(11-09-2016 09:17 AM)WoodlandsOwl Wrote:  Now it's time for Associate Supreme Court Justice Ted Cruz.

(11-09-2016 03:02 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  For those who failed to believe in the impossible, though it was achieved in the most unconventional of ways, with an unconventional personality who had unconventional wisdom that tapped directly into the sentiment of America:

Free at last, free at last, after 24 years, thank God Almighty, we are FREE AT LAST!!! God Bless America!

I see the sheer perversity of quoting MLK in praise of Trump is completely lost on you.

Some of you were worried that Trump supporters would not accept the result and would take to the streets to protest.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/p...li=BBnbkly

(11-09-2016 10:08 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  Some of you were worried that Trump supporters would not accept the result and would take to the streets to protest.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/p...li=BBnbkly

Indeed I was. Turns out they took to the streets to celebrate, instead:

https://mobile.twitter.com/kelbi1lewis/s...4448208896

(11-09-2016 09:43 AM)Rick Gerlach Wrote:  First, I voted write-in, and evidently was only one of less than 500 in Harris County on election day to do so. I could not bring myself to vote for someone who frequently lies and their main reason for running was to be President. I could not vote for Trump who was, and is, largely unqualified, and an affront to moral decency (sorry, that's not debatable). Gary Johnson was an unqualified loon. At that point I was too tired to consider Jill Stein . . . but just, . . . .no.

The people at the precinct were clueless (truly) on what I needed to type in to make sure my ballot counted. Had to call the Harris County Clerk to verify that what I typed in was sufficient to have my vote counted.

Watching the national news media (some of whom were literally on the verge of tears at times, some who actually got angry at points in the evening) drove home exactly why Trump won, and why 2004 repeated itself for the Democrats.

1. Hillary. Had the Democrats run Joe Biden, I think they win the Presidency. He has his issues, but he comes across as a decent man. And a decent candidate beats Trump (and by decent, I mean someone who exhibits regularly the attributes of basic human decency). It's why Bernie Sanders DESERVED the Democratic nomination. It was not because Hillary was a woman. It is because she is the consummate career politician, and her public/private persona and her willingness to say and do anything to satisfy ambition could not be hidden after 24 years in the limelight. No one trusted her, and the extent to which the DNC took measures to assist her win the nomination was appalling. For some reasons, the Democrats thought that only Trump voters would be holding their nose while voting. Those on the far, far left must be true believers indeed.
2. East Coast Media. I'm not sure I would call it bias, because Trump was such a flawed candidate on many levels. But it was obvious they favored Trump. Anyone who watched the ABC election returns and couldn't see the anguish and disbelief throughout the night and thinks there wasn't favoritism is kidding themselves. The issue is that the media came to their conclusions early and frankly decided that there is only one possible 'right answer' and that everyone else saw it also. They don't see how it comes across: we know better, we live in a state (or DC) which is going to go overwhelmingly Democrat, we surround ourselves only with people who think like us, and we are going to help guide you to make the right decision.
3. Hillary had no identifiable agenda or plan. Nothing that stood out. Whereas Trump had "Make America Great Again" which the Dems mocked, at least it was identifiable to a constituency the Dems have ignored (and I'm not talking about the 1/2 of 1% that some here are worried about). Again, Hillary has been at this so long that I think the real agenda was transparent to everyone, or at least this is what they saw: on a personal note "2016: It's My Turn" or pandering "OK, We've had an African-American President, Let's Check Another Box"
Those are not good reasons, unless you're part of the DNC. We WILL have a woman president someday, but it will be someone who is elected because they have an identifiable message, or at least a message that translates outside the DNC.
4. The talking heads kept noting that Trump was overwhelmingly winning with non-college white males. It was clearly stated as an indictment. It's the Dems dog whistle for racist morons.
They would then turn around and lament "What do they think Trump is really going to be able to do for them" On ABC, this was the refrain over and over. There only answer was that he represented change.
What they failed to grasp is that the fact they view Trumps appeal to that demographic (which is quite large) as an indictment, and because the far left Dems concentrated on the coast do view them flyover America as populated by 'deplorables' is exactly why they voted Trump.
They kept asking what Trump was going to do for them. What they should've stopped and asked themselves is what Hillary has EVER given that group besides lip service. When she used the term "deplorable", she wasn't addressing any constituency of Trump's (and he got Latino votes, and other demographic votes, at least enough to win) other than 'less than college educated', white, male America.

Not a one of the talking heads stated how the Dems would help this constituency improve their standard of living.

In fact, they went to so far as to say "What will these voters do when nothing changes for them?"

Basically, this is their lot in life, to be left behind, it's their deserved fate (implied - it's their own fault, they're deplorable after all)

If the Democrats invested the time and effort that LBJ put into the Great Society into that demographic (and not necessarily Great Society programs - maybe a focus on better education and access to college - Bernie hit on that big time. But it seemed like the DNC's version of that was targeting making it affordable for the kids already there or who had amassed student debt. The Trump demographic certainly didn't feel it was directed at them.

I was shocked. After 2004, I should not be. The DNC's ability to misread large swaths of the electorate is well documented.

For weeks I had been saying that Trump was the only Republican Hillary could beat.

Now the reality may have been that Hillary is the one Democrat that Trump could beat (albeit Kaine was even worse, IMO).

Well said, Rick. As I was telling my nephew late night when he pointed out the "Not cpllege educated" demographic to me, think of that demo as 'working class", not "stupid racists".

I am a college educated white male of partial Hispanic descent and many hispanic family members. his comment about "rapists" were offensive to me, but I recognized he was talking about illegal immigrants and not Mexicans, as the media tried to play it. But I think her "deplorables" comment was directed right at me personally, and illustrated her contempt for middle America- middle economically, middle geographically. Reminded me of Obama's "clinging bitterly" comment. The Dems need to think democratically rather than paternally and change their attitude toward Middle America.

(11-09-2016 10:25 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  But I think her "deplorables" comment was directed right at me personally, and illustrated her contempt for middle America- middle economically, middle geographically. Reminded me of Obama's "clinging bitterly" comment. The Dems need to think democratically rather than paternally and change their attitude toward Middle America.

You can think she was directing that at you, but she wasn't. She directed her remarks specifically:
"I know there are only 60 days left to make our case -- and don't get complacent, don't see the latest outrageous, offensive, inappropriate comment and think, well, he's done this time. We are living in a volatile political environment. You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump's supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic -- you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up. He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 11,000 people -- now 11 million. He tweets and retweets their offensive hateful mean-spirited rhetoric. Now, some of those folks -- they are irredeemable, but thankfully they are not America."

You can argue with her numbers, whether 50% of Trump supporters are racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, and/or Islamophobic (and I assume you will), but if you're not those things then you're part of the half not in that basket.

(11-09-2016 12:51 PM)JOwl Wrote:  

(11-09-2016 10:25 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  But I think her "deplorables" comment was directed right at me personally, and illustrated her contempt for middle America- middle economically, middle geographically. Reminded me of Obama's "clinging bitterly" comment. The Dems need to think democratically rather than paternally and change their attitude toward Middle America.

You can think she was directing that at you, but she wasn't. She directed her remarks specifically:
"I know there are only 60 days left to make our case -- and don't get complacent, don't see the latest outrageous, offensive, inappropriate comment and think, well, he's done this time. We are living in a volatile political environment. You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump's supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic -- you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up. He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 11,000 people -- now 11 million. He tweets and retweets their offensive hateful mean-spirited rhetoric. Now, some of those folks -- they are irredeemable, but thankfully they are not America."
You can argue with her numbers, whether 50% of Trump supporters are racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, and/or Islamophobic (and I assume you will), but if you're not those things then you're part of the half not in that basket.

Go ahead and rationalize all you want, but hell yes, she was aiming that comment at the likes of OO. It was a deliberate attempt to smear and marginalize a large group based on the actions of a very few (way, way less than 50%). I'm really growing tired of leftists making blanket indictments and then saying, "oh, I was kidding," or "oh, I meant somebody else, not you," when caught. She knew the words were loaded, she used "half" to give herself deniability, but she meant "all" and we both know that.

And for the record, I voted for Hillary in the primary and did not vote for Trump in the general.

(11-09-2016 10:06 AM)OldOwlNewHeel2 Wrote:  

(11-09-2016 03:02 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  For those who failed to believe in the impossible, though it was achieved in the most unconventional of ways, with an unconventional personality who had unconventional wisdom that tapped directly into the sentiment of America:

Free at last, free at last, after 24 years, thank God Almighty, we are FREE AT LAST!!! God Bless America!

I see the sheer perversity of quoting MLK in praise of Trump is completely lost on you.

I see the exactly same ignorance in your post as belied the entire media to miscall this election. MLK stood for ALL people, not just those of one race, but that fact is apparently and tellingly completely lost on bigots like you and your posting.

I have posted many times that Trump is far from a saint, has issues with his view of some women (as did Dr. King, though he was fortunate, like Kennedy, to come to power in a time of the "polite" media which helped cover up such egregious transgressions against women) and was a less than perfect choice in an ideal world. But we were voting for best president, not saint, and the choice was clear as a bell who was more authentic and offered a clear vision for the country unapologetically, which was refreshing and is very much needed these days. You can work with someone you disagree with, but is at least clear about where he stands. Hiliary's problem was fundamental trust--you never knew what she stood for other than her own selfishness, and the country doesn't need more of that. Literally any candidate would beat her, and as we saw last night, anyone did, which points to severe disconnect and denial among her supporters that hopefully will be acknowledged and honestly addresses. The tyranny of the PC left against anything but their own orthodoxy, combined with their 'some pigs are more equal than others" socialism is a fundamental flaw a bridge too far for most Americans to follow, and that was exposed clearly in plain view in this election.

The very fact that Trump won anyway, shows how nearly-completely detached the Elitist Left in this country and their followers have become. The message Trump brought to the forefront was "I will help the forgotten people. ALL forgotten Americans, of all backgrounds, the very ones the Democratic Party left behind long ago with Bobby Kennedy. And I will help Americans before those from other nations, because upholding the commitment to American freedoms is what the Constitution was created for in the first place." Now to what degree he will follow through, we ill have to see. Hopefully much more than Barak Obama, who squandered his chance, did. The Republican establishment is arguably just as afraid of trump's authenticity as the Democrats, and will no doubt try to steer him away from helping people in the ways he campaigned: repeal Obamacare and give a fair hearing for a reasonable and doable health plan for ALL Americans; Inspire companies to return and repatriate their dollars by lowering the corporate tax to a fair and reasonable level that will help create jobs; abolish needless regulation that stifles small businesses and competition and promotes entrepreneurial creativity and freedom for all; discourage and de-incentivize non-Americans here illegally, especially those participating in destroying our country by trafficking in drugs, crime, and other illicit and destructive behaviors, and open the jobs they currently fill up to Americans who are desperate for work--along with cracking down on those who employ them; turning off the free benefits to those who are not here legally and are free-loading off our generosity while promoting immigration from those who go through the process the right way and wait their turn like the law says; Standing up to our enemies who wish to destroy and kill us and let them know America will not be pushed around any more after 8 years of weakness; take care of those who sacrifice and defend us, and allow them to go to any doctor of their own choice; appoint judges who will follow the law and the Constitution and not invent new atrocities never intended by its framers, give the forgotten poor and middle classes less burdens and a fair chance while requiring them to give actual effort instead of free-loading as a way of life lasting generations which promotes personal and societal decay, etc...

Trump also demonstrated he was committed to be authentically who he was, win or lose, much like Bernie Sanders (well, until Sanders sold out in July). We will see if he will actually deliver on some of that promise. This was in very clear and sharp contrast to a transparently pandering Hiliary Clinton, who would say anything, do anything to get her name as the first woman president no matter the cost to others or the country.

Eight years ago, another candidate espoused much the same sentiment, and failed to deliver on even one promise of inclusion. Many were equally stunned, but I thought at the time, "well, it will be good to show there are truly no barriers, especially skin color, to achieving in this country. I hope Obama follows through on what he campaigned on." Sadly, few can today validly argue that our country is not more divided racially, spiritually, politically and economically than it was eight years ago. It didn't have to be this way. Trump wouldn't have had a chance against a fairly-run Democratic primary instead of the public sham. Biden would have easily beaten him last night. Sanders, I don't know, but both Sanders and Trump spoke their true feelings.

How did that happen? By ignoring the forgotten people, the working people of ALL backgrounds who have struggled for 24 years under two different parties and their related establishments that have more in common with eachother than they did with either Kennedy. The forgotten people have hurt for too long. Many decided to take a chance on an imperfect candidate they felt represent the possibility of true change from the status quo that restricts their lives and intrudes far, far more than it ever should or was meant to by our constitution.

Trump will make mistakes, no doubt. He is not a career politician. He has a chance to be a decent President since the expectations are so low for him. He knows how to run a business and get people working and negotiate to get things he wants done the way he wants. He knows the system in the opposite way that Hiliary and her cronies do. He knows why it stinks, and where the weak points are. Hopefully, he will use his knowledge built up over a lifetime of successes and failures to leave a legacy of making things more equal for all Americans, and to put American interests before those of other countries, especially those who openly try to destroy us. He has fewer limitations, and will have two years to get substantial things accomplished to get us out from the mess that has been created over the last 24 years. Let's all pray and root together for him to bring real change that lasts for a better America for all.

Lastly, I agree with a lot of, but not all, of Rick's post. I believe someday a woman WILL become president in America. I hope it is because she is the BEST person to lead, not just because she is a pathological self-seeker determined to use every single person she has ever met, including he3r husband and her child. Hiliary Clinton HAS done a great service to America, and to women of ALL backgrounds: she has shown us all what NEVER to do in order to be a great leader. Let us hope someday, some woman comes along soon who will be the complete opposite of everything Hiliary was and stood for, and break that great glass ceiling, so that ALL Americans who truly believe in the Constitution, have a truly EQUAL chance in life, especially those most vulnerable and the millions of innocent children who will still be selfishly murdered every day, month and year by those who have themselves been given protection of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness yet ignorantly refuse to abide and take responsibility for the choices they had ALREADY made and try to get a do-over, much like betting at the blackjack table, losing, and expecting the casino to give them a do-over and their money back. That is no choice, that is an abomination, and a discrimination against those most unable and in greatest need to defend themselves against tyranny.

Finally, to remember that our country and our government derives its powers not from itself, but from that granted to it by a creator, as it says in our most sacred founding documents. While we may disagree on the exact nature of our creator, there can be no America without firm belief in one, as those who formed our country clearly and unequivocally understood and codified for posterity; let atheism never rule our country to become its tyranny as we have drifted ever closer towards, especially most recently, but let our country be clearly and unapologetically informed by, though never controlled blindly by, divine wisdom as was always assumed and intended by our founders. For our government is formed by and we are all equally "endowed by our creator" and NEVER by itself or ourselves, meaning there is an unmistakable natural law of truth that applies to ALL human beings.

(11-09-2016 06:27 AM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Markets will drop at historic levels today I'm afraid. I hope it doesn't create too many layoffs but it might.

S&P 500
2,154.00
up 14.44 (0.67%)

Dow 30
18,495.18
up 162.44 (0.89%)

Nasdaq
5,211.78
up 18.29 (0.35%)

Sorry to burst your negative bubble.

(11-09-2016 01:38 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(11-09-2016 06:27 AM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Markets will drop at historic levels today I'm afraid. I hope it doesn't create too many layoffs but it might.

S&P 500
2,154.00
up 14.44 (0.67%)

Dow 30
18,495.18
up 162.44 (0.89%)

Nasdaq
5,211.78
up 18.29 (0.35%)

Sorry to burst your negative bubble.

I too expected a drop today, as the markets don't like surprises or uncertainty. Dow futures were off 800 last night. But it seems like business as usual today. Good to see, IMO.

(11-09-2016 01:22 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(11-09-2016 10:06 AM)OldOwlNewHeel2 Wrote:  

(11-09-2016 03:02 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  For those who failed to believe in the impossible, though it was achieved in the most unconventional of ways, with an unconventional personality who had unconventional wisdom that tapped directly into the sentiment of America:

Free at last, free at last, after 24 years, thank God Almighty, we are FREE AT LAST!!! God Bless America!

I see the sheer perversity of quoting MLK in praise of Trump is completely lost on you.

I see the exactly same ignorance in your post as belied the entire media to miscall this election. MLK stood for ALL people, not just those of one race, but that fact is apparently and tellingly completely lost on bigots like you and your posting.

I don't particularly understand this paragraph, but it doesn't change the fact that quoting MLK to praise a racist is particularly twisted. As for the rest of your post, I agree with you that Trump identified and tapped into a working-class undercurrent that has been largely ignored by "elites" and the party establishment (to the detriment of the country as a whole). I find it unforgivable, however, that in order to tap into this undercurrent, Trump repeatedly relied on paranoia, racism, xenophobia, and other deplorable (yes, deplorable) sentiments.

At any rate, what's done is done. Never in recent history has a party had the unchecked power that the Republicans are about to have. I, for one, am surprisingly ok with the situation: If they succeed in creating the prosperity and unity they promise, then the country will be better for it. If they crash and burn, there's no liberal (or Muslim, or Mexican, or homosexual, or socialist) boogeyman to blame. Let's see what happens.

(11-09-2016 09:43 AM)Rick Gerlach Wrote:  1. Hillary. Had the Democrats run Joe Biden, I think they win the Presidency. He has his issues, but he comes across as a decent man. And a decent candidate beats Trump (and by decent, I mean someone who exhibits regularly the attributes of basic human decency). It's why Bernie Sanders DESERVED the Democratic nomination. It was not because Hillary was a woman. It is because she is the consummate career politician, and her public/private persona and her willingness to say and do anything to satisfy ambition could not be hidden after 24 years in the limelight. No one trusted her, and the extent to which the DNC took measures to assist her win the nomination was appalling. For some reasons, the Democrats thought that only Trump voters would be holding their nose while voting. Those on the far, far left must be true believers indeed.

Saw a tweet last night from a right-leaning pundit, as the results started showing things much tighter than expected: "Any other Republican would have beaten her. Any other Democrat would have beaten him."

Obviously, he pulled it off. But that seemed (at the time), and in some ways still does, pretty close to true.

Where's the bench for the Democrats going forward?

At this point the thing I can't get past is how do I explain to my daughters that a man who brags about sexual assault and clearly thinks of women as second class humans was chosen by their country to be our leader? I don't know the answer.

This morning my wife was in tears when she found out Trump won - she said she couldn't get the image of him mocking the disabled reporter out of her head. (We have a special needs child.) I'd really like a Trump voter to explain to my daughter and the other special needs kids at her school why they think it's OK to cruelly mock the disabled. Why Trump supporters laughed when he did it.

But at least we didn't elect "Crooked Hillary" with her fraud trial starting next month. Oh wait, that's the president-elect.

I'm sure the Republicans in the house who were so enthusiastic about investigating corruption and impeachment last week will apply the same standards to Trump.

(11-09-2016 01:17 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-09-2016 12:51 PM)JOwl Wrote:  

(11-09-2016 10:25 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  But I think her "deplorables" comment was directed right at me personally, and illustrated her contempt for middle America- middle economically, middle geographically. Reminded me of Obama's "clinging bitterly" comment. The Dems need to think democratically rather than paternally and change their attitude toward Middle America.

You can think she was directing that at you, but she wasn't. She directed her remarks specifically:
"I know there are only 60 days left to make our case -- and don't get complacent, don't see the latest outrageous, offensive, inappropriate comment and think, well, he's done this time. We are living in a volatile political environment. You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump's supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic -- you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up. He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 11,000 people -- now 11 million. He tweets and retweets their offensive hateful mean-spirited rhetoric. Now, some of those folks -- they are irredeemable, but thankfully they are not America."
You can argue with her numbers, whether 50% of Trump supporters are racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, and/or Islamophobic (and I assume you will), but if you're not those things then you're part of the half not in that basket.

Go ahead and rationalize all you want, but hell yes, she was aiming that comment at the likes of OO. It was a deliberate attempt to smear and marginalize a large group based on the actions of a very few (way, way less than 50%). I'm really growing tired of leftists making blanket indictments and then saying, "oh, I was kidding," or "oh, I meant somebody else, not you," when caught. She knew the words were loaded, she used "half" to give herself deniability, but she meant "all" and we both know that.

And for the record, I voted for Hillary in the primary and did not vote for Trump in the general.

I don't know how you can plausibly suggest she meant "all" given the very next paragraph of her speech:

Quote:"But the other basket -- and I know this because I see friends from all over America here -- I see friends from Florida and Georgia and South Carolina and Texas -- as well as, you know, New York and California -- but that other basket of people are people who feel that the government has let them down, the economy has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures, and they're just desperate for change. It doesn't really even matter where it comes from. They don't buy everything he says, but he seems to hold out some hope that their lives will be different. They won't wake up and see their jobs disappear, lose a kid to heroin, feel like they're in a dead-end. Those are people we have to understand and empathize with as well."

Secondly, the idea that it's "way, way less than 50%" is debatable, too.

Quote:Much like Trump’s alleged opposition to the Iraq War, this not an impossible claim to investigate. We know, for instance, some nearly 60 percent of Trump’s supporters hold “unfavorable views” of Islam, and 76 percent support a ban on Muslims entering the United States. We know that some 40 percent of Trump’s supporters believe blacks are more violent, more criminal, lazier, and ruder than whites. Two-thirds of Trump’s supporters believe the first black president in this country’s history is not American. These claim are not ancillary to Donald Trump’s candidacy, they are a driving force behind it.

(11-09-2016 02:17 PM)OldOwlNewHeel2 Wrote:  

(11-09-2016 01:22 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(11-09-2016 10:06 AM)OldOwlNewHeel2 Wrote:  

(11-09-2016 03:02 AM)GoodOwl Wrote:  For those who failed to believe in the impossible, though it was achieved in the most unconventional of ways, with an unconventional personality who had unconventional wisdom that tapped directly into the sentiment of America:

Free at last, free at last, after 24 years, thank God Almighty, we are FREE AT LAST!!! God Bless America!

I see the sheer perversity of quoting MLK in praise of Trump is completely lost on you.

I see the exactly same ignorance in your post as belied the entire media to miscall this election. MLK stood for ALL people, not just those of one race, but that fact is apparently and tellingly completely lost on bigots like you and your posting.

I don't particularly understand this paragraph, but it doesn't change the fact that quoting MLK to praise a racist is particularly twisted.

By your own definition, your perspective on this is, as you say, "particularly twisted," and racist. I'm hoping you just fail to see this, but what you said is about as bigoted as can be.

I think I understand where you are trying to come from, but to me what you fail to see is that you are assuming that MLK does not belong to ALL people, black, white, and yes, even people who disagree with some of what he was...yes, even Donald Trump, warts and all. MLK tried to always be inclusive to a fault. He didn't jump to play the race card as the left constantly resorts to when they are beaten and exposed. For racism to come to an end, liberals will have to stop doing that and accept that black leaders and heroes are PEOPLE and belong to ALL of us, not just liberals or the "right" people cannonized by the left and the left only. On the View today, Whoopi and Joy Behar couldn't help themselves doubling and tripling down on their xenophobia, to the horror of the others on the set. It was sickening to watch. I realize the left needs to do some serious soul-searching--we all do. But until the cries of MLK can't belong equally to anyone but "us" stop from the left, there will always be a racial divide in this country. That is part of what this electorate was trying to teach the left. The fact that the Black Panthers and others were ultimately against MLK is testament to that.

(11-09-2016 02:17 PM)OldOwlNewHeel2 Wrote:  As for the rest of your post, I agree with you that Trump identified and tapped into a working-class undercurrent that has been largely ignored by "elites" and the party establishment (to the detriment of the country as a whole). I find it unforgivable, however, that in order to tap into this undercurrent, Trump repeatedly relied on paranoia, racism, xenophobia, and other deplorable (yes, deplorable) sentiments.

At any rate, what's done is done. Never in recent history has a party had the unchecked power that the Republicans are about to have. I, for one, am surprisingly ok with the situation: If they succeed in creating the prosperity and unity they promise, then the country will be better for it. If they crash and burn, there's no liberal (or Muslim, or Mexican, or homosexual, or socialist) boogeyman to blame. Let's see what happens.

As I said, Obama wasted a golden opportunity to bring people together and for 8 years methodically did almost everything he could to drive people further apart, leaving us the severe mess we see today. Lets' hope Trump learned what NOT to do from watching Obama's failed presidency these last 8 years (as well as the many mistakes of W Bush and Bubba Clinton.) He has a chance, but as you say, let's see what he can do with it.

I just think it's funny that people believe Mr. Trump has any great allegiance to any cause other than Mr. Trump.

If he could only have garnered the attention, ego-stroking, revenge for being laughed at, and opportunities for personal and familial enrichment by running so far to the left as to make Bernie Sanders look like Ronald Reagan, he would have done that. But people call him "authentic" because he found a good gig - the opposite of much of what he has said and done his adult life - and rode it hard.

A slim minority of the voters have elected a willfully ignorant, volatile man who bragged about sexual assault, stoked people's prejudices for his political gain, and told the kind of workers he routinely stiffed that he was their champion. His advisers are shot through with stooges, sympathizers, and agents of a foreign power that worked to subvert our democracy, and he invited that country's intelligence service to commit espionage against his political opponents. He was warmly supported by the KKK and has endorsed nuclear proliferation, while criticizing our allies and praising dictators the world around. Some of his top influencers are full-bore conspiracy "theorists", you know, the kind that claim the Sandy Hook massacre was faked and encourage their followers to harass the parents of the victims. He's praised them quite a bit.

That is who Donald Trump is.

The silver lining, I guess, is that he's not really attached to too many of his positions, other than making the tax code more favorable for himself and his spawn.

A friend of mine posted this, and I thought it was fitting:

"OK, Trump supporters who insisted their votes were not about hate, bigotry and misogyny, now is your time to prove it.

Make sure you make every non-white, non-Christian, non-straight, and/or non-male person in your community feel safe, appreciated, and respected."

This is pretty much the opposite of what I heard listening to KLBJ on the way in to work. I heard gloating, and angry calls for vengeance. Granted, the boring callers probably don't get through, but it's going to take a lot to bring this country back together.

(11-09-2016 02:18 PM)gsloth Wrote:  Saw a tweet last night from a right-leaning pundit, as the results started showing things much tighter than expected: "Any other Republican would have beaten her. Any other Democrat would have beaten him."

I've been saying that for months.

(11-09-2016 02:32 PM)GoodOwl Wrote:  

(11-09-2016 02:17 PM)OldOwlNewHeel2 Wrote:  I don't particularly understand this paragraph, but it doesn't change the fact that quoting MLK to praise a racist is particularly twisted.

By your own definition, your perspective on this is, as you say, "particularly twisted," and racist. I'm hoping you just fail to see this, but what you said is about as bigoted as can be.

I'm sorry - I'm really trying to figure out what you're saying, but I just can't. The idea that MLK is for "everyone" doesn't have anything to do with the propriety of using MLK's own words to praise a racist. I'd also consider it perverse if, say, someone quoted the Emancipation Proclamation to praise David Duke.

(11-09-2016 02:27 PM)OldOwlNewHeel2 Wrote:  

(11-09-2016 01:17 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-09-2016 12:51 PM)JOwl Wrote:  

(11-09-2016 10:25 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  But I think her "deplorables" comment was directed right at me personally, and illustrated her contempt for middle America- middle economically, middle geographically. Reminded me of Obama's "clinging bitterly" comment. The Dems need to think democratically rather than paternally and change their attitude toward Middle America.

You can think she was directing that at you, but she wasn't. She directed her remarks specifically:
"I know there are only 60 days left to make our case -- and don't get complacent, don't see the latest outrageous, offensive, inappropriate comment and think, well, he's done this time. We are living in a volatile political environment. You know, to just be grossly generalistic, you could put half of Trump's supporters into what I call the basket of deplorables. Right? The racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic -- you name it. And unfortunately there are people like that. And he has lifted them up. He has given voice to their websites that used to only have 11,000 people -- now 11 million. He tweets and retweets their offensive hateful mean-spirited rhetoric. Now, some of those folks -- they are irredeemable, but thankfully they are not America."
You can argue with her numbers, whether 50% of Trump supporters are racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, and/or Islamophobic (and I assume you will), but if you're not those things then you're part of the half not in that basket.

Go ahead and rationalize all you want, but hell yes, she was aiming that comment at the likes of OO. It was a deliberate attempt to smear and marginalize a large group based on the actions of a very few (way, way less than 50%). I'm really growing tired of leftists making blanket indictments and then saying, "oh, I was kidding," or "oh, I meant somebody else, not you," when caught. She knew the words were loaded, she used "half" to give herself deniability, but she meant "all" and we both know that.

And for the record, I voted for Hillary in the primary and did not vote for Trump in the general.

I don't know how you can plausibly suggest she meant "all" given the very next paragraph of her speech:

Quote:"But the other basket -- and I know this because I see friends from all over America here -- I see friends from Florida and Georgia and South Carolina and Texas -- as well as, you know, New York and California -- but that other basket of people are people who feel that the government has let them down, the economy has let them down, nobody cares about them, nobody worries about what happens to their lives and their futures, and they're just desperate for change. It doesn't really even matter where it comes from. They don't buy everything he says, but he seems to hold out some hope that their lives will be different. They won't wake up and see their jobs disappear, lose a kid to heroin, feel like they're in a dead-end. Those are people we have to understand and empathize with as well."

Secondly, the idea that it's "way, way less than 50%" is debatable, too.

Quote:Much like Trump’s alleged opposition to the Iraq War, this not an impossible claim to investigate. We know, for instance, some nearly 60 percent of Trump’s supporters hold “unfavorable views” of Islam, and 76 percent support a ban on Muslims entering the United States. We know that some 40 percent of Trump’s supporters believe blacks are more violent, more criminal, lazier, and ruder than whites. Two-thirds of Trump’s supporters believe the first black president in this country’s history is not American. These claim are not ancillary to Donald Trump’s candidacy, they are a driving force behind it.

Thanks, OONH, I had meant to add that paragraph.

Owl69: She did _not_ mean "all". That was clear from the paragraph I quoted, where she listed the specific characteristics she found deplorable. It's even more clear from the follow-up paragraph that OONH posted.

Is it fair that the basket of regulars is seen negatively by liberals simply due to its association and shared support with the basket of deplorables? My opinion - yes. If you want to debate that fairness question then fine, let's do it. But the facts aren't up for debate: 1) the deplorable subset exists, and 2) Hillary clearly called them out as a subset.