US Politics Mega-thread - Page 6193

On November 11 2016 13:59 ZeromuS wrote:


Pierre Elliot Trudeau was a great politician. Probably one of the most popular in Canada's history. He had a lot of good and bad, but he was very good at speaking and had strong convictions with the safety of Canada and the best for everyone at heart. I think his biggest misstep was the white paper, but the intention was understandable with that one - the way it was done though not so good. You can see how much P.E.T cared about the indigenous people of Canada through his son. Sadly the reality of the world makes it really hard to help them effectively without misgivings, its just way too complicated an issue to fix in any way without a 20 or 30 year plan to be honest.

Brian Mulroney was probably the best conservative in modern Canadian history though. He did so many important things for this country as well.

Alas this is US politics not Canadian

On November 11 2016 14:09 GreenHorizons wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +

Oh man the analysis here has been oh so bad, save a few on either side.

Not sure what to pick apart first...

Let's start with a surprise, Donald Trump did not win because of racism, people pushing that are doing what Republicans are accusing you of and making it worse and displaying you clearly don't get why she lost.

Hillary lost white voters who voted for Obama, if racism was why they voted for Trump, they wouldn't have voted for Obama in the first place. That's not to say racist people didn't vote Trump, or that the larger cloud of racism hovering over our country didn't play a role, but blaming this loss on racists is lazy, dishonest, and counter productive, so stop please.

And since I suspect people will bring up/ask the questions about the other stuff people got so wrong by topic I'll wait on that and mention Trump's tweet.

The most upsetting thing for me and many other people on the left isn't him (or most/all? of the conservatives here) not saying anything about people like Clark calling for torches if he lost. It's how right he is about a group of protesters, that even I seriously question.

If people were wondering, no, it's not Bernie supporters out there, those are Hillary "supporters". The righteous ones would be out there regardless of who won, the rest should go home and figure out why they didn't work harder for the only candidate who wanted to fix this mess.

EDIT: The media screwed this all up so bad, and now they are covering the holy hell out of these protests meanwhile people are getting all sorts of abused at the NODAPL protests by private security and police and no one pays any attention. I'm thoroughly disappointed in the immediate postmortem of Hillary's candidacy.

Silver lining, this is a great opportunity to rebuild the DNC. Unsurprisingly, Hillary's camp is still in denial and thinking Dean is an option to lead the DNC.

On November 11 2016 14:23 Logo wrote:
Also I think there's a fundamental misunderstanding about the so called loonies on both sides. Like as a left leaning person I find the extreme left loonies unbearable and insufferable for various reasons depending on their specific type of behaviour (the more illicit of which is also pretty deplorable)... But I still generally share their underlying views or either at least respect them or find them harmless views.

So when people say things like well both sides have loonies or the left has loonies too... It's not at all comparable. I accept how annoying those people are and understand that if you sit under the same umbrella you have to be complicit with their beliefs (even in the case of terrible actions you disvow). So you can see why its a big deal when people point to literal racists and they get merely dismissed as both sides having loonies.

On November 11 2016 14:33 Danglars wrote:

I really hope you guys take back your party. The entrenched power structure is vulnerable now that Hillary's toast, and the only bright lights are from the next generation. DWS gone so there's no big established DNC head calling the shots with stature, Tim Kaine's a nonstarter, Bernie might do another campaign but not party apparatus and message from the front. Best of luck; I'd rather fight principled and honest Dems than the Clinton gang and their media and party sycophants.

On November 11 2016 14:23 Logo wrote:
I accept how annoying those people are and understand that if you sit under the same umbrella you have to be complicit with their beliefs (even in the case of terrible actions you disvow).

On November 11 2016 15:27 plasmidghost wrote:

Probably the same reason people still held out hope for so long that Bernie would get the nomination

On November 11 2016 15:13 Jaaaaasper wrote:
The DNC needs to focus on winning state houses and state legislatures in 2020 to undo gerrymadnering with out doing it themselves and teaching millennials that not voting or voting third party is the same thing as voting republican. And they really need to make people realize that Berniecrats aren't electable. Taking the party way to the left is just going to lose elections. Honestly Clinton going high against bernie left the false impression that he was electable, leading to a whole bunch of angry protest votes or non votes. If she'd run adds about Bernie thinking all women have gang rape fantasies or that abstinence causes cancer, I highly doubt we'd have president Trump or people thinking that Bernie would have won if we did. Progressives didn't show up to defend Obama's legacy or the Supreme Court, conservatives showed up to kill it and hold the supreme court. In the end thats what did this.

On November 11 2016 15:39 Mysticesper wrote:


That's really the only path for Dems in the next 2-4 years. Dems want to cement their house majority by gemandering in their favor. But yeah, Repubs had their moments of somber in 2008, and was able to really change congress in 2010 moving forward, since Obama spent all of his political capital too early by ramming through ACA with their congressional majority before they lost it in 2010.

Fortunately for them, 2020 is an election year, whereas 2010 was a midterm year, so turnout should be in their favor, especially since they claim that trump will crater, so we will wait and see.

On November 11 2016 15:13 Jaaaaasper wrote:
The DNC needs to focus on winning state houses and state legislatures in 2020 to undo gerrymadnering with out doing it themselves and teaching millennials that not voting or voting third party is the same thing as voting republican. And they really need to make people realize that Berniecrats aren't electable. Taking the party way to the left is just going to lose elections. Honestly Clinton going high against bernie left the false impression that he was electable, leading to a whole bunch of angry protest votes or non votes. If she'd run adds about Bernie thinking all women have gang rape fantasies or that abstinence causes cancer, I highly doubt we'd have president Trump or people thinking that Bernie would have won if we did. Progressives didn't show up to defend Obama's legacy or the Supreme Court, conservatives showed up to kill it and hold the supreme court. In the end thats what did this.

On November 11 2016 15:53 Mysticesper wrote:
they need to win state legislatures who rewrite the districts after the 2020 census. Thats how the repubs did it in 2010. You got some funky ass districts in states like South Carolina (or north) and the like because of that. It would be hard to gain control of the house without winning state legislatures first,.

On November 11 2016 15:57 Wegandi wrote:


The reason the Dems will continue to lose the House isn't because of gerrymandering, it's because 90% of the Dems live within a small radius of each other. The Dems are so tilted to large cities that they've pretty much isolated themselves from 90% of the country. Should look at a distribution on a map sometime.