Donald J Trump wins the presidency.

[WDZ-RR Poncho Sullivan]

What makes you think Hillary is trash, dangerous? Have you seen any of her policies?

 

Also, yeah, that is sort of what I'm saying. You can see the direct correlation between education level and votes yourself. Obviously you can't say "everyone."

 

Let's see... Her ardent support for the disastrous Trans-Pacific Partnership... Her and the DNC actively screwing Bernie Sanders out of the Democratic nomination... Her getting donations from Middle East countries that treat woman like shit and see homosexuality as a crime punishable by death... her idiotic idea to put up a no-fly zone over Syria, which would have sparked a war with Russia...

 

That's why I see her as dangerous. Had Sanders gotten the Democratic nod, odds are that the outcome of the election would be a lot different.

[polar]

Her and the DNC actively screwing Bernie Sanders out of the Democratic nomination...

 

You keep mentioning this. Yeah, I agree Bernie would have been a better nominee, but what did she have to do with "actively screwing" him out of the nomination? She won the primaries pretty easily.

[Kimika-chan]

Trump is a meme. America likes memes. Therefore American votes for trump. FeelsBadMan

[WDZ-RR Poncho Sullivan]

You keep mentioning this. Yeah, I agree Bernie would have been a better nominee, but what did she have to do with "actively screwing" him out of the nomination? She won the primaries pretty easily.

 

On the eve of the Democratic National Convention, Wikileaks released documents showing the DNC and Hillary Clinton were colluding with one another, and the DNC actively shit on the Sanders campaign .

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/23/us/politics/dnc-emails-sanders-clinton.html

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/damaging-emails-dnc-wikileaks-dump/story?id=40852448

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Democratic_National_Committee_email_leak

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/wikileaks-emails-show-dnc-favored-hillary-clinton-over_us_57930be0e4b0e002a3134b05

[Hyperqube]

I guess if we lived through 8 years of Bush we can live through 4 years of Trump.

But since he's probbably gonna bungle in concerns of global warming, time to say goodbye to Florida...

 

best analogy I've heard for the election is would you rather have a surgeon with a malpractice charge perform open heart surgery on you, or the manager of a local Wendy's. Let's see how the manager does

LOL

 

Yet another time, the person who won the popular vote loses due to the electoral college.

Well ... the Trumpians said it: the system is rigged.

I wonder if they will still be so presistant when the system is rigged in Trumps advantage.

 

And I wonder if Trump is going to change the system that got him elected

[The One]

Well ... the Trumpians said it: the system is rigged.

I wonder if they will still be so presistant when the system is rigged in Trumps advantage.

 

And I wonder if Trump is going to change the system that got him elected

 

The electoral college is flawed, but not quite "rigged".

[Keroro1454]

On the eve of the Democratic National Convention, Wikileaks released documents showing the DNC and Hillary Clinton were colluding with one another, and the DNC actively shit on the Sanders campaign .

 

You mean the Democratic Party wanted the candidate they felt both better represented the views of their party and was more easily electable? The humanity!

Interestingly, the RNC did the exact same thing with its pushback against Trump, but that oddly was not called out.

 

Her ardent support for the disastrous Trans-Pacific Partnership

 

Any sources that the TPP would indeed be disastrous, excluding of course extremely obviously biased sources- that seems to be a problem this forum has. Most economists agree that the idea that trade deals inherently cause unemployment is fundamentally flawed- it excludes completely the fact that automation is much more to blame.

 

Her getting donations from Middle East countries that treat woman like shit and see homosexuality as a crime punishable by death

 

While receiving these donations was less than morally ideal, she didn't grant these countries special favor or anything of that sort, despite the allegations that claimed otherwise.

 

her idiotic idea to put up a no-fly zone over Syria, which would have sparked a war with Russia

 

This idea was relatively agreed-upon by U.S. military, and let's have a look at the alternative plans laid out

 

a) Leave the Middle East- There's so many problems here it's hard to pinpoint one

Send in US troops- Wildly unpopular opinion, even if it would likely solve the conflict at a high cost

c) Mosul is just so sad. That's the extent of Trump's plan

 

Had Sanders gotten the Democratic nod, odds are that the outcome of the election would be a lot different.

 

This actually has a grain of truth to it. At the very least, a Biden ticket easily would have won. Both Biden and Bernie could likely have secured the white male Rust Belt vote that screwed her over so royally.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/video/us/politics/100000004708101/hillary-clinton-concession-speech-live-stream.html

 

Worth a view

[Professional Map Painter]

This idea was relatively agreed-upon by U.S. military

 

https://youtu.be/8mNgElVy7eQ?t=3m24s

[Zcrab]

https://youtu.be/8mNgElVy7eQ?t=3m24s

 

I don't really think that is clear in the video, not much later in the video he says the opposite.

 

https://youtu.be/8mNgElVy7eQ?t=270

 

I think he means it might be require the US to go to war?

[WDZ-RR Poncho Sullivan]

You mean the Democratic Party wanted the candidate they felt both better represented the views of their party and was more easily electable? The humanity!

Interestingly, the RNC did the exact same thing with its pushback against Trump, but that oddly was not called out.

 

 

Any sources that the TPP would indeed be disastrous, excluding of course extremely obviously biased sources- that seems to be a problem this forum has. Most economists agree that the idea that trade deals inherently cause unemployment is fundamentally flawed- it excludes completely the fact that automation is much more to blame.

 

 

While receiving these donations was less than morally ideal, she didn't grant these countries special favor or anything of that sort, despite the allegations that claimed otherwise.

 

 

This idea was relatively agreed-upon by U.S. military, and let's have a look at the alternative plans laid out

 

a) Leave the Middle East- There's so many problems here it's hard to pinpoint one

Send in US troops- Wildly unpopular opinion, even if it would likely solve the conflict at a high cost

c) Mosul is just so sad. That's the extent of Trump's plan

 

 

This actually has a grain of truth to it. At the very least, a Biden ticket easily would have won. Both Biden and Bernie could likely have secured the white male Rust Belt vote that screwed her over so royally.

 

http://www.nytimes.com/video/us/politics/100000004708101/hillary-clinton-concession-speech-live-stream.html

 

Worth a view

 

1) Bernie Sanders was both more popular and more electable. I reiterate, one of the key reasons why Hillary Clinton lost was specifically because the DNC foolishly thought supporting a candidate whom Wikileaks was reporting damning evidence on was a great idea. If you actually read the context of what was in those reports, you'd understand why so many people actually voted third party.

2) The Trans-Pacific Partnership paperwork was more anti-consumer than anything else. In a nutshell, the nations involved in the Trans-Pacific Partnership would adopt the same shoddy copyright laws that are inherently the backbone of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

http://www.modvive.com/2013/11/13/trans-pacific-partnership-means-gaming/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trade-deal-confirms-advocates-worst-fears_us_563b9061e4b0411d306ff765

 

3) The Middle East's main chief export is petroleum, and Clinton getting money from those countries over (I presume) a better deal on petroleum when she was in office would further illustrate that she cares less about the gay community and women in general, since both those groups are pilloried in that area of the world.

 

4) To put a no fly zone over Syria would essentially be the cause of World War 3. You do know what a no-fly zone means, right? It means any plane that flies over that space is shot down indiscriminately. Do you have ANY idea how fucking bad a Russian plane being shot down by an American missile would be? Staying in the Middle East and sendng in U.S. troops is essentially the same thing. In addition, why the fuck do we have to get ourselves involved in Syria, when we armed the basic skeleton of Al Qaeda against the Soviets in the 1980s, and screwed up so miserably in Iraq that we now have this ISIS horseshit in the region. Also, keep in mind that one of the heavy backers of the Hillary Clinton campaign is Lockheed Martin, which would benefit financially if Hillary put more boots on the ground in the Middle East.

 

Also watch this video, and try to justify that Hillary was more electable after all of this shit:

[#NewWizard]

tfw memes win elections. MAGA

[A Cyan Stone in Mustard]

You keep mentioning this. Yeah, I agree Bernie would have been a better nominee, but what did she have to do with "actively screwing" him out of the nomination? She won the primaries pretty easily.

 

That's just it, isn't it?

[Utsoob]

You goofs never thought it would happen.

 

Hell yeah.

[Hyperqube]

The electoral college is flawed, but not quite "rigged".

I wonder if the Trumpians would see it that way, if Trump got the popular vote, but didn't get elected ...

[#NewWizard]

I wonder if the Trumpians would see it that way, if Trump got the popular vote, but didn't get elected ...

 

Winning by mere 200k? it's nothing, if she won by 2 mil I'd agree with you here.

 

If total vote count actually mattered we would have a whole lot different picture since there are millions of republicans that don't vote because their vote doesn't matter in blue states and the other way around.

[Keroro1454]

1) Bernie Sanders was both more popular and more electable. I reiterate, one of the key reasons why Hillary Clinton lost was specifically because the DNC foolishly thought supporting a candidate whom Wikileaks was reporting damning evidence on was a great idea. If you actually read the context of what was in those reports, you'd understand why so many people actually voted third party.

 

Statements that claim Bernie was "more electable" is extremely subjective. The tagline socialist is still extremely unpopular in the U.S., that alone will hurt him. On top of this though, it was clear during the primaries his debating capabilites were no where near Clinton's- his ability to hold his own against someone "reasonable" was limited at best, the likelyhood he could handle the instability of a Trump debate is very very slim. Furthermore, during the primaries he faced a lot of flak from almost solely Democratic news sources; ie, sources that Republicans are unlikely to be watching. As such, his policies hadn't come under the full scrutiny that some of them deserved.

 

If I recall correctly, the brunt of Wikileaks came long after the primary, when the Russians weren't as involved. Also being dismissive and condescending with your assumptions that I haven't read the reports (I can assure you, I have), as you proceed to do throughout your post, is irritating, makes you look petty, and is generally a poor way to further a proper argument. I'm not going to respond again unless this is addressed. Carrying on to your next points,

 

2) The Trans-Pacific Partnership paperwork was more anti-consumer than anything else. In a nutshell, the nations involved in the Trans-Pacific Partnership would adopt the same shoddy copyright laws that are inherently the backbone of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act.

 

This is a fair point, though it's rather heavily contested and there's a lot of points that argue the other side as well; your article from the Huffington Post is obviously biased in so much that it barely glances at the potential benefits to the degree that it discusses the negatives. If you find articles though that address both sides equally but then explain how the negatives outweigh the positives, please do reply with them or PM to me, this is obviously a murky and contested issue that Trump too stands strongly on, and is by far one of the issues I plan to read heavily into in the coming weeks, especially factoring in the changes to everything a Trump presidency could bring.

 

3) The Middle East's main chief export is petroleum, and Clinton getting money from those countries over (I presume) a better deal on petroleum when she was in office would further illustrate that she cares less about the gay community and women in general, since both those groups are pilloried in that area of the world.

 

This is just blatant speculation, and poor speculation at that. Fracking has drastically reduced US dependence on foreign fuels, Clinton has no reason to jeopardize her re-election chances with such a shady deal given it's negligible impact in the long and short term

 

4) To put a no fly zone over Syria would essentially be the cause of World War 3. You do know what a no-fly zone means, right? It means any plane that flies over that space is shot down indiscriminately. Do you have ANY idea how fucking bad a Russian plane being shot down by an American missile would be? Staying in the Middle East and sendng in U.S. troops is essentially the same thing. In addition, why the fuck do we have to get ourselves involved in Syria, when we armed the basic skeleton of Al Qaeda against the Soviets in the 1980s, and screwed up so miserably in Iraq that we now have this ISIS horseshit in the region. Also, keep in mind that one of the heavy backers of the Hillary Clinton campaign is Lockheed Martin, which would benefit financially if Hillary put more boots on the ground in the Middle East

 

You do know her foreign policy was not just "LUL Gun 'em down", right? Syria is a complex issue that deserves its own thread (Does it have one anymore?), but effectively her goal was to not be fighting against Russia in Syria, hence avoiding the simple issue you laid out. Some speculation believed she would have been willing to create a coalition to deal with IS at the expense of keeping Assad in power. This would have been wisest anyhow since it's the most likely outcome in terms of ending the war, and afterwards a "peaceful" transition would have been more likely.

 

One is being present and one is actually sending in large quantities of troops- I'm not sure if you're considering military advisers/reconstruction advisers to be troops right now.

 

We're present in the area because it's a horrific humanitarian crisis that all the other peacekeeping countries are involved in to a degree, either financially or physically. Not to mention it's an understandably important objective to ensure a degree of stability and the destruction of a IS stronghold and it's growth.

 

Okay? If someone announced they want to legally price all the unusuals that lack prices at 1000 keys each I'd be behind that person.

[Professional Map Painter]

CNN now projecting that Trump will also win the popular vote with 92% of the votes counted so far.

[#NewWizard]

CNN now projecting that Trump will also win the popular vote with 92% of the votes counted so far.

 

 

Can someone explain how the fuck they are still counting the votes? Why does it take so long?

[Keroro1454]

Can someone explain how the fuck they are still counting the votes? Why does it take so long?

Absentee ballots, long ballots, military ballots, etc. 

[Twins_Mercury]

You wanna hear the real kicker? Electoral college doesn't even vote until until December 19.

[HarryG]

What makes you think Hillary is trash, dangerous? Have you seen any of her policies?

 

Also, yeah, that is sort of what I'm saying. You can see the direct correlation between education level and votes yourself. Obviously you can't say "everyone."

Having seen many of Hillary's policies, I can definitely see her as more dangerous than Trump. Trump will actively fight the Iran Act. Trump will warm up to Russia. That right there is actively attempting to fight two potential nuclear war scenarios. If Hillary was elected, a nuclear war with Russia would not be a distant possibility. Iran would be able to easily build nuclear weapons. They're not exactly our best friends in the world, are they? The carelessness Hillary has shown with confidential material, FBI charge or not, proves that she would not be a good president, even with past political experience. You can tell me she didn't get a criminal charge, and I would obviously agree with you. But she lied time and again about those e-mails; that is undeniable given the findings of the investigation. Not to mention the contents of many of those e-mails revealing more evidence that her foreign relations history is very dicey (namely, those on Benghazi). Trump wants to avoid a war, Hillary did not. Simple fact. Personally, I much prefer a Trump presidency even as a self-declared independent because besides the above, I also side with him on the eventual repealing of Obamacare, which is really just a mess.

[Keroro1454]

-snip-

 

But the Iran Act was in direct response to a nuclear threat of Iran. Trump's policy as it stands is simply "Fuck Iran", gathering this both from his numerous comments about the deal and Iran in general, and his agreement already to meet with Israel to discuss a closer relationship. Now I hate Iran's mullahs as much as the next person, but Trump is re-igniting a volatile sect of anti-Americanism that has been largely shrinking in Iran.

 

In terms of Russia, yes he does want to get "cozier" with Russia, but I'd prefer to not question whether or not my president is a tad...too cozy with Russia. In general the outside organizations that have endorsed Trump haven't exactly been the nicest: Farage, Russia, ISIS, al-Qaeda, the KKK, Fox News (I kid).

 

Email scandal was understandable, she handles issues concerning herself very poorly. Seen both in her health issues and her emails. The fact Benghazi is still being discussed is a little unfair to the point of being almost gross- even the families who lost husbands/fathers/sons have come out and said publicly that its clear there was no "evil underhanded purposeful execution of American troops". 

 

Obamacare is a mess, but not to the degree it needs to be repealed. Fundamentally it's extremely strong (And may I mention is a Republican bill pushed originally in the late 80s early 90s that was agree upon across the political aisle until Obama put his stamp of approval, at which point Republicans started screaming bloody murder about their own bill. The real issue with Obamacare is the heavy catering it does to the health insurance and drug lobbies, who clearly wrote the specifics into their favor. Remove that issue of corporate lobbying greed and it's a very powerful system.

[0123847a;fsdaklf]

[HarryG]

But the Iran Act was in direct response to a nuclear threat of Iran. Trump's policy as it stands is simply "Fuck Iran", gathering this both from his numerous comments about the deal and Iran in general, and his agreement already to meet with Israel to discuss a closer relationship. Now I hate Iran's mullahs as much as the next person, but Trump is re-igniting a volatile sect of anti-Americanism that has been largely shrinking in Iran.

 

In terms of Russia, yes he does want to get "cozier" with Russia, but I'd prefer to not question whether or not my president is a tad...too cozy with Russia. In general the outside organizations that have endorsed Trump haven't exactly been the nicest: Farage, Russia, ISIS, al-Qaeda, the KKK, Fox News (I kid).

 

Email scandal was understandable, she handles issues concerning herself very poorly. Seen both in her health issues and her emails. The fact Benghazi is still being discussed is a little unfair to the point of being almost gross- even the families who lost husbands/fathers/sons have come out and said publicly that its clear there was no "evil underhanded purposeful execution of American troops". 

 

Obamacare is a mess, but not to the degree it needs to be repealed. Fundamentally it's extremely strong (And may I mention is a Republican bill pushed originally in the late 80s early 90s that was agree upon across the political aisle until Obama put his stamp of approval, at which point Republicans started screaming bloody murder about their own bill. The real issue with Obamacare is the heavy catering it does to the health insurance and drug lobbies, who clearly wrote the specifics into their favor. Remove that issue of corporate lobbying greed and it's a very powerful system.

Even if anti-Americanism is shrinking in Iran at a large pace (I have my doubts), I believe they are to volatile to have nuclear weaponry. Iran despises Israel; Israel is one of our staunchest allies in that region. Israel also has their own nuclear arsenal and the consequences of a nuclear war between Israel and Iran would be something we'd want to avoid either way. The outside organizations supporting Trump doesn't mean he supports the views of those people; I would hope that it's clear that just because those people support him doesn't mean he supports them. Russia endorsing Trump is a good thing; getting 'to cozy' with Russia would be loads better than being to far estranged from them and being enemies with a country with 7,000 + nuclear weapons. The Benghazi thing I'll have to disagree with you on; I believe that is still a solid example of poor foreign relations on her part. A repeal of Obamacare I believe is necessary; there are just way to many flaws, chief among what it does to taxes, insurance, and people who actually work in the health-care industry, not to mention the favoring of big drug companies like you said. Besides, an issue I always like to point out is that generally younger people in less need of health-care actually get better deals on it with the way Obamacare is set up. To many things wrong with it to keep it any longer.

 

@013847a;fsdaklf, there are some informative points here about Clinton and her supporters in the Middle East, mainly. The stuff about Trump does seem to drip conservative bias, however, so I'm not sure if it's the best source.

[ABPOD]

Couldn't be happier. I'm glad other people are upset, it means it's right