POTUS Election thread

**drone** · 11-09-2016, 04:57

Originally Posted by Hooahguy

Yup, and Clinton will go down in history as one of the worst candidates in history who lost to Trump, of all people. Her political career is over if she doesnt win.

I'm pretty sure it's over either way.

Assuming the worst, as horrifying as a Trump presidency will be there will be a small part of me that would enjoy watching Hillary wondering what the hell just happened. Hopefully the DNC learns from this. You may think you know better than us, but you have to do a better job convincing the rest of us, not just smugly telling us how it goes.

**GeneralHankerchief** · 11-09-2016, 05:16

Originally Posted by drone

I'm pretty sure it's over either way.

Assuming the worst, as horrifying as a Trump presidency will be there will be a small part of me that would enjoy watching Hillary wondering what the hell just happened. Hopefully the DNC learns from this. You may think you know better than us, but you have to do a better job convincing the rest of us, not just smugly telling us how it goes.

Judging by the reactions on my Facebook feed, this is not going to be a lesson quickly or easily learned.

**Montmorency** · 11-09-2016, 05:27

Amusingly, winning Iowa and keeping at least Michigan would make a probably victory for Clinton.

**Tuuvi** · 11-09-2016, 05:38

Kinda makes you wonder what would have happened if Sanders had won the Democratic nomination. One the one hand his self labeling as "socialist" made him a non-starter for the older generation but on the other hand a lot of people seemed excited for a potential Sanders presidency, more so than for Clinton who was supported just because she isn't Trump.

**GeneralHankerchief** · 11-09-2016, 05:40

269-269

**Pannonian** · 11-09-2016, 05:42

Originally Posted by Tuuvi

Kinda makes you wonder what would have happened if Sanders had won the Democratic nomination. One the one hand his self labeling as "socialist" made him a non-starter for the older generation but on the other hand a lot of people seemed excited for a potential Sanders presidency, more so than for Clinton who was supported just because she isn't Trump.

Depends what the voting demographics are. Corbyn is incredibly popular among the younger demographic in the UK, but they're also highly unlikely to vote. A marker of this discrepancy was David Cameron's former constituency, where the Labour membership doubled prior to the by-election, but where their vote halved.

**drone** · 11-09-2016, 05:45

Originally Posted by GeneralHankerchief

Judging by the reactions on my Facebook feed, this is not going to be a lesson quickly or easily learned.

The Dems still think they are entitled to the union (working class) and black vote. They have been losing the union votes over the years by both letting the country's manufacturing go to hell and trying (or being painted as trying) to take the guns from the Midwest hunters. And Clinton could not get the black vote motivated in the states that count. She won the primaries in the South mainly with the black vote, but she wasn't going to win those states in the general election regardless.

Pure arrogance lead them to this point. Anointing Clinton before the nomination race even began bypassed the usual vetting, they knew she was hugely disliked and scandal prone and put her up anyway. "How am I not up by 10 points" indeed.

They just don't get it.

**GeneralHankerchief** · 11-09-2016, 05:48

Originally Posted by drone

The Dems still think they are entitled to the union (working class) and black vote. They have been losing the union votes over the years by both letting the country's manufacturing go to hell and trying (or being painted as trying) to take the guns from the Midwest hunters. And Clinton could not get the black vote motivated in the states that count. She won the primaries in the South mainly with the black vote, but she wasn't going to win those states in the general election regardless.

Pure arrogance lead them to this point. Anointing Clinton before the nomination race even began bypassed the usual vetting, they knew she was hugely disliked and scandal prone and put her up anyway. "How am I not up by 10 points" indeed.

They just don't get it.

Yeah, people are blaming the voters for daring to have differing opinions from them. I generally bite my tongue because I enjoy the company of these people when politics isn't involved, but it's not the voters' job to prop up crappy candidates. It's up to the candidates and their campaigns to sell themselves to the voters, and if they aren't able to do that, it's on them.

**edyzmedieval** · 11-09-2016, 06:00

At best, for Hillary, it will be a tie. But that's very unlikely, so it's almost a given now that Donald Trump is the next US President.

**Montmorency** · 11-09-2016, 06:00

Originally Posted by GeneralHankerchief

Yeah, people are blaming the voters for daring to have differing opinions from them. I generally bite my tongue because I enjoy the company of these people when politics isn't involved, but it's not the voters' job to prop up crappy candidates. It's up to the candidates and their campaigns to sell themselves to the voters, and if they aren't able to do that, it's on them.

It's fairly dispiriting, as even though at this point in my life my political convictions are more than distasteful for any political spectrum, I still hold vestigial sympathies for the left. The D Party is more fragmented than the R party, but complacency has only increased with each instance of pointing this out.

**edyzmedieval** · 11-09-2016, 06:01

Bernie Sanders however would have stood a better chance, except that he didn't get the entire support of the Democratic voting base.

**Montmorency** · 11-09-2016, 06:02

Best-case: long-term executive failure of Trump induces Congress to return powers to the Presidency. Worst case, they remove more powers from the Presidency.

**edyzmedieval** · 11-09-2016, 06:05

What's stunning actually is the complete control of both legislative chambers by the Republicans. Swept away the Democrats.

**drone** · 11-09-2016, 06:14

Originally Posted by GeneralHankerchief

Yeah, people are blaming the voters for daring to have differing opinions from them. I generally bite my tongue because I enjoy the company of these people when politics isn't involved, but it's not the voters' job to prop up crappy candidates. It's up to the candidates and their campaigns to sell themselves to the voters, and if they aren't able to do that, it's on them.

And if you ignore your base and tell them it's raining, they will eventually realize that they are being micturated on. I am not in the Trump demographic, but I know lots of people that are a part of it. They aren't happy, and they aren't getting any reassurances that their situation will get better from their supposed party. It's not that the GOP will actually improve their situation, but at least they are giving it lip service.

Trump just took the lead in PA. Elitist, arrogant, and out of touch. The Democratic Party, 2016.

**Xiahou** · 11-09-2016, 06:20

Looks like we're about to have our first Oompa Loompa president. Historic.

**Kagemusha** · 11-09-2016, 06:28

I sincerely hope that once Trump is the POTUS, things will not turn out as bad as i fear they will. Well this is democracy and what parties put up as candidates can actually get elected into office.