|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On November 09 2016 23:12 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2016 22:43 zeo wrote:On November 09 2016 22:39 Reaps wrote:
Wasn't expecting female vote to be that high for trump.
Trump won 60% of white females. Seems unlikely. Given that he won 58% of the white vote, it seems unlikely there's a larger percentage of women than men in that block.
Trumps share:
White male 63% (33% of voters)
White female 53% (37% of voters)
Black male 13% (5% of voters)
Black female 4% (7% of voters)
Hispanic male 33% (5% of voters)
Hispanic female 26% (6% of voters)
"other": 32% (6% of voters)
Voters here means people allowed to vote, not actual voters.
|
On November 09 2016 22:46 Penev wrote:
People are not necessarily racist, misogynist etc (but apparently don't care about a candidate making such remarks) but they surely are ignorant. And no not just in the States. En masse, people constantly vote against their own interests because of populist tactics of fear and nationalism meanwhile these people offer nothing to actually help solve any real problems they may suffer from. As an example in the Netherlands the biggest party after the financial crises has always been the one who'd support the system that caused it the most. Why? 2 reasons. 1. They are ignorant of this fact. 2. This party actively tries to be a more reasonable option for "Dutch Trump" by making harsh statements about immigration.
For the most part I could not have said this better myself. Between the many years lived in the US and the reading I've done on the different regions (and how fractured their interests are) I can understand some of the voters, particularly the Midwest, bought into the populism, in PA I'm sure enough of coal country was spooked, in FL I can see (particularly in the Latino/Asian/other breakdown) legal immigrants voting against illegal immigrants, any regions where manufacturing was decimated (i.e. Ohio/PA), forgetaboutit.
You also have those people who wouldn't ever vote for anything D. That number is relatively high to begin with.
In some regions I can buy race/misogyny/cultural arguments played a role. But certainly not all, I think most voters didn't care about that, or the SCOTUS implications on civil/reproductive rights, and why would they, when it doesn't (conceivably) affect them? Maybe I'm oversimplifying it, but if you're struggling to put food on the table, why would anything else matter?
I haven't seen breakdowns by income yet, that I'm curious.
What concerns me a bit more is the lack of checks from a GOP House/Congress. They own this show now and will ride or die. Ironically people wanted change at the highest level but most people opted to retain their own rep. Ofc what I also hear is that most people may be relatively pleased with their own reps but hate most of the rest. Meh.
|
Pence is the dangerous one, just like many of the other religious lunatics in the republicans they have a possibility to set back years of progress with their stoneage views on homosexuals and transgenders etc, i believe trump tried to appease the evangelical's to get the votes but i don't think hes really that religious at all. I mean only in America can a atheist be deemed unfit for becoming the president lol.
So yea i'd agree it will depend on how much influence pence and others will have on him. On the plus side, at least you don't have Ted Cruz as president.
|
On November 09 2016 23:17 oneofthem wrote:it is ultimately a policy failure, partly bought on by congress but mostly the increasing stress of the modern hypercompetitive economy. look past employment rate, the proxy for explaining the participation rate is labor market friction. how long it takes to find a job, whether job expectations mismatch outcome, what are the expectations for a new hire relative to less churning times. https://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/page1-econ/2016/02/01/making-sense-of-unemployment-data/stress for the next generation is part of the anxiety for the older generation. this really explains the sanders situation and some of the wrong track numbers for small town america. given magnitude of trump edge in rural areas this was an issues vs values election for these people, and they were motivated by the issues. specifically, how did my family get stuck in this mud. trump scandals are fun and games reality tv, entertainment. these people are past that point. nafta being extremely toxic in the rustbelt ended up the dagger vs hrc, as a symbolic explanation. media environment, hrc fighting a two front war etc, were influential and perhaps outcome deciding, but the larger issue is the rise in trump rural vote, including a big chunk of suburbs
100% agreed, and of course my thoughts were ninjaed.
User was warned for this post
|
On November 09 2016 23:18 Reaps wrote:
Pence is the dangerous one, just like many of the other religious lunatics in the republicans they have a possibility to set back years of progress with their stoneage views on homosexuals and transgenders etc, i believe trump tried to appease the evangelical's to get the votes but i don't think hes really that religious at all. I mean only in America can a atheist be deemed unfit for becoming the president lol.
So yea i'd agree it will depend on how much influence pence and others will have on him. On the plus side, at least you don't have Ted Cruz as president.
I'm not sure how much of a difference there really is between Cruz and Pence, and if Pence gets to decide the social issues we're boned.
|
|
|
On November 09 2016 23:21 TheTenthDoc wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2016 23:18 Reaps wrote:
Pence is the dangerous one, just like many of the other religious lunatics in the republicans they have a possibility to set back years of progress with their stoneage views on homosexuals and transgenders etc, i believe trump tried to appease the evangelical's to get the votes but i don't think hes really that religious at all. I mean only in America can a atheist be deemed unfit for becoming the president lol.
So yea i'd agree it will depend on how much influence pence and others will have on him. On the plus side, at least you don't have Ted Cruz as president. I'm not sure how much of a difference there really is between Cruz and Pence, and if Pence gets to decide the social issues we're boned.
They are very similar that's for sure.
|
On November 09 2016 23:17 oneofthem wrote:it is ultimately a policy failure, partly bought on by congress but mostly the increasing stress of the modern hypercompetitive economy. look past employment rate, the proxy for explaining the participation rate is labor market friction. how long it takes to find a job, whether job expectations mismatch outcome, what are the expectations for a new hire relative to less churning times. https://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/page1-econ/2016/02/01/making-sense-of-unemployment-data/stress for the next generation is part of the anxiety for the older generation. this really explains the sanders situation and some of the wrong track numbers for small town america. given magnitude of trump edge in rural areas this was an issues vs values election for these people, and they were motivated by the issues. specifically, how did my family get stuck in this mud. trump scandals are fun and games reality tv, entertainment. these people are past that point. nafta being extremely toxic in the rustbelt ended up the dagger vs hrc, as a symbolic explanation. media environment, hrc fighting a two front war etc, were influential and perhaps outcome deciding, but the larger issue is the rise in trump rural vote, including a big chunk of suburbs
I agree with this assessment.
I was incredibly wrong about how this election would turn out, but oh well, time to get out there and Make American Great Again 
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On November 09 2016 22:14 Furikawari wrote:
Stop with the military expenditure bullshit, Russia is nowhere that big compared to EU and I dont see any other significant treat currently. Just - plain - bullshit.
it is about power projection and defense of the treaty org. france doesnt want to do it, getmany has no airforce. it is a pretty delicate situation maintained by human tripwire hooked up to pentagon but not the white house.
|
I would be shocked if Pence didn't call the shots on the social issues. I thought that was a significant chunk of what he was recruited for in the first place.
|
On November 09 2016 22:39 Reaps wrote:
Wasn't expecting female vote to be that high for trump.
Post-third debate there were a lot of women who treated his remarks as just par for the course, assuming that's your reason for the surprise. That attitude is pretty normalised over there.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On November 09 2016 23:22 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2016 23:17 oneofthem wrote:it is ultimately a policy failure, partly bought on by congress but mostly the increasing stress of the modern hypercompetitive economy. look past employment rate, the proxy for explaining the participation rate is labor market friction. how long it takes to find a job, whether job expectations mismatch outcome, what are the expectations for a new hire relative to less churning times. https://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/page1-econ/2016/02/01/making-sense-of-unemployment-data/stress for the next generation is part of the anxiety for the older generation. this really explains the sanders situation and some of the wrong track numbers for small town america. given magnitude of trump edge in rural areas this was an issues vs values election for these people, and they were motivated by the issues. specifically, how did my family get stuck in this mud. trump scandals are fun and games reality tv, entertainment. these people are past that point. nafta being extremely toxic in the rustbelt ended up the dagger vs hrc, as a symbolic explanation. media environment, hrc fighting a two front war etc, were influential and perhaps outcome deciding, but the larger issue is the rise in trump rural vote, including a big chunk of suburbs I agree with this assessment. I was incredibly wrong about how this election would turn out, but oh well, time to get out there and Make American Great Again laws matter after all it seems. trump cant fire all the judges.
my top issue is tax and ethics rules like FCPA. antitrust is dead
|
On November 09 2016 23:27 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2016 23:22 farvacola wrote:On November 09 2016 23:17 oneofthem wrote:it is ultimately a policy failure, partly bought on by congress but mostly the increasing stress of the modern hypercompetitive economy. look past employment rate, the proxy for explaining the participation rate is labor market friction. how long it takes to find a job, whether job expectations mismatch outcome, what are the expectations for a new hire relative to less churning times. https://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/page1-econ/2016/02/01/making-sense-of-unemployment-data/stress for the next generation is part of the anxiety for the older generation. this really explains the sanders situation and some of the wrong track numbers for small town america. given magnitude of trump edge in rural areas this was an issues vs values election for these people, and they were motivated by the issues. specifically, how did my family get stuck in this mud. trump scandals are fun and games reality tv, entertainment. these people are past that point. nafta being extremely toxic in the rustbelt ended up the dagger vs hrc, as a symbolic explanation. media environment, hrc fighting a two front war etc, were influential and perhaps outcome deciding, but the larger issue is the rise in trump rural vote, including a big chunk of suburbs I agree with this assessment. I was incredibly wrong about how this election would turn out, but oh well, time to get out there and Make American Great Again laws matter after all it seems. trump cant fire all the judges. my top issue is tax and ethics rules like FCPA. antitrust is dead
A 6th Circuit judge just said to my class, verbatim, "Every judge I know just got 4 years younger."
|
|
|
On November 09 2016 23:29 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2016 23:27 oneofthem wrote:On November 09 2016 23:22 farvacola wrote:On November 09 2016 23:17 oneofthem wrote:it is ultimately a policy failure, partly bought on by congress but mostly the increasing stress of the modern hypercompetitive economy. look past employment rate, the proxy for explaining the participation rate is labor market friction. how long it takes to find a job, whether job expectations mismatch outcome, what are the expectations for a new hire relative to less churning times. https://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/page1-econ/2016/02/01/making-sense-of-unemployment-data/stress for the next generation is part of the anxiety for the older generation. this really explains the sanders situation and some of the wrong track numbers for small town america. given magnitude of trump edge in rural areas this was an issues vs values election for these people, and they were motivated by the issues. specifically, how did my family get stuck in this mud. trump scandals are fun and games reality tv, entertainment. these people are past that point. nafta being extremely toxic in the rustbelt ended up the dagger vs hrc, as a symbolic explanation. media environment, hrc fighting a two front war etc, were influential and perhaps outcome deciding, but the larger issue is the rise in trump rural vote, including a big chunk of suburbs I agree with this assessment. I was incredibly wrong about how this election would turn out, but oh well, time to get out there and Make American Great Again laws matter after all it seems. trump cant fire all the judges. my top issue is tax and ethics rules like FCPA. antitrust is dead A 6th Circuit judge just said to my class, verbatim, "Every judge I know just got 4 years younger."
It would be a miracle if both RBG (83) and Breyer (78) managed to hold on to their seats for 4 years imo  Thank goodness that Scalia's replacement can't really be any more conservative than Scalia was.
|
Hillary's pushed back her speech an hour to 10:30ET.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
as always, if we had these multiple rerun elections trump would not win
|
Any word on whether the Fed still wants to raise rates in December?
|
I feel like literally anything could be said of "the economy" (different things about different parts of it) and it could be made to sound believable. At the same time, in any given statement (especially on the oh so productive twitter) there is always some part left unsaid - some counteraction that we will see down the line, or something that happens in another part of the economy to compensate for this shift. I just can't muster the courage or interest to find out what it could possibly be this time.
Also, I wonder if Clinton forever swears off e-mail after this. If I were her, I'd just retire to a wooden cabin and, like, read through a vast library of books as I wait alongside my cats for death to take me.
|
On November 09 2016 23:36 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:
Any word on whether the Fed still wants to raise rates in December?
nothing definitive that i've heard. The general scuttlebut was that it's less likely to do so.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
