Election 2016

RobbyPants · Post by **RobbyPants** » Wed Jun 15, 2016 12:20 pm

Ancient History wrote:http://www.vox.com/2016/6/14/11380320/d ... al-science

Granted, Trump would say this if Wisconsin won the Rose Bowl. But it's galling to me that people so blatantly let fear rule them that they'd vote for Trump.

It won't necessarily help in him the general, though.

This leads to a second point: The general election electorate is much different than a GOP primary electorate. Just because Trump gained support among Republicans after a terrorist attack doesn’t necessarily mean he’ll gain among voters at large. Trump, for instance, saw his favorability ratings among Republicans go up during the primary, while at the same time they went down among both Democrats and independents.

It's already fairly well understood that the people most likely to vote out of fear are conservative, anyway.

hyzmarca · Post by **hyzmarca** » Fri Jun 17, 2016 1:38 am

I've decided that I'm going to vote for Trump unless Hillary promises to legalize marijuana.

erik · Post by **erik** » Fri Jun 17, 2016 2:49 am

hyzmarca wrote:I've decided that I'm going to vote for Trump unless Hillary promises to legalize marijuana.

You mean push for it right? Since a president can't actually do that on her own.

Is this one of the many things Trump has claimed he would do on day one?

hyzmarca · Post by **hyzmarca** » Fri Jun 17, 2016 2:55 am

erik wrote:
hyzmarca wrote:I've decided that I'm going to vote for Trump unless Hillary promises to legalize marijuana.
You mean push for it right? Since a president can't actually do that on her own.

Is this one of the many things Trump has claimed he would do on day one?

No. And I really don't think it's something he'd ever consider doing. But here is my reasoning:

Trump's policies are going to be disastrous. He's going to crash and burn hard and cause a great deal of suffering while he does so. But it's going to be a fun ride into hell. I will be able to point and laugh. I will be able to enjoy the fact that I'm right and he's wrong. I'll be able to post rants on message boards like this one about how horrible he is. And I will take great pleasure in doing so. I will feast on the inhuman misery that he inevitably causes and spew it back as vitriolic internet rants. I will enjoy it, and it will be legal.

But I hear that marijuana is pretty good, too. Never tried any, though.

erik · Post by **erik** » Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:21 am

Ah, well it does sound like you're his demographic.

hyzmarca · Post by **hyzmarca** » Fri Jun 17, 2016 3:49 am

erik wrote:Ah, well it does sound like you're his demographic.

Well, you see, I can't really enjoy making vitriolic rants against Hillary, because I actually agree with her on most things. If I try I just feel bad. Same for Obama. I tried to make a vitriolic rant against him recently, and it just didn't work.

But, you know, I could pull some doozies against GW, and I can pull some good ones against Trump.

Besides, if you vote for the guy you hate, because you want to enjoy the schadenfreude when he screws up, you're less likely to be disappointed, I think.

tussock · Post by **tussock** » Fri Jun 17, 2016 5:55 am

I'll be able to post rants on message boards like this one about how horrible he is.

It's funny you should say that, because they already record everything you do and read on the internet, and are talking about setting up the house unamerican activities committee again to take a bit more of a death penalty attitude to people who disagree with the direction of the state.

Not to mention stack the shit out of the Supreme Court with crazy people who are all about 30 and will overrule all social progress for the rest of your life, if not wind things back a bit.

There may not actually be message boards like this one. It's not they exist in China, and it technologically trivial to just shut stuff like this down forever.

Koumei · Post by **Koumei** » Fri Jun 17, 2016 6:23 am

For what it's worth, a lot of people are sick of the way America (and indeed, American corporations) can just shit all over other countries and are interested in the possibility of Trump ruining America. But while that does sound fantastic in and of itself, I don't think it would be contained in America. The financial collapse would have hard-hitting effects elsewhere in the world (just like it did last time, in the Global Financial Crisis if anyone remembers that? Pepperidge Farms remembers.), and he's as likely as not to just start random wars, if for no better reason than to bring everyone else down with him.

But yeah. A lot of non-Americans want to see Trump make America second-rate again.

Mask_De_H · Post by **Mask_De_H** » Fri Jun 17, 2016 9:04 am

hyzmarca wrote:
erik wrote:Ah, well it does sound like you're his demographic.
Well, you see, I can't really enjoy making vitriolic rants against Hillary, because I actually agree with her on most things. If I try I just feel bad. Same for Obama. I tried to make a vitriolic rant against him recently, and it just didn't work.

But, you know, I could pull some doozies against GW, and I can pull some good ones against Trump.

Besides, if you vote for the guy you hate, because you want to enjoy the schadenfreude when he screws up, you're less likely to be disappointed, I think.

Poe's Law in a post, folks.

Although petty revanchism/ressentiment is basically the reason Trump is popular at home and abroad, to go off of what Koumei said. Here, people are just pissed at things and them not getting things, but it can't be their fault so it's gotta be someone else's fault. The Other is always mad easy to blame, and talking points are more important to the average voter than data points. Abroad, it is very hard to think long term and beyond what one can reach, so people in other countries want Trump to drag America into the abyss so they can feel sanctimonious and correct as they are dragged down.

maglag · Post by **maglag** » Fri Jun 17, 2016 11:51 am

Koumei wrote:For what it's worth, a lot of people are sick of the way America (and indeed, American corporations) can just shit all over other countries and are interested in the possibility of Trump ruining America. But while that does sound fantastic in and of itself, I don't think it would be contained in America. The financial collapse would have hard-hitting effects elsewhere in the world (just like it did last time, in the Global Financial Crisis if anyone remembers that?

Because that "crisis" was carefully orchestated so that everybody (but the USA banker bosses) would suffer.

Now contrast to the european economic collapse during/after WW II. It allowed the USA to become super powerful and also opened the gates for China and India to get their shit together.

Somebody's crisis is somebody else's opportunity.

Right now with the USA dollar as the "basis", the USA is never really in a "crisis". They can just print more dollars. Some peasants may suffer but the hillbillies can still afford full sets of assault rifles and enough ammo to murderize a school every weekend and the rich keep getting richer. The only way that ends is either a big war in the USA territory (which would end pretty ugly considering they have and always had more nukes than anyone else and are the only country to actually ever have thrown nukes at other countries), or a president so incompetent it collapses the system from inside.

There were after all the rumors that Ghadaffi and Saddam planned to abandon the dollar standard for selling their country's oil, and 99% because of that were quickly and summarly eliminated by the USA's military. While Syria's president and whoever is running ISIS have been running a war for several years and the USA government hardly give half a shit as long as they keep selling oil in dollars.

Still would vote for Hillary though. Donald Trump doesn't seems incompetent enough yet. Gotta wait another 8 years with a dem president for the GOP to sink even further down and pushforward an even more idiotic candidate.

erik · Post by **erik** » Fri Jun 17, 2016 12:54 pm

Was there a sale on tinfoil hats or did maglag pay full price?

Koumei · Post by **Koumei** » Fri Jun 17, 2016 1:02 pm

Pretty sure this is just part of the long-standing tradition of being wrong and crazy about everything ever.

Zaranthan · Post by **Zaranthan** » Fri Jun 17, 2016 4:00 pm

maglag wrote:Donald Trump doesn't seems incompetent enough yet.

Are we talking about the same Donald? His MO is to acquire a company on the upswing, pay himself a huge salary while running it into the ground, declare bankruptcy to shove the debts onto the investors, and repeat. He's not incompetent, he's a scam artist, and one who operates on the seven to ten figure scale, which is damn impressive because that's the sort of shit people rich enough to control the government worry about.

Kaelik · Post by **Kaelik** » Fri Jun 17, 2016 4:05 pm

Zaranthan wrote:
maglag wrote:Donald Trump doesn't seems incompetent enough yet.
Are we talking about the same Donald? His MO is to acquire a company on the upswing, pay himself a huge salary while running it into the ground, declare bankruptcy to shove the debts onto the investors, and repeat. He's not incompetent, he's a scam artist, and one who operates on the seven to ten figure scale, which is damn impressive because that's the sort of shit people rich enough to control the government worry about.

While he has definitely done that a lot of times, he has also lost a fair amount of money when he makes his own projects that he runs into the ground, so it sure looks like the scam is getting other people to pay for his failure, not that he doesn't actually think he can succeed where he clearly can't.

erik · Post by **erik** » Fri Jun 17, 2016 4:05 pm

Yeah, you'd think mag's from New Zealand or something.

So, given that trump is probably going to dramatically lose hard and cost seats down ballot, and if replacing him the GOP could suffer even more with a split ticket. Could it be in the gop's interest to not run a presidential candidate at all? It would drop turnout across the board but maybe they wouldn't be stung as hard down ballot since they could funnel all funding into smaller races. I dunno. They'd never do it since it is a huge gamble and is mostly based upon rejecting trump on principle.

Mechalich · Post by **Mechalich** » Sat Jun 18, 2016 4:27 am

Koumei wrote:For what it's worth, a lot of people are sick of the way America (and indeed, American corporations) can just shit all over other countries and are interested in the possibility of Trump ruining America. But while that does sound fantastic in and of itself, I don't think it would be contained in America. The financial collapse would have hard-hitting effects elsewhere in the world (just like it did last time, in the Global Financial Crisis if anyone remembers that? Pepperidge Farms remembers.), and he's as likely as not to just start random wars, if for no better reason than to bring everyone else down with him.

But yeah. A lot of non-Americans want to see Trump make America second-rate again.

It absolutely wouldn't be contained in America, in the same way the collapse of the Soviet Union absolutely wasn't contained within the USSR, and this time there wouldn't be another superpower available to step in for containment and do things like quietly acquire thousands of nuclear warheads so they didn't fall into the wrong hands.

ckafrica · Post by **ckafrica** » Sat Jun 18, 2016 4:39 am

[url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbM6WbUw7Bs]This makes me want to see trump win in Japan[/url}

Grek · Post by **Grek** » Sat Jun 18, 2016 7:46 am

erik wrote:Yeah, you'd think mag's from New Zealand or something.

So, given that trump is probably going to dramatically lose hard and cost seats down ballot, and if replacing him the GOP could suffer even more with a split ticket. Could it be in the gop's interest to not run a presidential candidate at all? It would drop turnout across the board but maybe they wouldn't be stung as hard down ballot since they could funnel all funding into smaller races. I dunno. They'd never do it since it is a huge gamble and is mostly based upon rejecting trump on principle.

Remember that the GOP ideology and the GOP political apparatus are not the same thing. Even if rejecting Trump would be a net benefit to the Republican ideology, the fact remains that 100% of the relevance of the GOP party apparatus is rooted in the (thus far credible) promise that if you win enough primary votes, Republicans will back you in the election. If the party apparatus shows that they're willing to throw unpopular candidates under the bus in order to win other elections, what motive is there for a similarly unpopular Republican candidate to court party support in future elections?

erik · Post by **erik** » Sat Jun 18, 2016 12:03 pm

Grek wrote:If the party apparatus shows that they're willing to throw unpopular candidates under the bus in order to win other elections, what motive is there for a similarly unpopular Republican candidate to court party support in future elections?

Ha ha ha! Good one. Because nobody would want to disincentivize unpopular shit stains from running and tarnishing their brand. It sounded like your points against should be read in sarcastic tone.

The big reason not to dump trump and not replace him is that he runs anyway as 3rd party and just steals the racists and America-hating-voters needed to win other elections but still energizes dems to come out in droves (as opposed to an uncontested Clinton having low turnout since she has already won). You can make a little lemonade out of this rotten lemon by using trump to campaign where he can buoy candidates where he plays well and direct money to down ballot campaigns. Trump already said he doesn't think he needs to spend as much, so as head of RNC you can take him at his word and allocate funds in other elections vs the presidency.

I retract my silly day dream about dumping trump and running no one. My next silly day dream is if trump gets under 15% polling then he can be excluded from debates. Telling him the debates are for adults only and no losers, that would be great.

PhoneLobster · Post by **PhoneLobster** » Sat Jun 18, 2016 12:58 pm

If you are waiting for the reasonable republicans to make the hard choices to save you from Trump you will be waiting a long fucking time.

Trump will run. He will be supported fully and enthusiastically by the party. He WILL be the republican "good guy" to the democrat "bad guy" in all things to all republican figures with any say in the matter or meaningful presence in the media.

And if he won? THE PARTY WOULD DECLARE HIM THE SECOND COMING OF RONALD REAGAN!! The most senior and serious republicans who you wished might save you will kiss his feet and pat each other on the back for a job well done.

It's not just that Trump is a mirror to the republican party's dark soul, the party HAS no soul, if Trump is their best path to short term glory, and however poor the path is he IS their best one, then fuck it they have no fucking qualms about following that path and you are a chump if you think otherwise.

erik · Post by **erik** » Sat Jun 18, 2016 1:57 pm

PL this is one instance where not being in the US you don't get exposed to nuances. I actually do know many many many otherwise good people who have been snookered by the Republican Party and believe their bullshit. Most are senior citizens or Catholics. Many grew up in a time when newsmen were pillars of honesty and the main source of information. They adapted poorly to the abandonment of facts by entertainment news. Others have been told by their priests that one party is going murder babies and the other will protect them and that has fostered strong tribalism that overlooks other issues and have made strange bedfellows with anti poor, anti gun control, anti equality movements.

And no, trump is not being fully accepted by his party. It is quite the scandal that he isn't and a source of daily national news.

Grek · Post by **Grek** » Sat Jun 18, 2016 4:59 pm

The main point I'm getting from you, erik, is "Republicans are shitstains". While I don't necessarily disagree, that sentiment has very little predictive value. You can't just say that the Republicans are shit and then think of the most shitty thing they could do and assume they'll do that. That's not how it works.

erik · Post by **erik** » Sat Jun 18, 2016 5:23 pm

I think you're confused, Grek. The only time i used the word shitstain was to describe trump or any hypothetical like him who would tarnish their brand that you were worried about discouraging from running. My last post was even a defense on behalf of otherwise good people who back the Republican Party (despite its objectively flawed political goals that result in human misery when enacted and incite disturbed individuals to violence with their rhetoric).

*the parenthetical was tacit in that post

PhoneLobster · Post by **PhoneLobster** » Sun Jun 19, 2016 1:12 am

So you think that reasonable republicans will save you from Trump by not letting him run and those reasonable republicans are not the old guard of congressmen and senators and party officials but are instead the old guard GRASS ROOTS who were merely bamboozled in the deep past but somehow are NOT bamboozled now?

Yeah ok remember how I was telling you you would be waiting a long fucking time for reasonable republicans to save you from trump when I was assuming you were hoping the party apparatus or something would turn on him?

Now that you've made it clear you believe in some sort of "silent submajority" of grass roots republicans and that THEY are going to save you from Trump running by means of ???? I'm going to suggest you are going to be waiting a VERY VERY long fucking time you spectacular chump.

erik · Post by **erik** » Sun Jun 19, 2016 1:44 am

No I think he will be the GOP nominee but you are sorely mistaken if you think that a bunch of republicans won't be voting for someone else or staying home in protest. He will not be fully and enthusiastically supported. Politicians are trying to do a tightrope dance trying not to alienate his rabid supporters while also not alienating the majority of people who cannot stand him.

Edit: I predict a banner year for the Libertarian party. They may even get in some debates.