Who are you voting for?

[JickyJuly]

With the super republican control, I am also concerned about Medicare. If my husband lost his insurance, I would need to make a few grand extra every month just to keep him alive and stuff. Is anyone else fearful over this? Someone tell me they can't knock out the Medicare.

 

[BellaPorsche]

I'm with her

 

[zippypinhead]

On the bright side, our future is already laid out for us.

 

[eyeteach]

You know, I had a whole diatribe typed out and was about to post it when I said "screw it...short and to the point is better." I could NOT bring myself to vote for HRC. Not because she's a democrat. Not because of her gender. But rather because she's a mean and evil person. We can go back and discuss Benghazi and her finger prints on those coffins; we can talk about how the DNC hand-picked her to be the nominee in the general election and how it rigged the primary for her because "it's HER time." Really??? You cheated Sanders and his supporters of their Constitutional rights simply because "it's HER time?" Gimme a break. Hell, we can talk about her corrupt family foundation and how it charged access to the U.S. State Dept (hello Wikileaks, we see you creeping around the corner.)

It's just easier to come out and say HRC is a corrupt, evil, vile, two-faced, piece of trash human being than trying to explain the populist movement that swept the country this election cycle; a movement where people of all races cast ballots for DJT. To paraphrase the 44th President of the United States: Elections have consequences, and WE won.

Suck on that, Hillary.

 

[Violet Dawn]

Well this thread is 10x more peaceful than my Facebook right now.

Think I'm going to stay here.

 

[ga5457]

I think that the only reason the election was as close as it was is because so many women voted for Clinton simply because she is a woman. It is just like the last two elections with Obama and the black votes.
James

 

[Lexi Emerson]

I think that the only reason the election was as close as it was is because so many women voted for Clinton simply because she is a woman. It is just like the last two elections with Obama and the black votes.
James

...this is a joke, right?

 

[ga5457]

No, it is not a joke. People will never admit it but it happens.

 

[Violet Dawn]

I think that the only reason the election was as close as it was is because so many women voted for Clinton simply because she is a woman. It is just like the last two elections with Obama and the black votes.
James

Obama got lots of votes from black citizens because his policies and ideas appealed to that group. Hillary got lots of women's votes for probably the same stuff. Just like Bernie Sanders appealed to the LGBT groups, black lives matter, feminists and pretty much every minority, despite him being absolutely none of them.

By your logic, I could easily say people only voted for Trump because they themselves were rich, white and male. But that most definitely isn't true. Most of us just like to vote for someone who appeals to our political beliefs, and it's pretty reasonable that those people who share our beliefs can be like us in one way or another.

 

[paige_orion]

I think that the only reason the election was as close as it was is because so many women voted for Clinton simply because she is a woman. It is just like the last two elections with Obama and the black votes.
James

Holy condescension batman.

Did you vote for Trump just because he is a white man? Is that the only single reason you can think of that would make him worthy of a vote? I highly doubt it. Therefore... It's pretty insulting to insinuate that women and POC cannot vote for a candidate that they feel is worthy... Based on criteria like issue stances or experience or things that are important. But noooope. The majority of us can't do research on the candidates and make an informed choice based on that! We are too simple for that - we side with candidates just because they have breasts and a vagina or because their skin is black.

 

[JickyJuly]

Not relevant. Hillary wasn't the only woman on the ballot. Even the Republicans could have had a female nominee this year if they pushed for it. Donald Trump is the 45th president in a row to have a penis. Does that mean that men are somehow unable to vote with their brains and, instead, fill out their voting card with their wiener? Since Hilldog won the popular vote and Jill Stein got a percentage too, I'm going to guess that humans are able to vote against their gender.

 

[Worship Jaclyn]

SO many people voted for Hilary because she is a woman. SO MANY. People were willing to look past and ignore so much because they wanted to vote for a woman, because it was such a feminist act. I understand that when people say things like this, it feels like they're saying you all voted with your vaginas. No, I don't think that. I think she had countless supporters who supported her as a person regardless of her gender. She also had countless people following her simply because she is a woman, don't deny that just because plenty of douchebags are saying it. Douches say things that are true sometimes. If you genuinely don't think that's true, that a woman would vote for a woman just because, then I'm really jealous that you don't know what so many radical new age feminist liberals are like.

 

[Worship Jaclyn]

With the super republican control, I am also concerned about Medicare. If my husband lost his insurance, I would need to make a few grand extra every month just to keep him alive and stuff. Is anyone else fearful over this? Someone tell me they can't knock out the Medicare.

Trump doesn't have something else in place which is why I think anything he does with healthcare is going to be an extremely slow process if it happens at all. I have thought about this a lot too but as far as everything I understand he only wants to replace Obamacare. I haven't seen a thing about medicaid or medicare.

 

[Shaun__]

I just love the sour loser attitude.

I assume you meant sore loser attitude.

Hillary didn't lose because people didn't show up to vote. Hillary lost because people showed up in overwhelming numbers for Trump

The popular vote will not be known for a while, but it looks close to half and half so far, not any overwhelming support for any candidate. It seems to be swinging in Hillary's favor though in the early numbers I have been seeing, but only the electoral votes really matter.

IPerhaps next time select a candidate that isn't a complete criminal. Or choose someone with a project instead of identity politics. Or use the democrat in the White House to unify instead of divide along racial lines. Or take blue collar workers into consideration every once in a while.

As for this other stuff, she did not do well enough to win and that is that. Maybe if my choice of Bernie had won the primary things would have been different, but I have no way of knowing that.

The real problem for the republicans is that they honestly have no excuse to not do all the things they have been saying they wanted to do for the last six or so years. They have two years to show America how they want to make things great again. If they screw this up they will end up like Obama with an opposing force sitting in Congress saying no to everything.

 

[JickyJuly]

Superdelegates and the electoral college should be scrapped.

 

[Shaun__]

Superdelegates and the electoral college should be scrapped.

An updated video from CGP Grey.

 

[BlairLuxe]

I've witnessed just as many people who say they're not voting for her because she's a woman as people who say they are voting for her because she's a woman. Probably no super accurate way to measure that, but it seemed like a wash to me. Neither of those seemed like the majority of the voter population, either.

 

[ACFFAN69]

SO many people voted for Hilary because she is a woman. SO MANY. People were willing to look past and ignore so much because they wanted to vote for a woman, because it was such a feminist act. I understand that when people say things like this, it feels like they're saying you all voted with your vaginas. No, I don't think that. I think she had countless supporters who supported her as a person regardless of her gender. She also had countless people following her simply because she is a woman, don't deny that just because plenty of douchebags are saying it. Douches say things that are true sometimes. If you genuinely don't think that's true, that a woman would vote for a woman just because, then I'm really jealous that you don't know what so many radical new age feminist liberals are like.

If this were the case, why were so few "radical new age feminists" clamoring to support Sarah Palin in her Republican run? Most feminists hated her. I think many people were excited at the idea of a "first female president" and the idea of making history, but that is very different then voting for her strictly because she was a woman.

The truth is, almost everyone voted for her simply because she was a democrat (and the corresponding political stances that come with it). I actually think more decided not to vote for her because of her gender then did.

This is coming from someone that has been outspokenly vehement against Hillary. I just can't imagine many people voting across party lines just because of her gender.

 

[AmberCutie]

SO many people voted for Hilary because she is a woman. SO MANY. People were willing to look past and ignore so much because they wanted to vote for a woman, because it was such a feminist act. I understand that when people say things like this, it feels like they're saying you all voted with your vaginas. No, I don't think that. I think she had countless supporters who supported her as a person regardless of her gender. She also had countless people following her simply because she is a woman, don't deny that just because plenty of douchebags are saying it. Douches say things that are true sometimes. If you genuinely don't think that's true, that a woman would vote for a woman just because, then I'm really jealous that you don't know what so many radical new age feminist liberals are like.

I wonder what percentage of votes went to her just because people wanted to vote against Trump. I've seen a lot of comments and replies to random polls stating that's why they voted Hillary.

 

[AmberCutie]

Hillary didn't lose because people didn't show up to vote. Hillary lost because people showed up in overwhelming numbers for Trump.

If these stats are accurate, I'd argue that it wasn't so much people showing up in overwhelming numbers for Trump, but moreso underwhelming numbers for Hillary. So he did average/expected, she did under average/expected.



Then again I use the word "expected" loosely because I think nobody actually expected The Donald to pull average republican vote numbers.

 

[mynameisbob84]

I wonder what percentage of votes went to her just because people wanted to vote against Trump. I've seen a lot of comments and replies to random polls stating that's why they voted Hillary.

That's the only reason I would have voted for her. I don't think she would have been a particularly good president, but preserving the status quo is at least preferable to World War 3.

 

[mutantdonut]

I want to take this opportunity to thank my thread pals during this cycle:

@LuckySmiles for helping combat the anti-trump propaganda in the media. We did it!

View attachment 66790

to @Lili_Loves for all her good hunches and intuition

View attachment 66791

and the latecomer @Simon for helping explain shit like everyone was 5 years old

View attachment 66792

We did it!

And now, by the power invested in me as the author, I hereby declare the end of this thread. It was a good, decent, and long thread, it served us for 60 pages and nearly a year. But most importantly, it had a beautiful finale.



See you in 73 days and another thread.

It's amazing that you use "sour (sore) loser" and "everyone was 5 years," while coming out with some of the most petulant responses among forum regulars in what could've been a much less passive-aggressive (and even sometimes less aggressive) disagreement, only to march around in victory like a sore winner. Essentially it's calling the kettle black.

 

[Lexi Emerson]

Of course there are people who voted for her because they wanted a female president but to say "the only reason the election was as close as it was is because people wanted a woman president" is asinine to me.

 

[ga5457]

You all are reading way too much into my statement. I never said anything about the majority voted for her because she is a women. "So many" can mean 1% or 50%. In this case I think it is just a few percent, maybe as much as 5%. If these few percent didn't vote for Clinton, Trump would have won by a larger margin and may have won the popular vote.

 

[Mila_]

Tough one because it only applies to women. Like, it's easy to assess marriage equality as a civil right because if I can marry the dick I like and Tom can't, he's being denied a right. I don't think being pro-life automatically makes someone right or even far right though. I would say the group who believes abortion should never be an option, even in cases where it would save the mother's life, are certainly far right. They would be denying her right to life.

So anyone opposing gay marriage is far right? That's a pretty heavy bag you are holding with the names of millions of people in it. Marriage law wasnt discrimnatory before gay marriage was passed by the Supreme Court. Gays could marry before that, they just had to marry someone from the opposite sex like everyone else. Gay marriage was simply a redefinition of what a marriage can be to include marriage between two people of the same sex. By considering the millions of americans who oppose it "far right" you are basically saying anyone who disagrees with you on the concept of marriage is a radical. Thats pretty bigoted in my opinion.

If this were the case, why were so few "radical new age feminists" clamoring to support Sarah Palin in her Republican run? Most feminists hated her. I think many people were excited at the idea of a "first female president" and the idea of making history, but that is very different then voting for her strictly because she was a woman.

The truth is, almost everyone voted for her simply because she was a democrat (and the corresponding political stances that come with it). I actually think more decided not to vote for her because of her gender then did.

This is coming from someone that has been outspokenly vehement against Hillary. I just can't imagine many people voting across party lines just because of her gender.

Because at the end of the day feminism is an empty flag. Feminism is a marxist white label packaged to appeal to women. The reason feminists hated Palin with the fury of 1000 suns and harassed her and mocked her was she was the wrong kind of woman and the living proof that the political enemy doesnt discriminate against women in their ranks. She had to be destroyed. Feminists will do the same to any female role model that is traditionally inclined. Try to say your life aspiration is to be a home maker in front of a group of radical feminists. Unless you are a man they will egg you.

Thats the reason they are so contradictory. Why do you think radfems tear their clothes and cry and moan about rape culture and then they defend islam with the same passion? Because feminism is not about ideals, its about tribal identity and tribes are about following the fad of the day, and the people leading the movement are marxist with an agenda.

 

[ACFFAN69]

Because at the end of the day feminism is an empty flag. Feminism is a marxist white label packaged to appeal to women. The reason feminists hated Palin with the fury of 1000 suns and harassed her and mocked her was she was the wrong kind of woman and the living proof that the political enemy doesnt discriminate against women in their ranks. She had to be destroyed. Feminists will do the same to any female role model that is traditionally inclined. Try to say your life aspiration is to be a home maker in front of a group of radical feminists. Unless you are a man they will egg you.

Thats the reason they are so contradictory. Why do you think radfems tear their clothes and cry and moan about rape culture and then they defend islam with the same passion? Because feminism is not about ideals, its about tribal identity and tribes are about following the fad of the day, and the people leading the movement are marxist with an agenda.

In other words, because the ideology and political stance is more important then the gender. Which was exactly my point.

 

[zippypinhead]

preserving the status quo is at least preferable to World War 3.

I'd say preserving the status quo is World War 3, which we've been involved in for about fifteen years now. I just don't think we recognize it for what it is because it's a Postmodern conflict, full of proxies, fought in the Third World, and controlled remotely. I don't believe Trump = nuclear winter or any of the apocalyptic scenarios that have been baking in our fevered imaginations over the last year and a half. Frankly, I'm hopeful that he's a different enough personality to maybe be able to be ballsy enough to redirect our too-big-to-fail military/industrial complex, and make good on his promises to shift focus to our crumbling infrastructure.

It's a pipe dream, but no such dreams even existed under a Clinton presidency.

 

[JickyJuly]

Gay marriage was simply a redefinition of what a marriage can be to include marriage between two people of the same sex. By considering the millions of americans who oppose it "far right" you are basically saying anyone who disagrees with you on the concept of marriage is a radical. Thats pretty bigoted in my opinion.

I'm not sure how calling someone far right is bigoted. People should own where they stand. I'm just assessing what the middle ground is differently than you are. You're assessing by what you think the average person believes I think? Feel free to correct me. I'm not trying to put words in your mouth. I'm putting middle ground as expecting other citizens to have the same rights as I do whether I like their choices or not. I think this is a more steadfast way to choose middle ground because what the average person believes/what is socially acceptable bias changes. For instance, interracial marriage wasn't Federally mandated as legal until 1967. So, if you and I were having this conversation at that time, your quote could be putting someone who feels interracial couples are a problem in the middle ground, but they certainly wouldn't be today. Either way, I don't think you can throw around the word "liberal" like it's a dirty word then get upset about my use of the phrase "far right".

 

[JerryBoBerry]

who knows maybe people will continue to use it to comment on Trump's presidency.

Or the idiots rioting just because he won.

Unfortunately... The reason Trump has zero political stinks is because he has ZERO political experience..... That is one of the most mind-boggling aspects of this entire mind-boggling race.

That's one of the things that makes the most sense. Hillary has political experience. So people know what she's like, and they didn't like her experience. They decided it was better to go with someone who had none over someone whose they hated.

Americans are fucking fed up with career politicians, they fucking hate the establishment, yet they chose Hillary Clinton to be the nominee thinking everyone would rally behind her. NOPE. She's literally the spokes woman for oligarchical governance. People hate her and the establishment so fucking much, that they are willing to vote for Donald Trump in protest. Yes, some Trump supporters are racists/bigots whatever, but some aren't. He was the "brick vote" for A LOT of people. Meaning they simply voted for him because they are fed up with the system and Donald Trump is the "brick" thats gonna destroy it all. Politics as we know it in America have changed forever.

"SOME" people chose Hillary, trust me, not everyone would have chose her. The only reason she was chosen was because they thought she had the liberal, democrat, minority, lgbtqhaj... votes to win it. She didn't.

As for Trump, I don't think most people voted for him just because they are fed up with the system. I think the overwhelming majority just hated the thought of Hillary being elected. She represents values and political stances that are against a huge number of peoples ideals.

This forum is sheltered from the truth, but here it is. There are a LOT of people in this country who do not like gays or lesbians. They don't support that lifestyle at all. There are a lot of people who do not like anyone who calls themselves cis or trans or whatever having any rights.

There's also a lot of people who want to make sure gun rights are secure. None of that shit like California where they keep chipping away at dumb laws making it impossible for people to actually own them.

There's also the matter of Free Speech, aka the First Amendment. Hillary is on record against it. She has stated within the first 30 days of her being elected she pledged to have a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United ruling. That upset a lot of people. You can read up on that if you want. I'll just say, don't believe the hippy dippy reason Hillary gave for wanting it. Look into what it really effected.

Then there's people who are pro-life. They don't really care for Hillary. Self explanatory there.

Religious freedom issues. She's firmly on the record against laws that religious people support. She has opposed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act at all state levels, the 'bathroom bill' in North Carolina, she promised to support the federal Equality Act (biggest threat to religious freedom out there).

There's many more reasons why someone would dread having her elected, but probably the big one has to do with timing. During a normal Presidents term there's some changes. But nothing too radical really happens for the most part. Law's would have to be submitted and get through Congress, and approved by the President. The really horrible ones 'usually' get lost in sub committee, never to be heard from again. Some like the Patriot Act do get shoved up the American Ass though.

But this time it's different, most likely this Presidency will elect 4 Supreme Court Justices. So major changes could be enacted, laws ruled unconstitutional, laws changed in bad ways. The person who could stack the deck in favor of their ideals would continue to have power long after they have left office.

Now the thing is, the average person who is in dismay that the beloved Hillary lost seems to have a misconception. All those ideals mentioned above are shared by a few misguided, bigoted, hate filled people. They aren't. In fact I doubt you'd find very many in the entire country who strongly adhere to all of them.

There's 'some' people who feel strongly about one or more of these issues. Some here, some there. They all decided it was important enough to vote against her. I don't think hating 'the establishment' even had much to do with it at all. If the democrats had put in a better candidate who didn't have such a long established record of being against so many damn things, we wouldn't be looking at President Trump today. They fucked up, pure and simple. They nominated someone that enough of this country could find at least one major thing she stood for they couldn't abide by.

Also, lets be honest. She totally messed up her own campaign. She and her staff made so many mistakes. Chief among them was just resting on their laurels. They assumed they had a lot more of the minority vote than they did, they assumed they could carry several states they didn't. So they let those minority votes go to 3rd party nominees, and they didn't bother to campaign like they should have. They fucked up.

Meanwhile, Trump, whether you like him or not, played a perfect Art of War campaign and won.
This guy sums it up way better on that if you want to know what I mean.

Clear back in March he laid out his reasons why Trump had already won.
imgur.com/gallery/HO5TT

Then today he did a follow up.
imgur.com/gallery/SxpJC

You can copy paste those, I don't want the forum to include two large imgur galleries here.

 

[Nordling]

How the hell is being against Citizens United against free speech? Free speech is given to HUMANS by the first amendment, not corporations....and money is not speech. As far as I'm concerned, giving billionaires more rights to affect the outcome of an election than average citizens...that is anti-free speech.