressional committee chairmen informing them of the PC and email. I would like to know if the chairmen pressured Comey into issuing the original letter.

I want to believe Comey knew issuing the letter so close to the election violated the established practice of staying out of elections, would cause the shit storm that resulted, and would harm his reputation and the reputation of the FBI. Comey is no fool. I think it is very plausible that he tried to make courtesy calls to the chairmen to cover his post-election ass, and one or more of the chairmen told him to put it in writing or he, the chairman, would leak it. It's the sleazy sort of thing my congressman, Jason Chaffetz, chairman of the House oversight committee would do.

Reportedly the FBI has some serious internal division, specifically on Hillary. The FBI is composed of a lot of conservative people, which is expected. Supposedly the field agents are 90+% white, a big majority male. Philosophically, and from a gung-ho "let us find wrongdoing!" morale standpoint, it's not unreasonable to think a large chunk of the FBI hasn't liked Hillary for a long time.

Part of Comey's letter to Congress may have been to head off leaks from within the FBI. No idea if it's true, but this morning on MSNBC they said it's believed there are anti-Hillary folks in the FBI who've been whispering things to Guiliani.

[NorthwestUteFan]

OK, so no one wants to predict the outcome for a sporting diversion.

I'll add a prize. I will give at least $20 to the winner's favorite tax deductible charity. If I like the charity, the prize might be more than $20.
I also called 322 for Hillary. Not sure on the percentage.

Also, Hillary wins Florida and we all get to change the channel by 7:30 pm Pacific when the FL polls close (because TheDonald can't win without Florida, period.)

[NorthwestUteFan]

Reportedly the FBI has some serious internal division, specifically on Hillary. The FBI is composed of a lot of conservative people, which is expected. Supposedly the field agents are 90+% white, a big majority male. Philosophically, and from a gung-ho "let us find wrongdoing!" morale standpoint, it's not unreasonable to think a large chunk of the FBI hasn't liked Hillary for a long time.

Part of Comey's letter to Congress may have been to head off leaks from within the FBI. No idea if it's true, but this morning on MSNBC they said it's believed there are anti-Hillary folks in the FBI who've been whispering things to Guiliani.
The Hatch Act is going to become extremely painful for a number of agents in the NY office. Actions by federal employees that influence elections (whether intentional or not) should lead to immediate termination and a permanent ban on any future federal employment.

[concerned]

I also called 322 for Hillary. Not sure on the percentage.

Also, Hillary wins Florida and we all get to change the channel by 7:30 pm Pacific when the FL polls close (because TheDonald can't win without Florida, period.)

Say what? the fla polls close at 10:30 local time? Actually, they close at 4 pm pacific.

[LA Ute]

No idea if it's true, but this morning on MSNBC they said it's believed there are anti-Hillary folks in the FBI who've been whispering things to Guiliani.

Oh, please, guys. I mean, I love you all, but if I were saying stuff like this you'd digitally roast me. And rightly so!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ma'ake]

Oh, please, guys. I mean, I love you all, but if I were saying stuff like this you'd digitally roast me. And rightly so!


A digital roasting is painful.

Point taken, point taken! Ouch ! !

;)

I added that as context for why Comey would have felt pressure to violate policy and give Congress the heads up on a potential new source of information.

Comey's gotta be hatin' life, these days...

[LA Ute]

This will be controversial with some of you poor less-enlightened slobs, but I think it is a very interesting analysis from Commentary, a conservative journal that has consistently taken A NeverTrump position:

*****

The Right’s Unhealthy Media Mania (https://www.commentarymagazine.com/politics-ideas/conservatives-republicans/the-right-unhealthy-media-bias-mania/)

NOAH ROTHMAN (https://www.commentarymagazine.com/author/noah-rothman/) / NOV. 7, 2016 (https://www.commentarymagazine.com/politics-ideas/conservatives-republicans/the-right-unhealthy-media-bias-mania/)

It is a tragic irony that the American right, a group that fancies itself finely attuned to media bias, has been so easily manipulated by the political press.

2016 was the year the left played conservatives like fiddles. Leaked emails (http://townhall.com/tipsheet/jasonhopkins/2016/10/11/leaked-emails-reveal-clinton-team-feared-rubio-n2230810) from Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s account make it plain that liberals feared the GOP’s more conventional presidential candidates and were eager to face Donald Trump in a general election. A thorough insider account of Clinton’s operation documents each time her team sighed with relief (http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/11/hillary-clinton-2016-donald-trump-214428) as one Republican threat after another fell to Trump. Even after the celebrity candidate became the Republican Party’s presumptive nominee, Clinton’s orbit backup plans ready if the RNC refused to allow such a clear risk to its institutional integrity to take the reins. Team Clinton’s fear that the American right would at some point pull back from the brink was unfounded.As studies (http://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/media-study-trump-helped-clinton-hurt-224300) have confirmed (http://www.niemanlab.org/2016/01/how-much-influence-does-the-media-really-have-over-elections-digging-into-the-data/), Donald Trump made up for his lack of a core Republican constituency and presidential credentials by luxuriating in a deluge of unfiltered, positive media coverage. Candidate popularity and the amount of attention they receive from the press proved closely correlated (http://www.niemanlab.org/2016/01/how-much-influence-does-the-media-really-have-over-elections-digging-into-the-data/) in 2016. This was not a phenomenon limited entirely to mainstream press outlets. Center-right media now wields considerable influence, too. By the time Trump faced a rump rebellion in Cleveland, the threat of a uniform backlash against the Republican National Committee from conservative media outlets was enough to cow the RNC into playing blocking tackle for Trump.The 2016 presidential election cycle has been characterized not by media not reporting on outcomes but shaping them. Yet media do not have the power to shape events unless they have millions of unwitting grassroots accomplices. The right’s unhealthy focus on media has become all-consuming. It blots out the sun. It means long-term strategic political thinking takes a backseat to gaming out fleeting and banal news cycles. Identifying and stewing over media bias have become a Republican pastime and, like any addiction, deadly if unchecked.

A healthy skepticism of mainstream reporting that once guided conservatives in an advantageous way has transformed into an all-consuming sense of victimization by the press. This condition has led Republicans to go chasing after candidates they believe can navigate a fraught media minefield rather than those who best exemplify their values and can communicate those values effectively. When it comes to media, the American political right can’t make up its mind. Do they reject it entirely, or do they compete against it? Do they undermine it from within, or do they seek out voices that are capable of speaking over the heads of the press? Sometimes, the answer is all of the above.

Conservatives aren’t imagining things. Media bias is real. An industry devoted to identifying and checking that bias in both the conservative and mainstream press has evolved from a niche to profitable venture. A near myopic obsession with countering that bias has, however, become unhealthy. In observing that selectivity, tone, and omission so often favor narratives favorable to the left, conservatives have given themselves permission to view all reporting in mainstream press outlets with suspicion. In so doing, they’ve given themselves license to escape into alternate realities.

This brooding preoccupation has led to a sad state of affairs. Some conservatives have retreated into bubbles (https://www.commentarymagazine.com/american-society/propaganda-conservative-trump-year-that-knowledge-died/), in which they are provided with comforting misinformation from disreputable foreign sources, which are more than happy to confirm their most antisocial biases. Conservatives who have not sworn off the mainstream political press entirely, and reality along with it, are not rewarded for calling out bias in a nuanced and circumspect fashion. Only garment-rending hyperbole rises above the din and is rewarded with clicks, eyeballs, met quotas, and job retention. Republicans have lost sight of the fact that media are, well, just the medium(s) through which a message is disseminated. In concentrating on the messenger and the medium, the right forgot about the message and lost the plot.

The left is not immune to persecution complexes. The nascent industry of hyperbolic liberal media criticism presages a paranoid and self-destructive future for the left under the unpopular and scandal-prone Hillary Clinton. The right can, however, escape this self-destructive cycle by recalling that the mainstream political press is a spent force. Its influence has been diluted by the proliferation of venues. Republicans managed to recapture Congress, a majority of governorships, and 910 legislative seats in the same media environment they find so punishing today. If, however, the right is determined to obsess over and defer unduly to media’s influence moving forward as they did in 2016, they’ll find this self-imposed handicap debilitating.

[USS Utah]

Nothing I have expected to happen in this presidential election cycle has happened, so I am abstaining from any further predictions.

I expected Hillary to get her party's nomination. I have been expecting her to win by at least the same margin Obama did 4 years ago (a part of me wants Trump to lose by more than Romney did).

I expected Cruz to get the GOP nomination. Thanks to the latest round of the email thing, I am worried that Trump might actually pull this out, despite the incredibly incompetent campaign he has run.

[NorthwestUteFan]

Say what? the fla polls close at 10:30 local time? Actually, they close at 4 pm pacific.
Oops, you are correct. I meant the FL polls will close at 7 EST, and the state will be called by 7:30. (I was speaking from the context of different time zones but didn't move the time appropriately)

[concerned]

An interesting take from Stuart Stevens

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/11/07/the-flat-earth-set-helped-donald-trump-hijack-the-gop-and-crash-it-into-the-ground.html

[NorthwestUteFan]

I expected Hillary to get her party's nomination. I have been expecting her to win by at least the same margin Obama did 4 years ago (a part of me wants Trump to lose by more than Romney did).

I expected Cruz to get the GOP nomination. Thanks to the latest round of the email thing, I am worried that Trump might actually pull this out, despite the incredibly incompetent campaign he has run.
The 2012 electoral college numbers were a shellacking, but iirc in the actual breakdown the actual real-world difference averaged around 65 votes per precinct. (Battleground states were closer, 'solid' states had a much larger separation).

And please stick around. DevilDog was letting his cult-like military indoctrination speak for him, and wasn't engaging his brain. He is usually much better than that.

Hillary will likely walk away with this one. But it is up to the voters to hold her feet to the fire and get things done.

[USS Utah]

The final polls as found at Real Clear Politics:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/

[Rocker Ute]

So Pangloss, I walked into work today and said to a group of people, "An expert I know (you) has Clinton taking 322 electorate votes to win in a veritable landslide." The reaction was interesting because most everyone kind of shrugged it off, but the handful of Trump supporters seriously began to panic. Kind of weird to see.

Anyway, I'd bet against you, but I think you've got it about right.

[pangloss]

So Pangloss, I walked into work today and said to a group of people, "An expert I know (you) has Clinton taking 322 electorate votes to win in a veritable landslide." The reaction was interesting because most everyone kind of shrugged it off, but the handful of Trump supporters seriously began to panic. Kind of weird to see.

Anyway, I'd bet against you, but I think you've got it about right.I can't even get people to bet with my money.

538 is forecasting Clinton 301. If Florida, N.Carolina and Nevada go the other way and one big surprise, then Trump could win.

[Dwight Schr-Ute]

My 9 year old brought this fun little civics chart gem home from fourth grade today. Pretty even handed stuff.

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20161108/ed3fae2e4f2a369124cf8f9772af3d1d.jpg
http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20161108/183b72b15b8cb1c221d03158dbae8d1d.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Utah]

My 9 year old brought this fun little civics chart gem home from fourth grade today. Pretty even handed stuff.

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20161108/ed3fae2e4f2a369124cf8f9772af3d1d.jpg
http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20161108/183b72b15b8cb1c221d03158dbae8d1d.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Was that written on cougar board? Yikes. Pretty right sided, no?

[UtahsMrSports]

Well the big day is finally here.......

My ideal scenario....(given reality)

-clinton wins by enough that anyone claiming voter fraud is laughed into oblivion.

-republicans keep house and Senate (given a choice, I opt for gridlock over freedom for one side to ram things through.)

-trump concedes and heads off to do reality tv and becomes just another ego maniac. No talk of rigged, voter fraud, taking up arms for a coup, just 'i lost....but now I get my Twitter back!")'

Yeah, I reread my list here and lol'd also.

[concerned]

I can't even get people to bet with my money.

538 is forecasting Clinton 301. If Florida, N.Carolina and Nevada go the other way and one big surprise, then Trump could win.

Clinton 299. 48%cm

[Ma'ake]

A great amount of the anxiety that drives people to support Trump - and Sanders - is fear of change, particularly economic disruption.

Everyone who is cognizant about current events knows that automation is coming to cars, and to trucks. Driving trucks is the biggest employer of men without college educations.

Truck drivers vs Technology will be a massive social, economic and business issue, for the next decade, symbolic of broader technological disruptions that have the potential to accelerate on a broader basis, as companies chase cost-savings. (If/when demand and aggregate demand stalls or decreases - due to less buying power from displaced workers - the drive to lower costs via technology may intensify, a nasty feedback cycle.)

We'll see a variety of policy ideas on how to deal with the disruptive edge of technology's double-edge sword. Marxian economists see this as a serious threat to capitalism, as rising inequalities lead to social upheaval, slow growth, growing investment bubbles, etc.

As Teddy Roosevelt saw the need to reform US Capitalism and avoid what was occurring in Russia, I think Americans would reject wholesale socialism... but the conditions also foment and make possible autocratic dictatorships.

When the dust settles from this campaign, how Congress and the President respond to this issue will be pivotal.

[UTEopia]

When the dust settles from this campaign, how Congress and the President respond to this issue will be pivotal.

My fear is that regardless of who wins the election, the rhetoric will prevail over meaningful dialogue, vilification of the opposition as opposed to finding solutions to real problems will be the primary goal and they will not be able to address problems that have existed for the past 20 years let alone those that are on the horizon.

[Applejack]

My 9 year old brought this fun little civics chart gem home from fourth grade today. Pretty even handed stuff.

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20161108/ed3fae2e4f2a369124cf8f9772af3d1d.jpg
http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20161108/183b72b15b8cb1c221d03158dbae8d1d.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is appalling. The grammar!

[LA Ute]

I was thinking this morning of the two types of people for whom I have no patience anymore: Hillary supporters who are simply baffled that anyone finds her dishonest or corrupt; and Trump supporters who begin every sentence about him with "I know he's got flaws, but...." I will not miss having to endure either one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Ute]

I wish the 80s really could have their foreign policy back.

Nato puts 300,000 ground troops on 'high alert' as tensions with Russia mount

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/nato-ground-troops-high-alert-russia-tensions-baltic-latvia-lithuania-estonia-a7402136.html



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pangloss]

My 9 year old brought this fun little civics chart gem home from fourth grade today. Pretty even handed stuff.

http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20161108/ed3fae2e4f2a369124cf8f9772af3d1d.jpg
http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20161108/183b72b15b8cb1c221d03158dbae8d1d.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's stunning.

Where's your 9 year old's school? Is it a public school or charter? Did the author attend that peculiar institution in Utah County?

[Ma'ake]

My fear is that regardless of who wins the election, the rhetoric will prevail over meaningful dialogue, vilification of the opposition as opposed to finding solutions to real problems will be the primary goal and they will not be able to address problems that have existed for the past 20 years let alone those that are on the horizon.

Based on everything to this point, it's not unreasonable to see this as the expected result.

I'm hopeful the shock to both Dems and Republicans - in the form of Sanders and Trump supporters - will spur serious policy thinking about the underlying economic shifts that led to this election.... because they're not going away, they're only going to intensify.

[Irving Washington]

My fear is that regardless of who wins the election, the rhetoric will prevail over meaningful dialogue, vilification of the opposition as opposed to finding solutions to real problems will be the primary goal and they will not be able to address problems that have existed for the past 20 years let alone those that are on the horizon.
This election has left me feeling very discouraged about the state of our country. The Hillary nomination demonstrates that the Democratic Party has some real problems to address. On the other hand, the Trump candidacy reflects serious societal problems we knew existed, but Trump has given them legitimacy - racism, anti-ethnicity, anti-semitism and anti-Islam, etc. Congress will be more dysfunctional than ever. Now stifling anything a president tries, regardless of the issue, is the norm. Unless the Dems take control of the Senate we may not have a new USSC justice for two years. With a Hillary victory we will see a witchhunt like we saw during Bill's presidency.
Not looking forward to it.

[Utah]

I think Hillary will go full on Bill on us, reach across the aisle, start meaningful dialogue and actually get something done.

That would be an amazing start.

[LA Ute]

It begins.

Restart GOP, a group of conservative luminaries, is already touching off debates about the party’s future.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441836/restart-gop-new-group-starts-post-election-gop-conflict



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[concerned]

It begins.

Restart GOP, a group of conservative luminaries, is already touching off debates about the party’s future.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441836/restart-gop-new-group-starts-post-election-gop-conflict


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As Y.B. put it, deja vu all over again.

[LA Ute]

As Y.B. put it, deja vu all over again.

Except we've never seen anything like Trump before.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[concerned]

Except we've never seen anything like Trump before.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Well, they did an autopsy 4 years ago, and the primary candidates and voters rejected its recommendations.

[LA Ute]

Well, they did an autopsy 4 years ago, and the primary candidates and voters rejected its recommendations.

Which resulted in the GOP landslide of 2014. Maybe those voters are on to something.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[concerned]

Which resulted in the GOP landslide of 2014. Maybe those voters are on to something.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


i think they are on to something. Tell them to keep at it.

[Irving Washington]

It begins.

Restart GOP, a group of conservative luminaries, is already touching off debates about the party’s future.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441836/restart-gop-new-group-starts-post-election-gop-conflict



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Doing what they're talking about will take incredible courage.

[Solon]

Doing what they're talking about will take incredible courage.

Just when I thought that today's bull-crap could not get any worse, this happens (http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/08/news/toblerone-chocolate-shape-change/index.html).

Armageddon is here. Run for your lives!

[Rocker Ute]

Somebody posted a video of someone burning a Trump effigy that included a slow motion capture of the face melting off and I realize the left and the right really aren't all that different.

[LA Ute]

While my Democrat friends are thinking about what the GOP needs to do to reform itself, you might think about your own party's needs:

*****

Last Night Was the High-Point of the Democratic Party’s Cool

by CHARLES C. W. COOKE November 8, 2016 12:45 PM

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/441921/obama-about-retire-and-leave-democrats-old-white-and-out-ideas

Barack Obama, Jon Bon Jovi, and Bruce Springsteen held a rally in Philadelphia last night. At the end, Hillary Clinton showed up and ruined the vibe. As pretty much everybody noted when the images started swimming through Twitter, it looked pretty cool...

Neat, huh? But, watching it this morning, a thought occurred to me: This might be the last period for a while during which the Democratic party is cool. In two months, Barack Obama will be an ex-president, and, if today’s polls are correct, his replacement will be a septuagenarian Nixonian whose aides have spent the best part of three decades trying to make people like her. Although President Obama has been a poor salesman for his ideology — there are few ideas he has made more popular during his presidency — he is generally liked and admired, and he has been for a long time. Hillary is not, and nobody seems to be able to do anything about it. That matters.

Clinton aside, the Democratic party is in an odd position. Who are its leaders? Elizabeth Warren, one of the “radicals of the future,” is 67. Bernie Sanders, that inspirer of youth, is 75. Nancy Pelosi, the would-be Speaker of the House, is 76. Chuck Schumer, the would-be Senate Majority Leader, is 65. All of them are old. All of them are white. All of them are out of ideas. None of them is Barack Obama. The White House to one side, the last six years have taken a serious toll on the Democrats’ bench. Looking at the party’s future prospects, a handful of names come to mind — Cory Booker, Kirsten Gilibrand, Tammy Duckworth, the eternally over-hyped Castro Brothers — but one cannot help but be impressed by how limited the selection is.

The Republicans, by contrast, are younger, more diverse, and come from a broader collection of states. The GOP is never going to be cool — a certain squareness is in the nature of conservatism — and, if the party continues as it has this year, it is never going to be taken seriously, either. But if it does decide to change, it seems well-set to do so nevertheless. Who are its leaders? The Senate Majority Leader is 74, so we can put him in the same camp as Warren, Sanders, Clinton, and co. But Paul Ryan, the Speaker of the House, is 46. Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz, the runners up in this year’s primaries, are both 45. And, going forward, the GOP has a strong range of younger guns just waiting to take the reins. Among them are: Cory Gardner (42), Tim Scott (51), Nikki Haley (44), Susanna Martinez (57), Tom Cotton (39), Dan Sullivan (51), Ben Sasse (44), Joni Ernst (46), Rand Paul (53), Scott Walker (49), Brian Sandoval (53) — and, for now, Kelly Ayotte (48). The oldest governor in the country is a California Democrat; the youngest is a Southern Republican. The oldest senator in the country is a California Democrat; the youngest is a Southern Republican. All is not as it seems in paradise.

*****

If Hillary captures the White House for 4-8 years that, will give the Democrats a chance to develop some serious talent -- she will get to appoint 3000+ people to executive-level jobs, but it will take those folks a while to develop resumes as elective office holders (most of them will go out into lobbying, business, consulting or academia after they leave her administration).

[Utah]

While my Democrat friends are thinking about what the GOP needs to do to reform itself, you might think about your own party's needs:

*****

Last Night Was the High-Point of the Democratic Party’s Cool

by CHARLES C. W. COOKE November 8, 2016 12:45 PM

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/441921/obama-about-retire-and-leave-democrats-old-white-and-out-ideas

Barack Obama, Jon Bon Jovi, and Bruce Springsteen held a rally in Philadelphia last night. At the end, Hillary Clinton showed up and ruined the vibe. As pretty much everybody noted when the images started swimming through Twitter, it looked pretty cool...

Neat, huh? But, watching it this morning, a thought occurred to me: This might be the last period for a while during which the Democratic party is cool. In two months, Barack Obama will be an ex-president, and, if today’s polls are correct, his replacement will be a septuagenarian Nixonian whose aides have spent the best part of three decades trying to make people like her. Although President Obama has been a poor salesman for his ideology — there are few ideas he has made more popular during his presidency — he is generally liked and admired, and he has been for a long time. Hillary is not, and nobody seems to be able to do anything about it. That matters.

Clinton aside, the Democratic party is in an odd position. Who are its leaders? Elizabeth Warren, one of the “radicals of the future,” is 67. Bernie Sanders, that inspirer of youth, is 75. Nancy Pelosi, the would-be Speaker of the House, is 76. Chuck Schumer, the would-be Senate Majority Leader, is 65. All of them are old. All of them are white. All of them are out of ideas. None of them is Barack Obama. The White House to one side, the last six years have taken a serious toll on the Democrats’ bench. Looking at the party’s future prospects, a handful of names come to mind — Cory Booker, Kirsten Gilibrand, Tammy Duckworth, the eternally over-hyped Castro Brothers — but one cannot help but be impressed by how limited the selection is.

The Republicans, by contrast, are younger, more diverse, and come from a broader collection of states. The GOP is never going to be cool — a certain squareness is in the nature of conservatism — and, if the party continues as it has this year, it is never going to be taken seriously, either. But if it does decide to change, it seems well-set to do so nevertheless. Who are its leaders? The Senate Majority Leader is 74, so we can put him in the same camp as Warren, Sanders, Clinton, and co. But Paul Ryan, the Speaker of the House, is 46. Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz, the runners up in this year’s primaries, are both 45. And, going forward, the GOP has a strong range of younger guns just waiting to take the reins. Among them are: Cory Gardner (42), Tim Scott (51), Nikki Haley (44), Susanna Martinez (57), Tom Cotton (39), Dan Sullivan (51), Ben Sasse (44), Joni Ernst (46), Rand Paul (53), Scott Walker (49), Brian Sandoval (53) — and, for now, Kelly Ayotte (48). The oldest governor in the country is a California Democrat; the youngest is a Southern Republican. The oldest senator in the country is a California Democrat; the youngest is a Southern Republican. All is not as it seems in paradise.

*****

If Hillary captures the White House for 4-8 years that, will give the Democrats a chance to develop some serious talent -- she will get to appoint 3000+ people to executive-level jobs, but it will take those folks a while to develop resumes as elective office holders (most of them will go out into lobbying, business, consulting or academia after they leave her administration).

So, instead of new ideas, new ways to continue America's greatness, republican'S ideas have gone from "stop Obama" to, "we are younger, therefore cooler."

Smh.

[NorthwestUteFan]

So, instead of new ideas, new ways to continue America's greatness, republican'S ideas have gone from "stop Obama" to, "we are younger, therefore cooler."

Smh.
The Democrat platform this year is the best in a generation (Thanks to Bernie). The challenge will to get people to call their Congresscritters' offices to hold their feet to the fire to get it done. There is a chance to make positive changes in society to make life better for all today, and well into the future.


Republicans can either come to the negotiation table and help out, or mindlessly resist everything like the last 8 years. And if they can't root out the Alt-Right from the party they will end up nominating an even more dangerous demagogue next time around.

[LA Ute]

So, instead of new ideas, new ways to continue America's greatness, republican'S ideas have gone from "stop Obama" to, "we are younger, therefore cooler."

Smh.


The Democrat platform this year is the best in a generation (Thanks to Bernie). The challenge will to get people to call their Congresscritters' offices to hold their feet to the fire to get it done. There is a chance to make positive changes in society to make life better for all today, and well into the future.

Republicans can either come to the negotiation table and help out, or mindlessly resist everything like the last 8 years. And if they can't root out the Alt-Right from the party they will end up nominating an even more dangerous demagogue next time around.

You've both missed my post's point (http://www.utahby5.com/showthread.php?1801-2016-Presidential-Election&p=87940&viewfull=1#post87940) entirely. But I still love you as my hopelessly misguided Ute brothers.

[Utah]

You've both missed my post's point (http://www.utahby5.com/showthread.php?1801-2016-Presidential-Election&p=87940&viewfull=1#post87940) entirely. But I still love you as my hopelessly misguided Ute brothers.

No, we got your point. The Democrats are getting old and now the Republicans can show how hip they are. Pretty bad.

Here's the ultimate irony:

This country is still a majority center right.

[LA Ute]

No, we got your point. The Democrats are getting old and now the Republicans can show how hip they are. Pretty bad.

Here's the ultimate irony:

This country is still a majority center right.

And the GOP controls many more governorships and state legislatures than the Dems. So we are not dead yet! And Rubio has been reelected so I have something to live for! :rockon:

[U-Ute]

Oh my. Looking close!

[U-Ute]

It'll be funny if Clinton wins by less than 6 EV and Utah votes for McMullin.

[U-Ute]

Silver called all 50 states in 2012.

796186194707120128

[Ma'ake]

Regardless of who wins, Amerexit is being manifested. Dow futures down 500, so far. Other global markets taking a beating, as well.

It's looking like some amount of the Tom Bradley effect in polling, people not admitting they intended to vote for Trump because they feared social ostracization, but buying into the Strongman assurances that only he could make America great again.

The Brits who voted to exit the EU were voting with their gut, not their brains. People who feel they've been left behind get angry, not more rational. They distrust smart people as being swindlers, or just selfish. My German buddy says the same thing is happening there - people in the country don't feel the vibe with more cosmopolitan, prosperous urban areas involved in the global economy.

The political axis is changing, its not about size and role of government, but changing to "protect us from forces foreign to our nation's core population."

[mpfunk]

We live in a racist, misogynist, xenophobic, and homophobic society. The fact that an admitted sexual predator may walk away our president tonight is terrifying. The fact that it is close is terrifying.

I fear for this country today like I have never done in the past.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[Ma'ake]

We live in a racist, misogynist, xenophobic, and homophobic society. The fact that an admitted sexual predator may walk away our president tonight is terrifying. The fact that it is close is terrifying.

I fear for this country today like I have never done in the past.


I'd like to see Pew level break down of Trump voters, though I'm not sure many would be willing to answer the questions. But we had 60% of college educated white voters in Florida go for Trump? We could ask detailed, nuanced questions to find complex answers, or we could assume the simple: they wanted a strong, white, male leader who wasn't afraid to insult minorities and women. Trump the gorilla alpha male resonated with their hearts. Our primate natures are uncomfortable to see.

[Irving Washington]

We live in a racist, misogynist, xenophobic, and homophobic society. The fact that an admitted sexual predator may walk away our president tonight is terrifying. The fact that it is close is terrifying.

I fear for this country today like I have never done in the past.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
I think you're overstating it. The are those elements, but not the majority. What's troubling is that those smaller elements collectively have found real influence like they haven't for a long, long time. You can say that misogyny and homophobia have had significant power, but the rest has been kind of buried. I'll wince even more now when people say we've moved past our racial intolerance. It's scary.

[Utah]

Regardless of who wins, Amerexit is being manifested. Dow futures down 500, so far. Other global markets taking a beating, as well.

It's looking like some amount of the Tom Bradley effect in polling, people not admitting they intended to vote for Trump because they feared social ostracization, but buying into the Strongman assurances that only he could make America great again.

The Brits who voted to exit the EU were voting with their gut, not their brains. People who feel they've been left behind get angry, not more rational. They distrust smart people as being swindlers, or just selfish. My German buddy says the same thing is happening there - people in the country don't feel the vibe with more cosmopolitan, prosperous urban areas involved in the global economy.

The political axis is changing, its not about size and role of government, but changing to "protect us from forces foreign to our nation's core population."

I heard somewhere that when people are presented with facts against their point of view, most double down on their incorrect views.

We humans are weird.

[LA Ute]

Holy....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sullyute]

I am speechless.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

[Irving Washington]

It's looking like the Democrats, who need to make some significant changes, will be in a great position to do so. The Republicans, who need to make even more changes, will be in a very difficult position to do so.

[LA Ute]

It's looking like the Democrats, who need to make some significant changes, will be in a great position to do so. The Republicans, who need to make even more changes, will be in a very difficult position to do so.

Well, with Trump as the head of the GOP that's a pretty good prediction. We'll just have to see. Since I've been wrong about EVERYTHING this time around I think I'll just shut up and watch.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Ute]

:blink:


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[LA Ute]

Speaking of people being wrong:

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/clinton-voters-arent-just-voting-against-trump/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mpfunk]

It is sad day in our country. Tonight the person I care about most is less safe. That is the worst part of this outcome.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[NorthwestUteFan]

Amazing. The Crimean Peninsula should be very, very worried.

[NorthwestUteFan]

Well, with Trump as the head of the GOP that's a pretty good prediction. We'll just have to see. Since I've been wrong about EVERYTHING this time around I think I'll just shut up and watch.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I trust you will work your little heart out to find somebody to beat him in the Primary in a few short years.

[chrisrenrut]

My one consolation in seeing trump win was to see a drunk Devildog victory post. Where are you DD?

[LA Ute]

I think one of Trump's first acts as president should be to pardon Hillary Clinton. It would be a magnanimous, unifying act and would help put the rotten nastiness of this campaign behind us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[chrisrenrut]

I think one of Trump's first acts as president should be to pardon Hillary Clinton. It would be a magnanimous, unifying act and would help put the rotten nastiness of this campaign behind us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You don't think Obama will do that on his way out?

[Rocker Ute]

Dear America, have you lost your damn mind? We've just entrusted our county and by virtue of that the world to a man who couldn't be entrusted with Twitter.

The Onion sums it up: "America elects first black-hearted president."

We deserve everything we're gonna get.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sullyute]

:suicide:

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

[Rocker Ute]

**Searches Constitution for "mulligan" provision**


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sullyute]

I don't understand how people want change so bad in Washington that they are willing to elect Donald freaking Trump, yet those same people re-elect the same senators and representatives who have made Washington such a mess. We are so dumb.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

[Sullyute]

Looking at who Trump surrounded himself with during his campaign should scare us $hitless about who will be in his cabinet and who he will appoint to the supreme court (mike lee was on his short list). This is crazy.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

[Sullyute]

The electorial college needs to go. One person, one vote.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

[Sullyute]

If you can't tell... I am losing my $!#@* right now.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

[Ma'ake]

Well, *that* escalated quickly:

http://www.ibtimes.com/what-calexit-california-considers-leaving-us-after-trump-win-2444019

#CalExit


I think one of Trump's first acts as president should be to pardon Hillary Clinton. It would be a magnanimous, unifying act and would help put the rotten nastiness of this campaign behind us.


Pardon her from *what*? A pre-emptive blanket pardon from further investigations? Donald risks appearing as a cave-in to his own supporters, who stood in line for many hours to hear the man, if he doesn't either take her into custody, or exile her.

I told the wife it's far more likely that Trump will quickly issue a number of pardons... to himself. Trump University suit? Done. Miss Utah and others with their sexual assault stories? There will be an Executive Order to silence them. "The unity and stability of the nation necessitate it. There has been too much rancor, we need to move forward."

I'm listening to Trump's post-election speech, which clearly wasn't written by him.

How long does anyone think the gracious Donald Trump will last? As long as it takes for Trump to hear about the Calexit movement?

[Devildog]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tptxW_ilRWc

[Ma'ake]

@Devildog - lol. I have to admit, Hillary makes a scary witch.

My mom was commenting that Hillary quickly sounds shill when she starts to speak with conviction. I asked if she thought Elizabeth Warren would be better? "Well, no... you make a good point. Women don't do well with angry politics".

Serious question - do you think a public execution would put to rest the Hillary hate? My sense is we've pushed quite a ways beyond the limitations of polite politics.

[LA Ute]

You don't think Obama will do that on his way out?

He may well, but that would not be the healing act that the country needs. It would probably be seen as the opposite: One last middle finger from the Democrats as they leave office.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Utah]

He may well, but that would not be the healing act that the country needs. It would probably be seen as the opposite: One last middle finger from the Democrats as they leave office.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This whole issue is ridiculous. Obama shouldn't need to pardon her. But because people can't let this silly issue go, he should pardon her.

This has to be humbling for Obama. Knowing all the work you did the last 8 years will go away.

[Ma'ake]

He may well, but that would not be the healing act that the country needs. It would probably be seen as the opposite: One last middle finger from the Democrats as they leave office.


I agree.

There's some British lady on TV, explaining why she thought Clinton was unable to speak last night. Very, very somber. Basically, she said Clinton felt she was the torch bearer for the American ideal of a tolerant, multi-cultural democracy, and that she personally let down those Americans who value that ideal.

I really believe many of the Trump supporters believed their vision of America was being damaged, by BLM, by having a brown president, by the loss of jobs, etc.

Trump is going to have to live up to the rhetoric he used on the campaign trail, or be seen as a sell-out. A lot of people want blood.

[Rocker Ute]

This whole issue is ridiculous. Obama shouldn't need to pardon her. But because people can't let this silly issue go, he should pardon her.

This has to be humbling for Obama. Knowing all the work you did the last 8 years will go away.

Pardon her for what? No charges have been brought against her. The person seeking pardons will likely be Trump himself. I've been thinking about this a bit, we've just elected a man who doesn't think climate change is real, wants to blow up NAFTA and no longer support our allies in NATO. He'll want to put boots on the ground right away in the middle east and will be saber-rattling immediately with North Korea, Iran, "Jina" and more. He is going to be intimidating the press. If I was one of the 12 women accusing him of sexual assault I wouldn't feel safe walking down the street. He is going to be harassing them.

There are only a couple points of hope right now. 1. We know he is a man who will say anything and pivot in the same phrase at times, maybe he'll wise up on a lot of the stupid things he has said and not feel like he needs to ban muslims, build silly walls or beat the hell out of the middle east. The other point of hope is that he'll do what some suspect in letting Pence run the country while he make appearances and golf's with dignitaries. You know, like Obama.

Dark day for the world.

[LA Ute]

Why We Use Electoral College, Not Popular Vote

It's those doggoned founders again.

http://dailysignal.com/2016/11/07/why-the-founders-created-the-electoral-college/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sancho]

Diehard - I need to thank you. You pointed out to me that I was coming across in my posts as extremely bitter and angry. I don't think of myself that way, and I definitely don't want to project that way. So I apologize to all I have offended, and I will try to do better. Please call me out on it again if I drift back to bad habits.

Forgive my scattered thoughts as I try to understand what just happened. I am hoping that the act of writing might bring some clarity.

I didn't get a good night's sleep. Rocker, you were right, and I was wrong. I really believed there was no way he could get elected. You were right to be alarmed. I have never felt emotionally connected to an election before until last night, but I definitely had a sick feeling in my stomach as I heard what was happening. I have often thought that it doesn't really matter who is in office. Now the rubber hits the road on that idea.

I am disappointed in my fellow Mormons to a level I haven't felt before. I really (naively?) hoped that they would be able to put principle over politics.

Eighteen months ago, I would have been thrilled to hear that a political outsider won the white house. I would have supported just about any political outsider with any kind of remote shot at victory. But not this outsider in this way.

This result is too complex for me to understand. I think there is a lot of blame to go around.

One half formed thought: I know that I dislike being labeled a homophobe simply because I am a Mormon. The label is applied generously to my tribe, and for the most part, I think we collectively reject it. I wonder if we wasted the power in the words "racist" and "sexist" by continually applying them to anyone with different political views instead of to people with serious issues. I wonder if we cried wolf so many times with those words that they became impotent when the real wolf arrived. Again, just a half formed thought.

I hate that politics is just a game to so many in the two parties. Now it looks like the game that republicans were playing with the supreme court might pay off for them.

In trying to think of silver linings, I'm remembering that Paul Ryan spoke about wanting to greatly simplify our tax code. I'm not going to hold my breath, but with all three branches of government, maybe they will actually make an effort.

That's all I got before work today.

[Rocker Ute]

Why We Use Electoral College, Not Popular Vote

It's those doggoned founders again.

http://dailysignal.com/2016/11/07/why-the-founders-created-the-electoral-college/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


"It was eventually justified in part as a stopgap to potentially reverse the vote if the people elected a criminal, traitor, or similar kind of heinous person. The Founders wanted to empower democratic elements in the American system, but they feared a kind of pure, unrestrained democracy that had brought down great republics of the past."

So serious question: Suppose Trump is found guilty of fraud, rape and who knows what else he is currently being accused of (Trump University fraud case is being heard this month), will the Electoral College do what it was built to do and keep a 'criminal... or similar kind of heinous person' out of office?

[UtahsMrSports]

Trump had around 59 million votes. Romney had ~61 and McCain ~60......

I truly believe that most of the trump votes were more about blocking Hillary than they were about backing Trump. Yes, we saw dozens of downright frightening trump supporters on tv at his rallies, but I really believe that is the minority.

But with those total votes, why are we not placing more blame on the dems who simply stayed home? As an upshot, the blame for this ought to be shared by the dems as a whole for putting forth a candidate with so much baggage.

[Rocker Ute]

Diehard - I need to thank you. You pointed out to me that I was coming across in my posts as extremely bitter and angry. I don't think of myself that way, and I definitely don't want to project that way. So I apologize to all I have offended, and I will try to do better. Please call me out on it again if I drift back to bad habits.

Forgive my scattered thoughts as I try to understand what just happened. I am hoping that the act of writing might bring some clarity.

I didn't get a good night's sleep. Rocker, you were right, and I was wrong. I really believed there was no way he could get elected. You were right to be alarmed. I have never felt emotionally connected to an election before until last night, but I definitely had a sick feeling in my stomach as I heard what was happening. I have often thought that it doesn't really matter who is in office. Now the rubber hits the road on that idea.

I am disappointed in my fellow Mormons to a level I haven't felt before. I really (naively?) hoped that they would be able to put principle over politics.

Eighteen months ago, I would have been thrilled to hear that a political outsider won the white house. I would have supported just about any political outsider with any kind of remote shot at victory. But not this outsider in this way.

This result is too complex for me to understand. I think there is a lot of blame to go around.

One half formed thought: I know that I dislike being labeled a homophobe simply because I am a Mormon. The label is applied generously to my tribe, and for the most part, I think we collectively reject it. I wonder if we wasted the power in the words "racist" and "sexist" by continually applying them to anyone with different political views instead of to people with serious issues. I wonder if we cried wolf so many times with those words that they became impotent when the real wolf arrived. Again, just a half formed thought.

I hate that politics is just a game to so many in the two parties. Now it looks like the game that republicans were playing with the supreme court might pay off for them.

In trying to think of silver linings, I'm remembering that Paul Ryan spoke about wanting to greatly simplify our tax code. I'm not going to hold my breath, but with all three branches of government, maybe they will actually make an effort.

That's all I got before work today.

For the record Sancho, I've never taken you to be bitter or angry and I didn't think that was justified. It is a weird time. I don't know if I was right, I was all over the place with this one. I had convinced myself that Clinton would win in a landslide. Like you, I am disappointed in Utah, we should have done better, although with Trump winning I am secretly glad Utah went for him. He is known as an openly vindictive person, I would have hated to see what would have come from his backlash. <------ And having just typed that, and realizing what I just said a couple of days ago about the Dachau concentration camp, that is how tyrants are born.

[Rocker Ute]

Trump had around 59 million votes. Romney had ~61 and McCain ~60......

I truly believe that most of the trump votes were more about blocking Hillary than they were about backing Trump. Yes, we saw dozens of downright frightening trump supporters on tv at his rallies, but I really believe that is the minority.

But with those total votes, why are we not placing more blame on the dems who simply stayed home? As an upshot, the blame for this ought to be shared by the dems as a whole for putting forth a candidate with so much baggage.

Media last night was doing just that. The votes for Trump in battleground states tracked near or close to the votes for Romney, but were way down from Obama to Hillary. The left simply didn't show up. This is what comes from the handout culture ;)

[Utah]

My thoughts:

1- no one can argue that racism/sexism/bigotry towards religion doesn't exist. How any LDS person, especially one with ancestors that had an extermination ordered against them, could vote for Trump...blows my mind.

2- Trump gave a good speech last night. Let's hope the 99.9% of his life before the speech is not President Trump, but the speech is President Trump.

3- all the incumbents re-elected? So, electing Trump wasn't about reforming Washington. So, what was it about? I hope it wasn't angry white man scared because of Obama then Hillary.

4- I thought Utah was better than this. It's pretty pathetic.

5- those "I'll show my displeasure by voting third party"...

6- those who didn't vote because there was no way Trump could win...

7- those "good people who aren't single issue voters who voted for Trump"....why did they vote for Trump? Would they ever be brave enough to state the real reasons? They weren't before the election, I doubt they will now.

[Rocker Ute]

I'm going to shut up about this, but one last thing. I now see people saying things like, "Now hopefully Trump will return power to the people/states/whatever..." Donald Trump has spent his life seeking and gaining power, and I don't think he would deny that. What he said about what he did to women was all about power and influence. People like Donald Trump never return power.

All of my predictions have been wrong, but I will make one final prediction that an expansion of executive power will continue unfettered under him.

[Rocker Ute]

Sorry, one last joke. I wonder if Trump is sitting there right now going, "Crap, now I need to actually come up with some policies on this stuff..."

[Two Utes]

No, we got your point. The Democrats are getting old and now the Republicans can show how hip they are. Pretty bad.

Here's the ultimate irony:

This country is still a majority center right.

When Obama had a sweeping victory in 2008, he still couldn't get much passed in Congress because of the blue dog democrats. This country is center right in spite of the media's insistence otherwise. The dems in the rust belt won it last night for Trump. And nearly 30% of Latinos voted for Trump. Holy crap. The repubs actually can get the Latino vote.

It's a sad day in America, but despite the media's insistence that it is true, the Republican party is not dead and the media has never been more of a joke than they are right now.

[Rocker Ute]

Perhaps the difference between the Republicans and the Democrats is at least the Republicans fractured in support behind a horrible candidate, the Democrats unified.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Two Utes]

The Democrat platform this year is the best in a generation (Thanks to Bernie). The challenge will to get people to call their Congresscritters' offices to hold their feet to the fire to get it done. There is a chance to make positive changes in society to make life better for all today, and well into the future.


Republicans can either come to the negotiation table and help out, or mindlessly resist everything like the last 8 years. And if they can't root out the Alt-Right from the party they will end up nominating an even more dangerous demagogue next time around.

This is now a funny post. Amazing what 24 hours will do to perceptions.

[Two Utes]

Perhaps the difference between the Republicans and the Democrats is at least the Republicans fractured in support behind a horrible candidate, the Democrats unified.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Huh?

[LA Ute]

This is an interesting non-partisan breakdown of the demographics behind last night's shocker.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/joelkotkin/2016/11/09/donald-trumps-presidenti-victory-demographics/#5f3a75fc79a8


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Utah]

The biggest comedy from last night? Thinking back on perusing cougarboard and all the money those idiots spent on guns and ammo and knowing the prices will fall through the floor now.

Lol. Almost as dumb as buying up gold.

[Two Utes]

Looking at who Trump surrounded himself with during his campaign should scare us $hitless about who will be in his cabinet and who he will appoint to the supreme court (mike lee was on his short list). This is crazy.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

Did not vote for him and do not like him, but this is an overstatement.

If he nominates Guliani as attorney general, what is wrong with that? By all accounts, he was an excellent mayor of New York. And is it really going to be worse than where it stands now where every major university seems to be under investigation by the federal government for something? You really think he'll do worse?

And Newt Gingrich for Secretary of State? Wasn't he an excellent speaker of the house and didn't we balance the budget during his tenure and can you agree he is intelligent and articulate?

[Sullyute]

Did not vote for him and do not like him, but this is an overstatement.

If he nominates Guliani as attorney general, what is wrong with that? By all accounts, he was an excellent mayor of New York. And is it really going to be worse than where it stands now where every major university seems to be under investigation by the federal government for something? You really think he'll do worse?

And Newt Gingrich for Secretary of State? Wasn't he an excellent speaker of the house and didn't we balance the budget during his tenure and can you agree he is intelligent and articulate?

We will find out soon enough whether it is an overstatement or not. Guliani was at his best right after 9/11. He was actually a pretty moderate republican mayor and presidential candidate (he has gone farther right recently in supporting Trump). Although he is not my first choice as attorney general, he would be qualified to serve in the role.

Gingrich is toxic. While intelligent and articulate (just like Cruz) I just don't trust him. He may have worked well on domestic affairs, but that doesn't mean he would be good at representing America to other countries. Bring back Condolezza in a heartbeat.

[Irving Washington]

I don't understand how people want change so bad in Washington that they are willing to elect Donald freaking Trump, yet those same people re-elect the same senators and representatives who have made Washington such a mess. We are so dumb.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
This makes it more difficult to believe that the election wasn't about white power.

[pangloss]

Clinton won the popular vote by 193,000 votes.

Trump won in Michigan by 0.36% and in Wisconsin by 0.91%, a total of 44,275 votes. That swung the election. "Other" received about that many votes in California, far fewer than Johnson or Stein in California.

I suppose we can now all hope that Trump's promises of revenge and retribution, his idiotic proposals, and his repudiation of the country's institutions were insincere.

[U-Ute]

Looking at the electoral map, I'm beginning to think Trump was "crazy like a fox".

The crux of the election was the rust belt states. Those impacted by the loss of manufacturing jobs. All of Trumps rhetoric about xenophobia, bringing manufacturing back, and import tariffs was targeted at that demographic. The poor white males in the Northeast lacking an education. Some of his rhetoric also helped with the redneck vote, which helped keep the south firmly in the Republican pocket. Although Florida was a bit of a surprise to me given his anti-immigrant rhetoric.

It'll be interesting to see what he does now that he is in office. In my mind, the biggest problem facing middle America is the financialization of business. They invest in companies and don't care how it is made, as long as they make money. That means shipping manufacturing to China, Mexico, wherever. It'll be interesting to see if he'll be able to push these things through a Congress that is beholden to the financial industry.

[LA Ute]

This makes it more difficult to believe that the election wasn't about white power.

I think that is probably an overstatement, in light of the Forbes piece I linked above (by Joel Kotkin, who is a New Democrat type -- remember them?). There are many ingredients to the witches' brew that produced this election. White anger is surely one of them, but not the leading one, IMO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mUUser]

Can someone explain this?

When I went to bed last night, Trump had the momentum and the stock market after hours trading was down 5% setting an automatic safety brake to the system, effectively shutting things down. Just a few hours later, after its clear he won, the markets are up.....so on the news that he may win the markets so-called "crashed", but, on the news that he won, the markets recover immediately.

I have an MBA in finance (never practiced, however) and just don't get it. Surely, the markets understood that it was less likely that the feds would raise rates under a Trump presidency within the hours of him winning, and when he actually won. Nothing changed there.....so what do you think was the difference in those hours? -- the only thing I can come up with is that the market really, really, loved Trumps victory speech.

[Sullyute]

Obama saying all the right things right now in his speech. I like that he praised Pres Bush's help with his transition and his intent to help Trump transition.

[Utah]

Only college educated white women did not vote for Trump. All other white groups voted Trump.

That's tough to explain. I think racism/sexism may be a little more prevalent than we white people want to believe.

I wonder if the there has been too much change too fast and us, religious, father knows best, white guys couldn't handle it.

[Scratch]

You don't think Obama will do that on his way out?

Yep, Obama will. I think Trump should come out this week and announce that he will pardon Hillary so that he can score some points on his way in, but it won't matter anyway because she's getting pardoned by Obama regardless.

[Scratch]

Well, *that* escalated quickly:

http://www.ibtimes.com/what-calexit-california-considers-leaving-us-after-trump-win-2444019

#CalExit



Pardon her from *what*? A pre-emptive blanket pardon from further investigations? Donald risks appearing as a cave-in to his own supporters, who stood in line for many hours to hear the man, if he doesn't either take her into custody, or exile her.

I told the wife it's far more likely that Trump will quickly issue a number of pardons... to himself. Trump University suit? Done. Miss Utah and others with their sexual assault stories? There will be an Executive Order to silence them. "The unity and stability of the nation necessitate it. There has been too much rancor, we need to move forward."

I'm listening to Trump's post-election speech, which clearly wasn't written by him.

How long does anyone think the gracious Donald Trump will last? As long as it takes for Trump to hear about the Calexit movement?

Trump can only pardon himself for federal crimes. I think most, if not all claims against him are state crimes or civil cases, which also cannot be impacted via a pardon.

[#1 Utefan]

Only college educated white women did not vote for Trump. All other white groups voted Trump.

That's tough to explain. I think racism/sexism may be a little more prevalent than we white people want to believe.

I wonder if the there has been too much change too fast and us, religious, father knows best, white guys couldn't handle it.

I am a white male and am neither a fan of Trump or Hillary Clinton I voted 3rd party yesterday for that reason.

With that said, the reality is that Obama's hard push to the left the past 8 years has created a lot of frustration and anger in a country that has traditionally been center to slightly right. I have said all along that the rise of Trump's candidacy has as much to do with a backlash against several of Obama's policies as it does with weaknesses of the other candidates (GOP primaries and Hillary in the general).

Obsma's open border, lax immigration policies, Obamacare and rising premiums, perceived war on religion, abuse of executive power, flawed foreign policy, and overall divisiveness paved the path for the rise of a politician like Trump.

Don't be fooled by the media and their polls showing his approval ratings being 50%+. If there is anything we all learned yesterday it is that the press hascan agenda and the accuracy of their polls and opinions they give don't always truly reflect the pulse and feeling of the entire electorate. If people generally were happy with Obama's policies and the status quote, please explain how Trump won yesterday.

As I stated, I felt both parties candidates were deeply flawed and I am skeptical of Trump. I view him more as a populist, union leader type than a Republican. I would even argue on many issues outside immigration, he is more Democrat than Republican. With that said, I am open to giving him the benefit of the doubt for now. Like it or not, he is our next President.

I think whether he succeeds or fails will largely be determined by the people who chooses as his advisors and cabinet. Giuliani as Attorney General is a solid pick but Newt as Secretary of State? No thanks.

[Scratch]

Clinton won the popular vote by 193,000 votes.

Trump won in Michigan by 0.36% and in Wisconsin by 0.91%, a total of 44,275 votes. That swung the election. "Other" received about that many votes in California, far fewer than Johnson or Stein in California.

I suppose we can now all hope that Trump's promises of revenge and retribution, his idiotic proposals, and his repudiation of the country's institutions were insincere.


Although Trump still wins even without Wisconsin and Michigan. That's what crazy; it turns out that he didn't even need those states to win the election.

[Two Utes]

Only college educated white women did not vote for Trump. All other white groups voted Trump.

That's tough to explain. I think racism/sexism may be a little more prevalent than we white people want to believe.

I wonder if the there has been too much change too fast and us, religious, father knows best, white guys couldn't handle it.

So when 93% of the black vote goes for Obama (many not educated) was that "blacklash"?

New reality, uneducated white voters (dems and repubs) are even a stronger voting group than uneducated black voters.

[Scratch]

Here's my write-in ballot:

2012

As LA and the Forbes article mentioned, there are a lot of reasons why people voted for Trump. Many did it as a protest vote. Many did it simply because they believe that Hillary is completely unacceptable as a presidential candidate (regardless of gender). Many did it because they believe Trump really can revitalize certain segments of the American economy. I personally expressed my dissatisfaction with both of them by writing in a satirical candidate. Many others did so by holding their nose and voting for who they perceive as the lesser of two evils, or falling back on party ties despite disagreeing with their party's nominee. A huge portion of people expressed their displeasure by simply staying home. I'm sure there are racist/sexist segments out there, but it's disingenuous to say that that was a driving force behind what happened yesterday.

[LA Ute]

Can someone explain this?

When I went to bed last night, Trump had the momentum and the stock market after hours trading was down 5% setting an automatic safety brake to the system, effectively shutting things down. Just a few hours later, after its clear he won, the markets are up.....so on the news that he may win the markets so-called "crashed", but, on the news that he won, the markets recover immediately.

I have an MBA in finance (never practiced, however) and just don't get it. Surely, the markets understood that it was less likely that the feds would raise rates under a Trump presidency within the hours of him winning, and when he actually won. Nothing changed there.....so what do you think was the difference in those hours? -- the only thing I can come up with is that the market really, really, loved Trumps victory speech.

I have been told that the markets like stability. Things are unstable, people sell; when things are stable, people buy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Two Utes]

Here's my write-in ballot:

2012

As LA and the Forbes article mentioned, there are a lot of reasons why people voted for Trump. Many did it as a protest vote. Many did it simply because they believe that Hillary is completely unacceptable as a presidential candidate (regardless of gender). Many did it because they believe Trump really can revitalize certain segments of the American economy. I personally expressed my dissatisfaction with both of them by writing in a satirical candidate. Many others did so by holding their nose and voting for who they perceive as the lesser of two evils, or falling back on party ties despite disagreeing with their party's nominee. A huge portion of people expressed their displeasure by simply staying home. I'm sure there are racist/sexist segments out there, but it's disingenuous to say that that was a driving force behind what happened yesterday.

Except for the fact that the biggest reason Trump won is because he overwhelmingly won uneducated whites and white males. (With the low voter turnout in second place)

[Utah]

Here's my write-in ballot:
As LA and the Forbes article mentioned, there are a lot of reasons why people voted for Trump. Many did it as a protest vote. Many did it simply because they believe that Hillary is completely unacceptable as a presidential candidate (regardless of gender). Many did it because they believe Trump really can revitalize certain segments of the American economy. I personally expressed my dissatisfaction with both of them by writing in a satirical candidate. Many others did so by holding their nose and voting for who they perceive as the lesser of two evils, or falling back on party ties despite disagreeing with their party's nominee. A huge portion of people expressed their displeasure by simply staying home. I'm sure there are racist/sexist segments out there, but it's disingenuous to say that that was a driving force behind what happened yesterday.

Trumplajsdlkfja
Trump had 5 million+ less votes than Romney or McCain. There wasn't some huge movement to get Trump elected.

Where did Trump excel? The Rust Belt and rural, uneducated people.

I don't get this "Hillary is completely unacceptable as a presidential candidate" argument. She is probably the most qualified person to ever run for office. It's a weak and lazy argument.

I do believe that the Rust Belt thinks Trump can bring back the days of making $50,000 being a janitor for GM with a full pension. The problem is, it's because of the Reagan's and Trump's that those days are gone. We've gone full board "trickle down" which means that instead of providing pensions, etc, the guys at the top (Trump) get to keep the money. Looking at Trump's tax plan shows that this will continue. Trump's plan will grow the deficit tremendously.

A huge portion did stay home. And that is why Trump won. It wasn't because he fulfills some grandiose dream of Americans. It's because some democrats weren't excited enough to go vote, and the rest thought she would win in a landslide and couldn't bother going to the polls after work.

There are racist segments out there, and those racist segments were the groups that turned out in full force yesterday. It's tough to not draw some conclusions when the more rural/racist parts of America turned out in much higher than normal numbers, when white men of all categories and white, uneducated women voted as a block.

That's a lot of coincidences.

[#1 Utefan]

I think many are underestimating how much of Trump's victory was a repudiation of Obama's hard push to the left and many unpopular policies (lax immigration, Obamacare, middle east foreign policy, etc). Sure Hillary wasn't that likable but Trump had even bigger unfavorables.

I'm sorry but if people are happy with Obama's policies and the status quote, how does Trump win? The reality is America is still a center to center right country and Obama pushed too hard and fast to the left. Hillary alone can't explain away this loss and the GOP keeping majorities in both the Senate and House.

[Utah]

I am a white male and am neither a fan of Trump or Hillary Clinton I voted 3rd party yesterday for that reason.

With that said, the reality is that Obama's hard push to the left the past 8 years has created a lot of frustration and anger in a country that has traditionally been center to slightly right. I have said all along that the rise of Trump's candidacy has as much to do with a backlash against several of Obama's policies as it does with weaknesses of the other candidates (GOP primaries and Hillary in the general).

Obsma's open border, lax immigration policies,

I find this argument interesting, because a lot of our "problems" with the border started to happen once we tried to keep people out. Why not allow migrant workers to come in, do their job, then go home afterwards? It worked out great before. If they go home, then we don't have to take care of them. If we close down the borders, then they have to stay because if they don't, they may not be able to get back in.


Obamacare and rising premiums,

Sure, this sucks, but this wasn't the issue. Why? Because we voted in every single incumbent (or pretty close to that). We just re-elected everyone that either voted Obama care into law or has done nothing to fix it/repeal it.


perceived war on religion,

So, because two dudes can get married, that is an attack on religion? Holy shit, you sound like Mark E. Petersen..."If we let the (insert N word) go to our schools, he will try to marry our women and will force himself into our society and the next thing you know, we will treat him like a human being." There was no attack on religion. Stop being a dick to people and then you won't have the backlash.


abuse of executive power,

Again, this whole abuse of power thing started with Bush and the Patriot Act, Obama did make it worse, and I fear Trump will take it even further.


flawed foreign policy,

Both sides share equal blame here. The Iraqi war was a mistake. And both sides readily voted for it and collected their money for it.


and overall divisiveness paved the path for the rise of a politician like Trump.

Yeah, because the right has done so much the last 6 years.


Don't be fooled by the media and their polls showing his approval ratings being 50%+. If there is anything we all learned yesterday it is that the press hascan agenda and the accuracy of their polls and opinions they give don't always truly reflect the pulse and feeling of the entire electorate. If people generally were happy with Obama's policies and the status quote, please explain how Trump won yesterday.

Mitt and McCain recieved 5+ million more votes than Trump. This wasn't some grand movement across America trying to make this country great again (BTW, how stupid is that slogan? So, we suck now because our women can vote, our blacks can go to school, men can't go around sexually assaulting women, our girls can play sports, etc? This country is the greatest it has ever been right now. We are the wealthiest we have ever been. Our poor are better taken care of than they have ever been. Rape, crime, murder is lower than it has ever been. Those that want to "Make America Great Again" are the old white guys that are terrified that the women and immigrants are taking over...ironically enough, those are the same people that showed up to vote yesterday).


As I stated, I felt both parties candidates were deeply flawed and I am skeptical of Trump. I view him more as a populist, union leader type than a Republican. I would even argue on many issues outside immigration, he is more Democrat than Republican. With that said, I am open to giving him the benefit of the doubt for now. Like it or not, he is our next President.

I think whether he succeeds or fails will largely be determined by the people who chooses as his advisors and cabinet. Giuliani as Attorney General is a solid pick but Newt as Secretary of State? No thanks.

aksldjfklasjdf;l
He is our president now. And, like I stated earlier, I hope President Trump is the man that gave the speech yesterday and not the man that spent the precious 99.9% of his life being Donald Trump.

[Utah]

So when 93% of the black vote goes for Obama (many not educated) was that "blacklash"?

New reality, uneducated white voters (dems and repubs) are even a stronger voting group than uneducated black voters.

Oalkdjfalasldjf
Of course it was backlash. There was a significant portion of our country that felt like they had been held down by the white man. They came out and voted for a better future. They thought Obama could do things to help them.

And rural, white, uneducated voters did the same thing yesterday.

The difference is MONUMENTAL:

Black people voted as a block because they hoped for a time where they could be more equal.

Uneducated, white women and a shit ton of white men voted to keep those immigrants, gays, women, and blacks under control.

Do you not see the difference?

[jrj84105]

I think many are underestimating how much of Trump's victory was a repudiation of Obama's hard push to the left and many unpopular policies (lax immigration, Obamacare, middle east foreign policy, etc). Sure Hillary wasn't that likable but Trump had even bigger unfavorables.

I'm sorry but if people are happy with Obama's policies and the status quote, how does Trump win? The reality is America is still a center to center right country and Obama pushed too hard and fast to the left. Hillary alone can't explain away this loss and the GOP keeping majorities in both the Senate and House.
This is one opinion that will be shown to be categorically wrong.

The Dem/GOP party leadership was so blind in their preference of Clinton and Jeb Bush. I think the strength of the American people's aversion to dynasticism was WAY under appreciated. The reason why the email leaks were so damaging to Clinton was because they confirmed the suspicion of Both political parties as being divorced from the people and bent on installing dynastic rule from ruling elites. I think Jeb Bush loses just as surprisingly to Bernie Sanders as Clinton did to Trump had the results of the primaries been reversed. If this election was a repudiation of anything, it will prove to be a repudiation of insider crony politics and the removal of the people's will from the electoral process and governance.

The appeal that Trump has as being a choice of the disempowered disenfranchised people over self-serving political machine isn't something Trump monopolizes. I think the next 4 years won't be framed as right versus left but as insider vs outsider. Looking through this lens, Bernie Sanders becomes the voice of the left, and Obama- a non-establishment presidential nominee- becomes the elder statesman, and an important stabilizing voice as racial issues undoubtedly come front and center.

I think this election will ultimately be less about a move on the political spectrum and more about broader populism in politics enabled by social media and the declining roll of the dual party political machine in dictating America's future.

[#1 Utefan]

I find this argument interesting, because a lot of our "problems" with the border started to happen once we tried to keep people out. Why not allow migrant workers to come in, do their job, then go home afterwards? It worked out great before. If they go home, then we don't have to take care of them. If we close down the borders, then they have to stay because if they don't, they may not be able to get back in.



Sure, this sucks, but this wasn't the issue. Why? Because we voted in every single incumbent (or pretty close to that). We just re-elected everyone that either voted Obama care into law or has done nothing to fix it/repeal it.



So, because two dudes can get married, that is an attack on religion? Holy shit, you sound like Mark E. Petersen..."If we let the (insert N word) go to our schools, he will try to marry our women and will force himself into our society and the next thing you know, we will treat him like a human being." There was no attack on religion. Stop being a dick to people and then you won't have the backlash.



Again, this whole abuse of power thing started with Bush and the Patriot Act, Obama did make it worse, and I fear Trump will take it even further.



Both sides share equal blame here. The Iraqi war was a mistake. And both sides readily voted for it and collected their money for it.



Yeah, because the right has done so much the last 6 years.



Mitt and McCain recieved 5+ million more votes than Trump. This wasn't some grand movement across America trying to make this country great again (BTW, how stupid is that slogan? So, we suck now because our women can vote, our blacks can go to school, men can't go around sexually assaulting women, our girls can play sports, etc? This country is the greatest it has ever been right now. We are the wealthiest we have ever been. Our poor are better taken care of than they have ever been. Rape, crime, murder is lower than it has ever been. Those that want to "Make America Great Again" are the old white guys that are terrified that the women and immigrants are taking over...ironically enough, those are the same people that showed up to vote yesterday).



aksldjfklasjdf;l
He is our president now. And, like I stated earlier, I hope President Trump is the man that gave the speech yesterday and not the man that spent the precious 99.9% of his life being Donald Trump.

Mellow out. I didn't even vote for Trump. You may not want to hear the fact that many Americans aren't happy with the direction of the country under Obama but I think the result of the election speaks for itself.

Don't underestimate how much rising Obamacare premiums coming out even in the past month may have pushed some struggling middle class Americans to break for Trump. Moreover, what does Bush have to with Obama's foreign policy decisions in arming renels, taking out Ghadafi, meddling in Syria & Egypt, and striking an unpopular nuclear deal with Iran?

You can only play politics and blame the previous administration for all of these problems for so long. Apparently, many in the electorate came to this conclusion and voted for change. Sorry but don't shoot the messenger.

[jrj84105]

These next midterms are going to be fascinating. Trump's ability to win while eschewing traditional advertising and the party-based ground machine should completely eliminate the anti-third party rhetoric of outsiders being unelectable. It will be interesting to see the effect on subsequent elections. Twitter is going to be unbearably crowded with political crap next time around.

[Utah]

Mellow out. I didn't even vote for Trump. You may not want to hear the fact that many Americans aren't happy with the direction of the country under Obama but I think the result of the election speaks for itself.

Don't underestimate how much rising Obamacare premiums coming out even in the past month may have pushed some struggling middle class Americans to break for Trump. Moreover, what does Bush have to with Obama's foreign policy decisions in arming renels, taking out Ghadafi, meddling in Syria & Egypt, and striking an unpopular nuclear deal with Iran?

You can only play politics and blame the previous administration for all of these problems for so long. Apparently, many in the electorate came to this conclusion and voted for change. Sorry but don't shoot the messenger.

Letm
Let me simplify it:

Hillary won the popular vote.

Trump rallied the racists and sexists.

That concerns me.

[Utah]

Also, I don't buy the "My premiums went up so I switched to Trump" argument because we just voted in all the people who passed ACA or have done nothing to fix it. If we were really worried about the ACA and rising premiums, we would not have kept so many incumbents in office.

[Sullyute]

Uneducated, white women and a shit ton of white men voted to keep those immigrants, gays, women, and blacks under control.

obviously I am not happy with the way things turned out, but I really think (and hope) that is not true for the majority of those voters. I think it is more about wanting change in Washington, but still thinking that their local rep and senator are not part of the problem. How we change the later is what I want to figure out.

[jrj84105]

Mellow out. I didn't even vote for Trump. You may not want to hear the fact that many Americans aren't happy with the direction of the country under Obama but I think the result of the election speaks for itself.

Don't underestimate how much rising Obamacare premiums coming out even in the past month may have pushed some struggling middle class Americans to break for Trump. Moreover, what does Bush have to with Obama's foreign policy decisions in arming renels, taking out Ghadafi, meddling in Syria & Egypt, and striking an unpopular nuclear deal with Iran?

You can only play politics and blame the previous administration for all of these problems for so long. Apparently, many in the electorate came to this conclusion and voted for change. Sorry but don't shoot the messenger.
I sort of feel like republicans who didn't support Trump but who see a lot of (R)s in the win column are in for a rude awakening when blaming Obama is off the table and they're tasked with building a working governing coalition with Trump at the helm. Blame Bush didn't serve the Dems too well, and I think blaming an increasing popular Obama is going to flip hard.

[Sullyute]

The Dem/GOP party leadership was so blind in their preference of Clinton and Jeb Bush. I think the strength of the American people's aversion to dynasticism was WAY under appreciated. The reason why the email leaks were so damaging to Clinton was because they confirmed the suspicion of Both political parties as being divorced from the people and bent on installing dynastic rule from ruling elites. I think Jeb Bush loses just as surprisingly to Bernie Sanders as Clinton did to Trump had the results of the primaries been reversed. If this election was a repudiation of anything, it will prove to be a repudiation of insider crony politics and the removal of the people's will from the electoral process and governance.

The appeal that Trump has as being a choice of the disempowered disenfranchised people over self-serving political machine isn't something Trump monopolizes. I think the next 4 years won't be framed as right versus left but as insider vs outsider. Looking through this lens, Bernie Sanders becomes the voice of the left, and Obama- a non-establishment presidential nominee- becomes the elder statesman, and an important stabilizing voice as racial issues undoubtedly come front and center.

I think this election will ultimately be less about a move on the political spectrum and more about broader populism in politics enabled by social media and the declining roll of the dual party political machine in dictating America's future.

Other than the bolded, I agree with you.

[Two Utes]

Oalkdjfalasldjf
Of course it was backlash. There was a significant portion of our country that felt like they had been held down by the white man. They came out and voted for a better future. They thought Obama could do things to help them.

And rural, white, uneducated voters did the same thing yesterday.

The difference is MONUMENTAL:

Black people voted as a block because they hoped for a time where they could be more equal.

Uneducated, white women and a shit ton of white men voted to keep those immigrants, gays, women, and blacks under control.

Do you not see the difference?

MONUMENTAL. If you cap it then it must be true.

Blacks voted as a block because they thought it would help them in the future.

Uneducated whites voted as a block because they thought it would help them in the future.

Do you not see the similarity?

[Applejack]

I'm no political scientist, but the thing I found fascinating is they interviewed a bunch of Trump die-hards last night (at celebration parties, etc) and the one thing everyone could agree on was that Trump "spoke his mind; he tells it like it is." I have no idea what this means, but it is apparently a strong motivator for Republican votes.

[Two Utes]

Letm
Let me simplify it:

Hillary won the popular vote.

Trump rallied the racists and sexists.

That concerns me.

Ok. Ute has it. Case closed. Let's move on.

[#1 Utefan]

This is one opinion that will be shown to be categorically wrong.

The Dem/GOP party leadership was so blind in their preference of Clinton and Jeb Bush. I think the strength of the American people's aversion to dynasticism was WAY under appreciated. The reason why the email leaks were so damaging to Clinton was because they confirmed the suspicion of Both political parties as being divorced from the people and bent on installing dynastic rule from ruling elites. I think Jeb Bush loses just as surprisingly to Bernie Sanders as Clinton did to Trump had the results of the primaries been reversed. If this election was a repudiation of anything, it will prove to be a repudiation of insider crony politics and the removal of the people's will from the electoral process and governance.

The appeal that Trump has as being a choice of the disempowered disenfranchised people over self-serving political machine isn't something Trump monopolizes. I think the next 4 years won't be framed as right versus left but as insider vs outsider. Looking through this lens, Bernie Sanders becomes the voice of the left, and Obama- a non-establishment presidential nominee- becomes the elder statesman, and an important stabilizing voice as racial issues undoubtedly come front and center.

I think this election will ultimately be less about a move on the political spectrum and more about broader populism in politics enabled by social media and the declining roll of the dual party political machine in dictating America's future.

I might agree with you if Trump's likability/favorability ratings weren't below Clinton's. The reality is both are deeply flawed and unpopular candidates. Clinton being unpopular just doesn't explain this result away..

Why did so many traditional blue collar Democrats vote for Trump this time? Obviously many of them supported Obama and Democrat candidates in previous elections. The obvious answer is they aren't happy with the country's current direction and voted for change.

[Two Utes]

I might agree with you if Trump's likability/favorability ratings weren't below Clinton's. The reality is both are deeply flawed and unpopular candidates. Clinton being unpopular just doesn't explain this result away..

Why did so many traditional blue collar Democrats vote for Trump this time? Obviously many of them supported Obama and Democrat candidates in previous elections. The obvious answer is they aren't happy with the country's current direction and voted for change.


And the same group of blue collar dems voted for a black guy four years ago. compare the numbers in Michigan, Wisc, Penn, Ohio and Minn from 2012 to 2016.

[Two Utes]

Although Trump still wins even without Wisconsin and Michigan. That's what crazy; it turns out that he didn't even need those states to win the election.


Only because he also got Pennsylvania

[#1 Utefan]

I'm no political scientist, but the thing I found fascinating is they interviewed a bunch of Trump die-hards last night (at celebration parties, etc) and the one thing everyone could agree on was that Trump "spoke his mind; he tells it like it is." I have no idea what this means, but it is apparently a strong motivator for Republican votes.

and all the Midwestern rust belt Democrats that gave Trump wins in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Ohio. Just saying...

[jrj84105]

Letm
Let me simplify it:

Hillary won the popular vote.

Trump rallied the racists and sexists.

That concerns me.
I don't think that's right either.

Both parties have been securing certain demographics as locks for their own party vote by not just allowing but promoting fear and mistrust of the other side. Fear and mistrust lead to isolation, and in those isolated message boards and fora extremism and racism are fostered. For all the talk of unity and working together that we hear after an election, I'm hoping that this time around, the Dem and GOP establishment realizes they've lost control and created an electorate that went from manageably divided to unpredictably alienated.

I worry that Trump just wanted the title and that he'll delegate everything to potentially hastily chosen surrogates. I hope that he really wants to take a crack at governing as an outsider and actually enacts changes that benefit his primary constituency. Because I think the reality is that we really have neglected the plight of poor uneducated whites, and the first step in lessening the racism and and xenophobia in that group is to sort of admit that just because they're uneducated, poor, and backwards doesn't been they deserve it or are predestined to stay that way.

[mUUser]

Oalkdjfalasldjf
Of course it was backlash. There was a significant portion of our country that felt like they had been held down by the white man. They came out and voted for a better future. They thought Obama could do things to help them.

And rural, white, uneducated voters did the same thing yesterday.

The difference is MONUMENTAL:

Black people voted as a block because they hoped for a time where they could be more equal.

Uneducated, white women and a shit ton of white men voted to keep those immigrants, gays, women, and blacks under control.

Do you not see the difference?

At what point in your life did you realize you're the smartest person in the room? I mean you can take fragmented, generalized data points, look into the hearts and minds of the American people/voters, and draw absolute conclusions. You're very gifted, my friend.

[U-Ute]

Also, I don't buy the "My premiums went up so I switched to Trump" argument because we just voted in all the people who passed ACA or have done nothing to fix it. If we were really worried about the ACA and rising premiums, we would not have kept so many incumbents in office.


Plus, only 3% of people who have insurance were affected by this premium increase.

[LA Ute]

This is an interesting analysis:

Donald Trump is moving to the White House, and liberals put him there (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/09/donald-trump-white-house-hillary-clinton-liberals)

Excerpt:

****

A month ago I tried to write a column proposing mean nicknames for president-elect Donald Trump (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/donaldtrump), on the basis that it would be funny to turn the tables on him for the cruel diminutives he applied to others.

I couldn’t pull it off. There is a darkness about Trump that negates that sort of humor: a folly so bewildering, an incompetence so profound that no insult could plumb its depths.

He has run one of the lousiest presidential campaigns ever. In saying so I am not referring to his much-criticized business practices (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/sep/02/donald-trump-atlantic-city-casinos-taj-mahal-plaza-bankruptcy) or his vulgar remarks about women (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/oct/10/sexual-assault-definition-trump-comments). I mean this in a purely technical sense: this man fractured his own party. His convention was a fiasco. He had no ground game to speak of. The list of celebrities and pundits and surrogates taking his side on the campaign trail was extremely short. He needlessly offended countless groups of people: women, Hispanics, Muslims, disabled people, mothers of crying babies, the Bush family, and George Will-style conservatives, among others. He even lost Glenn Beck, for pete’s sake.

And now he is going to be president of the United States. The woman we were constantly assured was the best-qualified candidate (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jan/04/bill-clinton-new-hampshire-campaign-trail-hillary) of all time has lost to the least qualified candidate of all time. Everyone who was anyone rallied around her (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/05/im-with-her-beyonce-and-jay-z-back-hillary-clinton-in-battleground-state-of-ohio), and it didn’t make any difference. The man too incompetent to insult is now going to sit in the Oval Office, whence he will hand down his beauty-contest verdicts on the grandees and sages of the old order.

Maybe there is a bright side to a Trump victory....

But let’s not deceive ourselves. We aren’t going to win anything. What happened on Tuesday is a disaster, both for liberalism and for the world. As President Trump goes about settling scores with his former rivals, picking fights with other countries, and unleashing his special deportation police on this group and that, we will all soon have cause to regret his ascension to the presidential throne.

What we need to focus on now is the obvious question: what the hell went wrong? What species of cluelessness guided our Democratic leaders as they went about losing what they told us was the most important election of our lifetimes?

Start at the top. Why, oh why, did it have to be Hillary Clinton (https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/hillary-clinton)? Yes, she has an impressive resume; yes, she worked hard on the campaign trail. But she was exactly the wrong candidate for this angry, populist moment. An insider when the country was screaming for an outsider. A technocrat who offered fine-tuning when the country wanted to take a sledgehammer to the machine....

****

Read the whole thing.

[Ma'ake]

Trump won because people want change - majorities of the electorate want their high paying jobs back, immigrants deported, Obamacare repealed on Day 1, etc. A very large part of Trump's supporters don't really do nuance, or half measures.

I'm interested to see who is the temporary Senator from Utah, assuming Mike Lee is a SCOTUS justice in a couple of months.

It will be interesting to see how Trump balances his campaign rhetoric / promises with the need to decent to everyone else. His personality is not well suited to restraint.

[LA Ute]

What really fascinates me now is how Trump will interact with Congress. I wonder if he will not be more like someone from another party than another Republican? He hasn't even been a Republican for most of his life and he has no discernible ideology. Also, a lot of them were either tepid in their support for him, didn't support him at all, or dropped him when the Billy Bush tape came out. If he's smart he'll hammer out compromises and try to create good policy. But if he acts like the street bully he portrayed during the campaign things will be a mess.

[Diehard Ute]

Trump won because people want change - majorities of the electorate want their high paying jobs back, immigrants deported, Obamacare repealed on Day 1, etc. A very large part of Trump's supporters don't really do nuance, or half measures.

I'm interested to see who is the temporary Senator from Utah, assuming Mike Lee is a SCOTUS justice in a couple of months.

It will be interesting to see how Trump balances his campaign rhetoric / promises with the need to decent to everyone else. His personality is not well suited to restraint.

Maybe. I think there's a case to be made that Trump won because the Democrats failed.

I think LA's article has some merit. Hillary just didn't get the voters to turnout to vote for her.

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/article113641936.html



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sullyute]

What really fascinates me now is how Trump will interact with Congress. I wonder if he will not be more like someone from another party than another Republican? He hasn't even been a Republican for most of his life and he has no discernible ideology. Also, a lot of them were either tepid in their support for him, didn't support him at all, or dropped him when the Billy Bush tape came out. If he's smart he'll hammer out compromises and try to create good policy. But if he acts like the street bully he portrayed during the campaign things will be a mess.

What is the chance that he makes a 180 degree change from what he has been and done for the last 70 years? #tigersdontchangetheirstripes

[jrj84105]

I might agree with you if Trump's likability/favorability ratings weren't below Clinton's. The reality is both are deeply flawed and unpopular candidates. Clinton being unpopular just doesn't explain this result away..

Why did so many traditional blue collar Democrats vote for Trump this time? Obviously many of them supported Obama and Democrat candidates in previous elections. The obvious answer is they aren't happy with the country's current direction and voted for change.
Because they wanted change. I don't know if you saw this article (link below) but it talks about how Democrats neglected Decatur in favor of Martha's Vineyard. The former is my hometown. I worked summer breaks in the soy/corn fields (until Monsanto bought everyone out and replaced us with migrant workers) and worked at a small auto parts factory in the winters until it was bought by Mitsubishi, then downsized, and closed. I wound up going for more education (hello U of U) and am part of the brain drain and population decline of that region. During those labor issues we had family friends on the picket line and family friends with a 24 hour security detail at their house, and Jesse Jackson was in town fanning the flames of racial tension. I feel like it was potentially a preview of the class and racial conflict we're poised to see the next 4 years.

Things have gotten progressively worse and worse. People feel like they are getting screwed by powers out of their control. Then the question is who's in collusion with those powers, and who's helping me? The answer to the first is unclear, but multinational corporations in collusion with a "fixed" political system would be in most people's top 3. The answer to the latter question is generally the local politician and nationally, no one. Obama was an outsider, but not one who really appealed to that demographic as being on their side. Clinton is an insider and definitely part of the corporate/political collusion class. Trump is an outsider and at least pretends to be on their side. We'll see if President Trump works against the system for the disempowered, but Trump aligning with the GOP machine would be seen by many in this demographic as selling them out.

Despite having many very different political views from what I grew up around, I think I still have some of that same mistrust- I didn't vote for the Democratic presidential nominee for the first time in my life.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/06/republicans-and-democrats-fail-blue-collar-america?CMP=share_btn_link

[jrj84105]

Holy shit. LA and I just posted links from the same author from the same publication on the same page of ALUF.net.

Trump truly is the great Uniter we've all been waiting for.

[#1 Utefan]

Plus, only 3% of people who have insurance were affected by this premium increase.

So you conducted a poll? Feel free to share where you got your information if it is an objective source.

Also, 3% is a fairly large number if it sways even 1% of those to vote one way or another.

[LA Ute]

Holy shit. LA and I just posted links from the same author from the same publication on the same page of ALUF.net.

LOL!



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[#1 Utefan]

Because they wanted change. I don't know if you saw this article (link below) but it talks about how Democrats neglected Decatur in favor of Martha's Vineyard. The former is my hometown. I worked summer breaks in the soy/corn fields (until Monsanto bought everyone out and replaced us with migrant workers) and worked at a small auto parts factory in the winters until it was bought by Mitsubishi, then downsized, and closed. I wound up going for more education (hello U of U) and am part of the brain drain and population decline of that region. During those labor issues we had family friends on the picket line and family friends with a 24 hour security detail at their house, and Jesse Jackson was in town fanning the flames of racial tension. I feel like it was potentially a preview of the class and racial conflict we're poised to see the next 4 years.

Things have gotten progressively worse and worse. People feel like they are getting screwed by powers out of their control. Then the question is who's in collusion with those powers, and who's helping me? The answer to the first is unclear, but multinational corporations in collusion with a "fixed" political system would be in most people's top 3. The answer to the latter question is generally the local politician and nationally, no one. Obama was an outsider, but not one who really appealed to that demographic as being on their side. Clinton is an insider and definitely part of the corporate/political collusion class. Trump is an outsider and at least pretends to be on their side. We'll see if President Trump works against the system for the disempowered, but Trump aligning with the GOP machine would be seen by many in this demographic as selling them out.

Despite having many very different political views from what I grew up around, I think I still have some of that same mistrust- I didn't vote for the Democratic presidential nominee for the first time in my life.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/06/republicans-and-democrats-fail-blue-collar-america?CMP=share_btn_link

"racial conflict we're poised to see the next 4 years." Seems to me there has been a hell of a lot the past 4 years as well. I wasn't alive in the 60's but most people I know that remember that time say race relations in this country are as bad as they've seen them since that era.

I hope it gets better from here. Time tell if Trump can tone it down and become a president for all Americans. Lets just not try to pretend racial relations haven't been pretty strained the past 4-6 years under the current administration, though.

[#1 Utefan]

Trump won because people want change - majorities of the electorate want their high paying jobs back, immigrants deported, Obamacare repealed on Day 1, etc. A very large part of Trump's supporters don't really do nuance, or half measures.

I'm interested to see who is the temporary Senator from Utah, assuming Mike Lee is a SCOTUS justice in a couple of months.

It will be interesting to see how Trump balances his campaign rhetoric / promises with the need to decent to everyone else. His personality is not well suited to restraint.

I read this morning that Lee cast his ballot for McMullin as a "protest vote." I doubt Trump nominates a guy for SCOTUS that openly admits to voting 3rd party against him.

[Irving Washington]

Trump won because people want change - majorities of the electorate want their high paying jobs back, immigrants deported, Obamacare repealed on Day 1, etc. A very large part of Trump's supporters don't really do nuance, or half measures.

I'm interested to see who is the temporary Senator from Utah, assuming Mike Lee is a SCOTUS justice in a couple of months.

It will be interesting to see how Trump balances his campaign rhetoric / promises with the need to decent to everyone else. His personality is not well suited to restraint.
As others have suggested, Trump will delegate most work to subordinates. His interest is in feeding his colossal narcissism.

[jrj84105]

"racial conflict we're poised to see the next 4 years." Seems to me there has been a hell of a lot the past 4 years as well. I wasn't alive in the 60's but most people I know that remember that time say race relations in this country are as bad as they've seen them since that era.
Things haven't been on slow simmer, they've been getting progressively worse. And there aren't many high profile people in the world of race relations who are in it for anything other than self-aggrandizement it seems, so I don't see a lot of ready candidates for changing the tone.

You seem to see Trump's win as a validation of your own view points; just think about how validated poor uneducated white people who have felt muzzled in respect to racial and ethnic positions feel today. It's going to get real.

And I think you should reconsider your stance in Obama. Outside the office of the president, he will have a lot more room to speak freely. I really hope he doesn't shrink from the opportunity/responsibility to be THE level-headed leader on this issue, because I can't see anyone else stepping up. I think his post-presidential public life will be far more important- and hopefully more effective- than his time in office.

[#1 Utefan]

Letm
Let me simplify it:

Hillary won the popular vote.

Trump rallied the racists and sexists.

That concerns me.

Calling almost half the electorate racists and sexists seem quite stereotypical, self serving and irresponsible to me.

Maybe in a few weeks when you're emotions have settled some, you will realize that most of his supporters just weren't happy with the status quote and voted for change.

Again, I didn't vote for Trump and don't know if the change he will bring is what they are looking for or will be good for the country. Time will tell.

[Ma'ake]

Maybe. I think there's a case to be made that Trump won because the Democrats failed.

I think LA's article has some merit. Hillary just didn't get the voters to turnout to vote for her.

http://www.newsobserver.com/news/politics-government/article113641936.html


Agree. The Clintons are history. That's good. People wanted change, and Hillary being in public service for 40 years was pretty remarkable for the endurance, and exactly the wrong candidate for an electorate wanting dramatic changes.

Now, Republicans are unambiguously responsible for the next 2-4 years, perhaps beyond.

Obama's leaving the economy in reasonably decent shape - from a business cycle standpoint - with the increase in inequality and US wages moving toward an international equilibrium, not withstanding. How Trump intends to counter these broader economic tectonic shifts with policy from DC will be interesting to see.

Whether the Republican SCOTUS decides to reverse the gay marriage decision will be interesting to watch, as well. That change helped fuel the anger.

Based on talking with my wife and a couple of her family and friends, and folks here at work, brown people are *really* feeling distraught, afraid... at risk.

My investment advisor called and said the Biotech sector stocks are booming today, because they believe FDA scrutiny will evaporate. That's good (for me) because I own some stock in that sector. :)

[Ma'ake]

As others have suggested, Trump will delegate most work to subordinates. His interest is in feeding his colossal narcissism.

I don't disagree, but he's going to be really irritated when his supporters call him on how he promised a whole bunch of specific points of progress, within a short amount of time, and how it's going to make America better than ever before.

When that doesn't happen, does he then blame minorities? That's what one Indian PhD told me she fears.