Donald John Trump: 2016 President-Elect

[millennium]

Giuliani's teasing another Trump surprise in the final four days.

Last paragraph:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/11/04/rudy-giuliani-is-claiming-to-have-insider-fbi-knowledge-does-he-really/

[Ladyrain]

6 hours ago, gatopretoNYC said:

My husband & I were cracking up over that. 

Also, what the hell was up with that huge polka dot bow tie Ghouliani was sporting today?

I know, right? 

Deflection.  He was hoping that we'd all be staring at that ridiculous clown tie instead of paying attention to his words, as he was so blatantly lying through his gigantic horse teeth.  That piss-poor excuse ranks right up (or down) there with "the dog ate my homework".

Edited November 5, 2016 by Ladyrain

[PatsyandEddie]

7 hours ago, Pixel said:

Well, dammit. 

I was the one who brought it up initially so I apologize for that. However, CC was supposed to be on the stump this weekend with Trump. Now he's not. His absence speaks volumes. MMV of course. 

[HumblePi]

6 hours ago, Kitty Redstone said:

I also hope Giuliani and those Brietbart-believing agents go down for this.  Clearly they don't have even the most basic critical thinking skills.

I know!  He looked ridiculous.  And whenever Matthews wouldn't let him off the hook, he got that wide-eyed, oh shit look on his face. 

It's seems that a lot of us saw the interview with Chris Matthews and Rudy Giuliani. I knew it was coming, so I recorded it and watched it later. Rudy Giuliani was well prepared for the question and he had a story ready, but Chris Matthews was not buying it. Giuliani did everything he could to pivot onto 'crooked Hillary' and all the same 'blah blah blah' that we've been hearing for a year. They have nothing really, not a thing.

As mentioned up-thread, Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, Rep. John Conyers, Jr. and Maxine Waters, all Ranking Members of the House Committees on Oversight and Government Reform and Judiciary, are seeking an investigation into the possible leak of information regarding James Comey's announcement last week. They want Giuliani investigated as having information about this announcement two days before James Comey made it.

This is the letter sent to the Department of Justice;

http://democrats.oversight.house.gov/news/press-releases/cummings-and-conyers-request-investigation-of-fbi-leaks-to-trump-campaign

For those who missed the Chris Matthews/Rudy Giuliani interview, here it is.

[Ladyrain]

I just heard some talking head on MSNBC say that if tRump had a 'good day' on Tuesday, it would be a testament to the RNC's intervention and propping, not due to any wise moves on the part of the DT campaign.  So here's what I don't understand:  The Donald is not a repub candidate in the same vein as Romney or McCain or Ryan or even Huckabee.  This man is a lying, thieving, opportunistic, narcissistic, misogynist pervert.  Those repubs who are going all out for him are doing so just to put a Win in the R column.  However - they all have wives or daughters or granddaughters - do they honestly want those women and girls growing up/living in a country dominated by tRump's perverted X-rated thought processes???  Have any of them even thought far enough ahead to realize what a DT victory on 11/8 would mean for the females that they purport to care about???  Or....maybe they have.  Maybe that's how they think about girls and women, too.  It literally makes me feel sick.  I have never been prouder to be a Democrat, as that distances me so far away from all the R's.  And yes, Bill was a womanizer, no doubt, but I always thought that was between him and Hillary.  if she chose to stay with him, so be it.  It didn't affect my world one iota.  But tRump saying 'there should be some punishment' for the woman who exercises her constitutional right to an abortion definitely reverberates throughout the nation.

Edited November 5, 2016 by Ladyrain

[Pixel]

34 minutes ago, HumblePi said:

It's seems that a lot of us saw the interview with Chris Matthews and Rudy Giuliani. I knew it was coming, so I recorded it and watched it later. Rudy Giuliani was well prepared for the question and he had a story ready, but Chris Matthews was not buying it. Giuliani did everything he could to pivot onto 'crooked Hillary' and all the same 'blah blah blah' that we've been hearing for a year. They have nothing really, not a thing.

As mentioned up-thread, Rep. Elijah E. Cummings, Rep. John Conyers, Jr. and Maxine Waters, all Ranking Members of the House Committees on Oversight and Government Reform and Judiciary, are seeking an investigation into the possible leak of information regarding James Comey's announcement last week. They want Giuliani investigated as having information about this announcement two days before James Comey made it.

This is the letter sent to the Department of Justice;

http://democrats.oversight.house.gov/news/press-releases/cummings-and-conyers-request-investigation-of-fbi-leaks-to-trump-campaign

For those who missed the Chris Matthews/Rudy Giuliani interview, here it is.

Chris's looks of bemusement and disgust on this are priceless. And Ghouliani looks like a ranting madman. 

[HumblePi]

It's been said so many times how critical Florida is for both candidates. They've both been stomping in Florida and even President Obama thought it vital enough to rally for Hillary there. Early voting by residents of Florida shows that Latino early voting is up 100% and that's huge. Hillary Clinton is on track to capture 79 percent of the Latino vote in Florida.

Here's the good part. Puerto Ricans have been streaming into Florida, and they sure aren't fans of Donald Trump. Hillary Clinton's representatives in Florida have actually been at the airports registering people to vote. The section asks would-be voters to select an affiliation: The options are Republican, Democratic, none at all, write in something else, or leave it blank. But back on the island, Puerto Ricans don’t have the same political parties. And according to advocacy group organizers and volunteers working on registration efforts, the labels of American governance often prove perplexing. Some of them will ask, ‘What party is the president?'. There are over 1 million of them in Florida, more than double the number 14 years ago and this is going to be a large factor in Hillary Clinton's favor. Even though Puerto Rican immigrants new to U.S. politics don't really know a lot about our elections or the candidates, the majority of them know about Donald Trump. Latino voters desperately want to reject Trump's disparaging rhetoric against Latinos, which has been a major piece of his campaign.

So there you go, some brighter news for the start of one day closer to a Hillary Clinton win.

[Ladyrain]

15 minutes ago, Pixel said:

Chris's looks of bemusement and disgust on this are priceless. And Ghouliani looks like a ranting madman. 

Ghouliani is a ranting madman.  It is just so ironic to hear tRump call Hillary 'unhinged', when this doofus behind him carrying his water sounds like he's one step away from the loony bin. 

[fireice13]

Vox had a really good article explaining how the Puerto Rican vote in Florida could deliver that state to Hillary. 

Basically, Puerto Rico's economy collapsed due to Republican policies from the 90s that went into effect a few years before the global crash of 2008. Many of them decided to leave the island and move to the mainland, most of them to Florida. The key point is that Puerto Ricans have citizenship so they could easily move and immediately be allowed to vote. 

[DeLurker]

8 hours ago, Desperately Random said:

I think the FBI needs to get a subpoena for Ghouliana's emails. I'm sure they will find some very interesting reading in there.  I would love to see Rudy go down for this. Help make up for all the anxiety that cretin has been a part of putting us all through.

 

8 hours ago, Kitty Redstone said:

I also hope Giuliani and those Brietbart-believing agents go down for this.  Clearly they don't have even the most basic critical thinking skills.

I know!  He looked ridiculous.  And whenever Matthews wouldn't let him off the hook, he got that wide-eyed, oh shit look on his face. 

While legal action should be done, I am against anything that puts Ghouliani in my line of sight for any reason.  I've had limited exposure to him until this election and now he is the face of my nightmares.  Well, one of the faces.  I can't bring myself to watch the Matthews interview if I ever want to sleep again.

1 hour ago, Ladyrain said:

Those repubs who are going all out for him are doing so just to put a Win in the R column.  However - they all have wives or daughters or granddaughters - do they honestly want those women and girls growing up/living in a country dominated by tRump's perverted X-rated thought processes???  Have any of them even thought far enough ahead to realize what a DT victory on 11/8 would mean for the females that they purport to care about??? 

This goes back to the issue brought up by Pussy Gate (or whatever it is being called) - it is morally offensive and criminal because it is morally offensive and criminal, not because they are related to women.

[zxy556575]

1 hour ago, Ladyrain said:

Have any of them even thought far enough ahead to realize what a DT victory on 11/8 would mean for the females that they purport to care about???

THE ONLY THOUGHT IS FOR THEIR CONTINUED POLITICAL VIABILITY. Need to toady up to a sniveling shitstain? Okey dokey!

[random chance]

12 hours ago, Ladyrain said:

Melanoma Trump

AHahahahahaha.   I know it's wrong but that's what I always call her in my head.  Also, whenever she talks all I can think about is "bring me the head of Moose and Squirrel."

 

12 hours ago, Padma said:

It's moments like Trump dissing Christie about the bridge that, for a moment, makes me feel in touch with why some people like him. 

Yeah if he was just commenting on the election I'd probably find him entertaining. I thought the debate clips were funny way back when I thought he had no chance of making it out of the primaries. (Not so funny NOW of course.)

[HumblePi]

I just watched a large part of Donald's 45 minute speech at his rally in Florida. It was covered in entirety by Fox News Verney and Company. When it finished, Stuart Varney looked proudly into the camera and said "Can I just ask everybody a question? When is the last time you watched a politician or any national leader, speak for 45 minutes straight, and you listened to every word? When was the last time you saw that? He held that crowd from beginning to end. They were clearly very much for him. He looked like a man that's engaged with his audience and engaged with the country. That's my position." He asked his guest commentator if she thought that Hillary's speech today would be as good and if she thought that Hillary could work the crowd like Donald Trump worked that crowd. She answered "well, it's hard to get people enthusiastic and excited when the gist of your message is attacking and dragging down your opponent

Well, I watched as much as I could stand and all I heard was the same old things he's been saying for almost 2 years. ie: "the wall', open borders, Hillary is a crook, illegal immigrants coming to kill us, etc"

I was totally uninspired by a single word and all I heard was;

[Ladyrain]

51 minutes ago, DeLurker said:

 

While legal action should be done, I am against anything that puts Ghouliani in my line of sight for any reason.  I've had limited exposure to him until this election and now he is the face of my nightmares.  Well, one of the faces.  I can't bring myself to watch the Matthews interview if I ever want to sleep again.

This goes back to the issue brought up by Pussy Gate (or whatever it is being called) - it is morally offensive and criminal because it is morally offensive and criminal, not because they are related to women.

Oh, I totally agree.  But since so many R's in public office seem to be so narrow-minded and self-interested, I'm kind of taken aback that they haven't considered what this means to the females in their own families; that rating women's boob size is offensive to their wives or daughters too; that a man in power over their wives and daughters in the workplace may grab their private parts now and think it's 'cool'; that a man in such a position of power would say that it's problematic to have a wife in the work force and how that line of thinking could stifle the smart and gifted women in their own families.  I know I'm not explaining this well because I am so emotional about this issue that I can't even think straight, but hopefully I'm conveying the gist of it, at least. 

42 minutes ago, lordonia said:

THE ONLY THOUGHT IS FOR THEIR CONTINUED POLITICAL VIABILITY. Need to toady up to a sniveling shitstain? Okey dokey!

This whole scenario reminds me of the cowardly, self-serving men that jumped into the lifeboats on the Titanic, letting women and children go down with the ship. 

[zxy556575]

When I look at the post counts for the HRC vs Trump threads, I'm reminded of how reports of bad customer service reach twice as many ears as praise for a good service.

At any rate I'm grateful to have this space to, frankly, release my venom and take comfort in the like-minded bile of others.

[needschocolate]

I would put this is the funny stuff thread if it weren't so true.  College Humor's private message to Ivanka

10 hours ago, gatopretoNYC said:

I saw that clip on several MSBNC shows tonight, but it is from December 2015, not today.

In other words, Trump either "hired" a guy he knew was corrupt or Trump is a liar.**

To all those Trump supporters out there - Do you support him because he tells it like it is and chooses to work with law-breakers, or because he is liar who was duped by Christie - I don't get it. How does supporting him make any sense?

** My official opinion is both - he is a liar who likes to work with corrupt people.

8 minutes ago, HumblePi said:

I just watched a large part of Donald's 45 minute speech at his rally in Florida. It was covered in entirety by Fox News Verney and Company. When it finished, Stuart Varney looked proudly into the camera and said "Can I just ask everybody a question? When is the last time you watched a politician or any national leader, speak for 45 minutes straight, and you listened to every word? When was the last time you saw that? He held that crowd from beginning to end. They were clearly very much for him. He looked like a man that's engaged with his audience and engaged with the country. That's my position." He asked his guest commentator if she thought that Hillary's speech today would be as good and if she thought that Hillary could work the crowd like Donald Trump worked that crowd. She answered "well, it's hard to get people enthusiastic and excited when the gist of your message is attacking and dragging down your opponent

How hard is it to hold the crowd when is is filled with people that support you? However, I think he held their attention because no one can believe that he could speak for 45 minutes without attacking or dragging down his opponent.  

@HumblePi - I didn't hear his speech, nor will I (I just don't have your intestinal fortitude).  Did he really go the whole 45 minutes without saying Hillary was going to jail or that she is corrupt or anything negative about her?

[HumblePi]

12 minutes ago, Ladyrain said:

Oh, I totally agree.  But since so many R's in public office seem to be so narrow-minded and self-interested, I'm kind of taken aback that they haven't considered what this means to the females in their own families; that rating women's boob size is offensive to their wives or daughters too; that a man in power over their wives and daughters in the workplace may grab their private parts now and think it's 'cool'; that a man in such a position of power would say that it's problematic to have a wife in the work force and how that line of thinking could stifle the smart and gifted women in their own families.  I know I'm not explaining this well because I am so emotional about this issue that I can't even think straight, but hopefully I'm conveying the gist of it, at least. 

Jason Cheffetz has considered what effect this would have on his 15 year old daughter. "I'm out. I can no longer in good conscience endorse this person for president," Chaffetz said the day after The Washington Post revealed Trump's 2005 "Access Hollywood" tape. The breaking point, he went onto say, was that he couldn't look his 15-year-old daughter in the eye and talk about what the GOP presidential nominee said: "It is some of the most abhorrent and offensive comments that you can possibly imagine."

Okay, fast forward 19 days and Jason Cheffetz he breaks some kind of political flip-flop record with this tweet,

This is the same guy that tried to crucify Hillary Clinton in the James Comey hearing. This is an elected official serving in Congress. This is an elected official that is the chairman of the United States House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform!  I for one, am hoping that when Hillary Clinton wins that she will start cleaning out the house in Washington. The Republicans will take a big hit for all this conspiring against Clinton and have no doubt about it, this HAS been a collective conspiracy.

Edited November 5, 2016 by HumblePi

[Frost]

I just watched that Ghouliani interview.  Now I have to go take a shower.  I think what offends me the most about Donald's apologizers is the constant smirk and smug attitude they universally display.  As if they truly believe they are smarter than Anderson Cooper or Chris Heyes or Hallie Jackson and that their blathering is putting these idiot journalists in their place.   Sorry Rudy, Kellyanne, et al.  Legitimate journalists actually see right through you to your rotten core, and so do we.

[Pixel]

28 minutes ago, lordonia said:

When I look at the post counts for the HRC vs Trump threads, I'm reminded of how reports of bad customer service reach twice as many ears as praise for a good service.

At any rate I'm grateful to have this space to, frankly, release my venom and take comfort in the like-minded bile of others.

It reminds me of the thing that went around FB a while ago about checking to see how many of your friends have liked either of them on FB. Trump has way more followers, but it's not because he's popular. It's because a train wreck is always more fun to watch. I love Hillary and hate Trump, and yet it's his antics that have me riveted to this election. The other thread has more pages, but it's all negative. It's not like it's full of supporters. 

[MulletorHater]

And, because these dumbasses just can't help themselves, we have yet another Drumpf supporter trying to commit voter fraud.  She tried to cast a ballot for her dead husband.  Bless her.

Ding-A-Ling Voter Actually Went There

And, yes, I watched the Ghouliani segment on Chris Matthews last night.  I actually had my coat on to go to the grocery store to pick up dinner, but I was riveted.  And, then I needed some air.  Was it our imaginations that just a few days ago, he was downright gleeful because something BIG was coming that would turn this thing around?  Now, he's attempting to walk it back.  Sorry, you grotesque fucker, but it doesn't work that way.

And, if he thought Chris was there for that shit, he picked the wrong one because Chris wasn't having it either.  It seems it finally clicked in that cavern between Ghouliani's ears that--OOPS!--the optics!  Especially now that Mad Maxine Waters (whom I love) and others are demanding an investigation.

It's as if Drumpf's surrogates and some of his supporters share one brain cell and you have to figure out which of them is using it on any given day.

[Darian]

7 minutes ago, MulletorHater said:

And, because these dumbasses just can't help themselves, we have yet another Drumpf supporter trying to commit voter fraud.  She tried to cast a ballot for her dead husband.  Bless her.

Ding-A-Ling Voter Actually Went There 

Wait for it...wait for it....she's an election judge.  And she still doesn't believe she did anything wrong. I'm sorry she lost her husband, but she should know the rules. 

[Danny Franks]

Trump's base of support seems to be made up of the worst stereotypes America has to offer. These people... words fail me. But the trouble is, this election is showing that there are millions of them. Tens of millions. That's one of the problems that faces America, but the thing is, half of the politicians don't want to fix it. The Republicans don't want an educated, engaged, aware electorate, because that disadvantages them. As Rob Corddry once said, "facts have a liberal bias". How can you keep denying climate change and evolution and equality if the electorate knows you're lying to them?

I do worry that there will be significant violence on Tuesday. Trump is encouraging his supporters to "watch" voting places, that's bad enough. But he's bragging about them going to vote in his merchandise, which would mean they would be turned away. Can't we all see a lot of uninformed, gullible voters thinking that them not being allowed to vote because they're wearing a Trump hat is proof that they're being conspired against? That the election is being rigged?

I would honestly have police stationed at every voting place in the country. Hell, maybe even the damned national guard.

 

Also, if any of you fancy dipping your toes into pure bile and venom, Salon has an article up about Milo Yiannopoulos's 'Twitter for racists' app. In case anyone was under the impression that he wasn't a revolting excuse for a human being. And don't worry, it's not just racists, the sexism is equally important to them.

Edited November 5, 2016 by Danny Franks

[scriggle]

If you have some time to kill:

Donald Trump: The unauthorized database of false things

Quote

The Star’s Daniel Dale has been fact checking Trump’s public statements on the U.S. election campaign trail since September 15. Below, find the complete list of the false statements Dale has found.

[DeLurker]

2 hours ago, Ladyrain said:

I know I'm not explaining this well because I am so emotional about this issue that I can't even think straight, but hopefully I'm conveying the gist of it, at least. 

You weren't unclear and your emotion is shared.  It is repugnant on so many levels, not just one.

55 minutes ago, Darian said:

Wait for it...wait for it....she's an election judge.  And she still doesn't believe she did anything wrong. I'm sorry she lost her husband, but she should know the rules. 

Unfuckingbelievable.  They aren't "rules", they are law.

[DeLurker]

15 hours ago, starri said:

When the National Enquirer goes low, the Wall Street Journal goes lower.

Has he, though?

I read the WSJ article but am confused:  How are they going lower that the National Enquirer on this?

[Padma]

I've discovered an inner mean streak where I actually want all the Trump voters intentionally committing fraud to get arrested and booked for a crime. (The 88 year old doesn't need to stay overnight in jail.)  They are heinous.

I -do- LOVE it that she got caught! And I hope all of them will. This was a heartening sentence in the article: "The fraud was caught by a group of Republican and Democratic election judges who routinely compare votes cast to recent death records to check for fraud like this."   Hooray for Democratic and fair elections!

[Ladyrain]

4 hours ago, random chance said:

AHahahahahaha.   I know it's wrong but that's what I always call her in my head.  Also, whenever she talks all I can think about is "bring me the head of Moose and Squirrel."

 

Yeah if he was just commenting on the election I'd probably find him entertaining. I thought the debate clips were funny way back when I thought he had no chance of making it out of the primaries. (Not so funny NOW of course.)

Moose and Squirrel!  LOL !!!   Thank you SO much for the laugh; I sorely needed that!

[NextIteration]

Why the hell is the Cheeto Jesus coming to my state?  Seriously, we haven't gone Republican since 1972.

[NewDigs]

16 hours ago, Pixel said:

Lawrence O'Donnell also said a story is breaking that the National Enquirer was paid to sit on a story about an affair Trump had with a Playboy bunny while married to Melania. While I know none of his supporters will give a shit about this, it's nice to see some chickens coming home to roost. 

 

16 hours ago, starri said:

When the National Enquirer goes low, the Wall Street Journal goes lower.

Has he, though?

Not a WSJ subscriber so was unable to read entire article but makes me wonder how many other stories various outlets might be sitting on.

Edited November 5, 2016 by NewDigs

[HumblePi]

Bill Maher show epilogue , November 4th

Edited November 5, 2016 by HumblePi

[Padma]

9 minutes ago, NextIteration said:

Why the hell is the Cheeto Jesus coming to my state?  Seriously, we haven't gone Republican since 1972.

You're taking one for Wisconsin, which got cancelled today because they've suffered enough.

National Enquirer Paid $150,000 to Silence a Trump Mistress

The agreement between Ms. McDougal (the 1998 Playmate of the Year) and AMI ... gives [Enquirer publisher David Pecker, a Trump friend & supporter] the rights to “any romantic, personal and/or physical relationship McDougal has ever had with any then-married man.” The document says AMI is entitled to damages of at least $150,000 if she discloses her story elsewhere on social media or gives interviews about it.

[Kitty Redstone]

A excerpt from a New York Times opinion piece on the dangers of Donald and his fans to the rest of the country:

Quote

Denouncing Trump as a liar, or describing him as merely entertaining, misses the point of authoritarian propaganda altogether. Authoritarian propagandists are attempting to convey power by defining reality. The reality they offer is very simple. It is offered with the goal of switching voters’ value systems to the authoritarian value system of the leader.

This is particularly apparent in places like Ohio, where Mr. Chinese Steel has given people the impression that he's a change-maker and is somehow going to bring back steel mill jobs all by himself.

"Beyond Lying: Donald Trump’s Authoritarian Reality"

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/05/opinion/beyond-lying-donald-trumps-authoritarian-reality.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-right-region&region=opinion-c-col-right-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-right-region

[biakbiak]

17 minutes ago, NextIteration said:

Why the hell is the Cheeto Jesus coming to my state?  Seriously, we haven't gone Republican since 1972.

Politico is reporting he fired pollsters because he didn't want to pat them.

[NewDigs]

4 hours ago, stewedsquash said:

https://www.catholics4trump.com/the-true-story-donald-trump-did-not-mock-a-reporters-disability/

Another viewpoint about the subject.

Brought over from Hillary's thread.

I'm guessing that Catholics4Trump is a similar organization to BlacksforTrump or any number of fill-in-the-blank for Trump organizations.

Edited November 5, 2016 by NewDigs

[Kromm]

19 hours ago, Pixel said:

Called it! A small joy in this pile of crap. 

Coincidentally "pile of crap" is what most people in his state call Governor Christie, I believe.

Oddly enough it took standing next to Donald Trump to make Christie look good (at least in comparison to someone).

13 minutes ago, biakbiak said:

Politico is reporting he fired pollsters because he didn't want to pat them.

Do you mean "pay"?  Because that would be right in line with what we know of Orange Julius Caesar. 

Edited November 5, 2016 by Kromm

[mustbekarma]

13 minutes ago, biakbiak said:

Politico is reporting he fired pollsters because he didn't want to pat them.

If they were pretty blondes, Trump definitely wanted to "pat" them.

[NextIteration]

7 minutes ago, biakbiak said:

Politico is reporting he fired pollsters because he didn't want to pat them.

He's trying to stiff well respected Republican pollster  Tony Fabrizio.  As an aside, the rode hard put up wet looking campaign manager is a pollster as well.

[NextIteration]

11 minutes ago, NewDigs said:

Brought over from Hillary's thread.

I'm guessing that Catholics4Trump is a similar organization to BlacksforTrump or any number of fill-in-the-blank for Trump organizations.

The GODS2.com Blacks for Trump guy was covered on Rachel's show the other night.  It's the second coming of the Miami Yahweh ben Yahweh death cult.

[random chance]

Orange Julius Caesar is my new favorite name for him.  (Damn, now I want an Orange Julius - how ironic.)

[Kromm]

16 minutes ago, Kitty Redstone said:

Denouncing Trump as a liar, or describing him as merely entertaining, misses the point of authoritarian propaganda altogether. Authoritarian propagandists are attempting to convey power by defining reality. The reality they offer is very simple. It is offered with the goal of switching voters’ value systems to the authoritarian value system of the leader.

---------------------

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/05/opinion/beyond-lying-donald-trumps-authoritarian-reality.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-right-region&region=opinion-c-col-right-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-right-region

Here's the problem.

As much as we hate to admit it (because it seems to deride a whole gigantic group of people, some who may even post here) the problem is that kind of language sounds like elitist claptrap. "Liberal intellectuals" some will say and just dismiss it. A six syllable word followed immediately by a four syllable word ("authoritarian propaganda"). 

But it's not even like we can use the old stock phrase "like Hilter" either (even though Trump is quite literally using a number of techniques right out of Hilter's playbook, unlike most of the times when people say "like Hilter" and simply mean "dangerous"). That phrase has lost it's value with the number of times it's been overused to describe well... everything. 

I don't know how this country gets out of the trap it's in now. Even if Trump loses, that desire to have a Strongman telling you what to do is hard to shake. Especially if people can justify it to themselves by having scapegoats (in WWII "The Jews", now "the Muslims", "The Mexican Rapists", probably also still "The Jews", disguised as "The Elite Bankers", etc.) and a real solid belief that the biblical end times are coming, so they'd better stand by the literalism of their bible now... or else. 

[Pixel]

My new favorite is Cheeto Jesus. 

[Kromm]

14 hours ago, Padma said:

Christie and Giuliani --Trump's too closest henchmen--were shown as liars in the same day. Birds of a feather!

My big fear is that there will be a backlash against the NY/NJ region because of these three nightmarish representatives (Trump being the third). The bastion of liberal free thought in America will now be characterized by three disgusting contradictions to that. 

13 minutes ago, random chance said:

Orange Julius Caesar is my new favorite name for him.  (Damn, now I want an Orange Julius - how ironic.)

Indeed it is. Orange Juliuses taste great, and the original Caesar, for all his faults, was an effective leader. Trump?  Not so much.  But really the point is he's Orange and a Dictator. Probably that's enough.

[Pixel]

Trump is that guy sitting alone at the bar who starts inexplicably spouting his word-salad views at you while you're just waiting for the bartender to make your margarita so you can get back to your friends. 

[needschocolate]

1 hour ago, NextIteration said:

Why the hell is the Cheeto Jesus coming to my state?  Seriously, we haven't gone Republican since 1972.

Because, in addition to being a racist, homophobic, misogynistic, lying, cheating, delusional, out-of-touch, obnoxious, sadistic, corrupt, egotistical, irrational, orange sociopath, he is also an idiot.  

 

15 minutes ago, Pixel said:

My new favorite is Cheeto Jesus. 

The first time I saw "Cheeto Jesus" my mind immediately wanted to combine the words into one - Cheesus.  And when I said it allowed, it sounded like Cheats Us, which is rather appropriate.

[Padma]

You know, going back to the Founding Fathers (not counting the intellectual ones who had slaves--but opposed slavery--as part of the South), there were two Americas in the leadership--and compromises in forming the Senate and House addressed some of that.

Still, from the beginning there were two Americas--slave states and free--with the ideology that went with them. The Civil War made the ideological split real--and then forced everything to go back together. But we were still two Americas.

We seem like two Americas still.  The conservative, less educated white Christian Trump supporters who appreciate an authoritarian leader and want to return the country to the 1950s.

And the ethnically & religiouisly diverse, better educated, less church-centered, less authoritarian-inclined, Hillary supporters, which also includes more young people.  Many in the first group depends for their world view on right wing radio, alt-right websites, FOX and, with Trump's encouragement, sees the MSM as "liars" and "the most corrupt and dishonest people in the world".

Two Americas with very little in common. What brings us together after an election that has only highlighted our differences and made it so difficult to accept losing and find common ground with the other side?

They think Hillary is Satan and we think Trump is Hitler (or maybe Mussolini).

Edited November 5, 2016 by Padma

[Kromm]

18 minutes ago, Padma said:

You know, going back to the Founding Fathers (not counting the intellectual ones who had slaves--but opposed slavery--as part of the South), there were two Americas in the leadership--and compromises in forming the Senate and House addressed some of that.

Still, from the beginning there were two Americas--slave states and free--with the ideology that went with them. The Civil War made the ideological split real--and then forced everything to go back together. But we were still two Americas.

We seem like two Americas still.  The conservative, less educated white Christian Trump supporters who appreciate an authoritarian leader and want to return the country to the 1950s.

And the ethnically & religiouisly diverse, better educated, less church-centered, less authoritarian-inclined, Hillary supporters, which also includes more young people.  Many in the first group depends for their world view on right wing radio, alt-right websites, FOX and, with Trump's encouragement, sees the MSM as "liars" and "the most corrupt and dishonest people in the world".

Two Americas with very little in common. What brings us together after an election that has only highlighted our differences and made it so difficult to accept losing and find common ground with the other side?

They think Hillary is Satan and we think Trump is Hitler (or maybe Mussolini).

And thus the problem is displayed.

I know I do it in my posts, and whether you intended to or not you also did it in yours. We (again, I am no better and maybe even worse with this) can't even talk about "the other America" without sounding like we think we are smarter than them.

Because we DO think we are.

This is not me saying I think we aren't. My own history of posts would contradict that. But I can see how it probably looks from the other side. A bunch of people talking down to them. And for the ones who believe in god, we're also the god-deniers. 

Is it any wonder the divide is so sharp?

The only relief is that things seem to go in waves. A generation of people who are now grown somehow wound up more conservative than their parents, but I think the one growing up now is due to swing the other way. Hopefully not in a somewhat feckless Occupy manner (which maybe fed into Bernie Sanders affecting current politics, so not totally useless), but just in general attitudes.

That said, Trump is not a disease, as much as we'd like to act like he is, but a symptom. Far more is wrong with America than can be explained by one orange sociopath. And while it's easy (and yet TRUE) to say that most people want things simple (upthread I talked about how fruitless it probably is to use phrases like "authoritarian propaganda", like The New York Times did, to reach people) I really don't know what solves this problem other than time.

Edited November 5, 2016 by Kromm

[backgroundnoise]

In past elections, there have been friendly rivalries going on where I work.  People would freely talk about who they are voting for and why.  But this year, it's as if the whole subject is too provocative to even bring up.

I know for myself, that I can't come out and say what I believe:  Any one voting for Trump should be ashamed of themselves.  At least I can say it here.

[Landsnark]

8 minutes ago, Padma said:

They think Hillary is Satan and we think Trump is Hitler

Interesting statement.   Trump IS actually very similar to Hitler in the way he divides and uses propaganda.  Actual facts, phrasing, philosophies, tactics, patterns between the two can be observed and correlated.  Trump promotes himself as a totalitarian strongman.  Comparing Trump to Hitler or garden variety totalitarian strongmen is a supportable position to hold, to a degree. 
Satan isn't real... so we'll say that Hillary is entirely corrupt and bent on... I dunno.. "bad things."  That's actually not true.  She used a private email server.  Satanic?  Corrupt?  She doesn't trust the press, so she can be reserved and circumspect with her energy.  Satanic?  Corrupt?  She was Secretary of State when there was a terrorist attack.  Satanic?  Corrupt?  Her husband, former President of the United States, helps manage one of the best global charities ever.  Satanic?  Corrupt?  Her efforts made her wealthy.  Satanic?  Corrupt?
They hate her because she's a woman.  She's an attorney.  She's Ivy League educated.  She's ambitious.  She's "elite."  She's worked in government and is a traditional politician.  They've been told she rigged the game and is out for herself.  She's not like them; their provincial lives are unfulfilling.  They HATE her for those reasons. 
The sentence quoted could be better written, "They're stupid, and Trump is dangerous."

[MulletorHater]

43 minutes ago, Kromm said:

Here's the problem.

As much as we hate to admit it (because it seems to deride a whole gigantic group of people, some who may even post here) the problem is that kind of language sounds like elitist claptrap. "Liberal intellectuals" some will say and just dismiss it. A six syllable word followed immediately by a four syllable word ("authoritarian propaganda"). 

But it's not even like we can use the old stock phrase "like Hilter" either (even though Trump is quite literally using a number of techniques right out of Hilter's playbook, unlike most of the times when people say "like Hilter" and simply mean "dangerous"). That phrase has lost it's value with the number of times it's been overused to describe well... everything. 

I don't know how this country gets out of the trap it's in now. Even if Trump loses, that desire to have a Strongman telling you what to do is hard to shake. Especially if people can justify it to themselves by having scapegoats (in WWII "The Jews", now "the Muslims", "The Mexican Rapists", probably also still "The Jews", disguised as "The Elite Bankers", etc.) and a real solid belief that the biblical end times are coming, so they'd better stand by the literalism of their bible now... or else. 

I think sometimes it depends.  For instance, respected Conservative writer, David Frum, wrote an excellent piece for The Atlantic, "The Conservative Case for Voting for Clinton."  Don't Gamble on Trump

Now, Mr. Frum is in no way, shape or form a Liberal.  Neither are some of the other Conservative writers who see Drumpf for the danger that he is.  But, some people will not be convinced no matter who the message is from.  For instance, I had to actually step back from a woman whom I used to respect because in spite of reading this piece, she despises Hillary Clinton so much that she still believes that Drumpf would be a better alternative.  After all, according to her, Hillary does not embody Conservative values and she resented Frum for trying to make the case.  See, this is when I have to cut your ass off because when you value your fucking ideology more than you do our friendship and the fate of this country then there isn't anything else to be said.  This woman is as elitist as you can get, is well educated and doesn't fit the stereotype of the pitchfork wielding, knuckle-dragging mouth breather one may expect.  I believe there are a lot of voters like this, such as those evangelicals and "values voters" that Bill Maher so brilliantly called out.  All they care about is getting rid of Roe v. Wade.  These are people so wedded to an ideology that there is nothing you can say to convince them even if you used simple sentences: ("See Don Run!  Run, Don, run!").  

At this point, I take the attitude that you are going to believe what you believe and far be it from me to keep pulling my hair out especially when you know good and damn well that Drumpf's "policies" and his marriage to the white supremacist movement would be detrimental to me and many of the people we know and love.  

[Landsnark]

10 minutes ago, Kromm said:

We (again, I am no better and maybe even worse with this) can't even talk about "the other America" without sounding like we think we are smarter than them

The world isn't equivalently smart.  Stupid people tend to fear the unknown and fear change and are small "C" conservative.  The other America IS stupider than the smarter America. 
It's a shame that poor white men vote against their own self interests because God, guns, gays, blacks, army men, flags, eagles, trucks, football, NASCAR, etc...  If they'd unionize and stand against their manipulators, they'd have 1950s-ish salaries and benefits (to the degree the economy could support that) and vote Democrat.  They got fooled off their positions because they're stupid.  The world changed and now they're mad.  Mad enough to rip apart the fabric of the country.  Which is what a stupid person would do.