Hillary Clinton could still win the presidency

[Cymrea]

She certainly ran on fear of Trump. Didn't work out.

Considering that I literally couldn't watch a single commercial segment without a "Trump is a bigoted devil!" smear ad for almost a month straight, I'd even go so far as to say that the tactic might have even backfired on her as I'm sure I wasn't the only person tired of the sheer volume of hate coming from her camp.

But totally cool with the Trump campaign's hate. Mmkay.

The problem is that she was right. Trump is a demonstrably misogynist, bigoted, racist, narcissist who ran on a campaign of way over the top lies and fear of everyone who wasn't a white male. His voters may not have shared his hatreds (though many clearly did and do), but they tacitly condoned it with their vote. They said these things are okay in an American president. And that is just unconscionable.

Instead of taking any heed of Trump's conspiracy-theory campaign, his supporters just responded with strawman and ad hominem bullshit while cramming their fingers in their ears.

Trump spewed exactly what cowards and bigots already believed. And now we have to live with the consequence of less than half the country's fear. Certainly can't bitch about tyranny of the majority.

[Eol Sha]

Never underestimate the party's ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

I mean, I thought this would be a landslide for Clinton. The Democratic Party does really continue to impress.

I thought she'd win by over 100 electoral votes. Boy was I wrong.

[Corrian]

I think we really need that 50 state strategy back, EVEN in the electoral vote system. Campaign in the rust belt anyway for fuck's sake.

I mean, you can probably disregard most of the south still, and places like Montana, because that is very unlikely to get and may actually be not worth it, but clearly something was wrong with the approach. And considering Sanders campaigned on helping everybody....He may have actually gone there.

I think these career politicians to that degree (Sanders technically counts, considering how long he's been around) is what is clouding them and causing them in the first place. They thought Trump was easy. No, I think he's smarter in his own way than they gave him credit for.

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

I'm not saying he is a dictator. But he is worrying me by demanding to see the names of those who work on climate change and appointing crazy people to offices.

You dont think he'd want to see those names so he'd know who to talk to about it? I mean he held a private meeting with Al Gore and Leonardo Dicaprio in Trump tower a week ago to discuss climate change- do you think he tried to convert them or tried to end their careers? No. He appointed Rick Perry to the EPA because Rick Perry understood even in 2012 (even if he couldnt name it) that it needed to be restructured, and as Governor of Texas the Environmental Industry in Texas saw massive growth, which is important for the survival of the practical use of green technology.

Right...

So a person who thinks Global warming is a silly myth should be in charge.

[Sassanidia]

You dont think he'd want to see those names so he'd know who to talk to about it? I mean he held a private meeting with Al Gore and Leonardo Dicaprio in Trump tower a week ago to discuss climate change- do you think he tried to convert them or tried to end their careers? No. He appointed Rick Perry to the EPA because Rick Perry understood even in 2012 (even if he couldnt name it) that it needed to be restructured, and as Governor of Texas the Environmental Industry in Texas saw massive growth, which is important for the survival of the practical use of green technology.

He wanted to dismantle it in 2012, not restructure it, which he probably wants to do now that he took the job. Anyone who wants to see it gone probably wouldn't take it's highest post.

At the 2012 republican debate he said there were 5 agencies that needed to be rebuilt- someone joked the EPA, and he said no it wasn't that, but that EPA needed to be rebuilt.

[Corrian]

At the very least, Trump had a message of change. Something that Clinton didn't have. That was probably one of the biggest deciding factors in his victory.

The "hope and change" candidate seems to do the winning nowadays,k even if it is for the worst.

[East Klent]

Declaring all news that criticises him as "fake" and installing his own personal sources is certainly reminiscent of dictatorial moves. And appointing people to posts they oppose is only going to do damage.

Nearly all of the newsmedia is running around declaring alternate news sources "fake"- I dont even think he specifically has declared any specific news organizations "fake", but even if he did he won't outlaw it because you can't even prove if a news source is fake.

If they report something that didn't happen (an article saying Trump was born in Pakistan, for instance) that's pretty easy to prove.

[Grinning Dragon]

Oh my god, that is gold. Bless her little heart.

You from the South?

Yep

[Corrian]

Honestly, I'm just at the point where I don't want a Clinton around politics ever again.

[East Klent]

He wanted to dismantle it in 2012, not restructure it, which he probably wants to do now that he took the job. Anyone who wants to see it gone probably wouldn't take it's highest post.

At the 2012 republican debate he said there were 5 agencies that needed to be rebuilt- someone joked the EPA, and he said no it wasn't that, but that EPA needed to be rebuilt.

Sorry I misread when you said EPA. I thought you said Energy. He's been appointed to be the Secretary of Energy, not head the EPA. Energy was the one he wanted to dismantle but couldn't remember.

[Eol Sha]

I think we really need that 50 state strategy back, EVEN in the electoral vote system. Campaign in the rust belt anyway for fuck's sake.

I mean, you can probably disregard most of the south still, and places like Montana, because that is very unlikely to get and may actually be not worth it, but clearly something was wrong with the approach. And considering Sanders campaigned on helping everybody....He may have actually gone there.

I think these career politicians to that degree (Sanders technically counts, considering how long he's been around) is what is clouding them and causing them in the first place. They thought Trump was easy. No, I think he's smarter in his own way than they gave him credit for.

As far as presidential politics goes, Montana is pretty out of reach, although a lot closer than most of the Mountain West sans Colorado, but I wouldn't give up on the state just yet. It's got a Democratic governor who was just re-elected and 40% of both branches of the state's legislature are controlled by Democrats.

[G-Tech Corporation]

Considering that I literally couldn't watch a single commercial segment without a "Trump is a bigoted devil!" smear ad for almost a month straight, I'd even go so far as to say that the tactic might have even backfired on her as I'm sure I wasn't the only person tired of the sheer volume of hate coming from her camp.

But totally cool with the Trump campaign's hate. Mmkay.

The problem is that she was right. Trump is a demonstrably misogynist, bigoted, racist, narcissist who ran on a campaign of way over the top lies and fear of everyone who wasn't a white male. His voters may not have shared his hatreds (though many clearly did and do), but they tacitly condoned it with their vote. They said these things are okay in an American president. And that is just unconscionable.

Instead of taking any heed of Trump's conspiracy-theory campaign, his supporters just responded with strawman and ad hominem bullshit while cramming their fingers in their ears.

Trump spewed exactly what cowards and bigots already believed. And now we have to live with the consequence of less than half the country's fear. Certainly can't bitch about tyranny of the majority.

But did Trump campaign on that? I don't remember him doing so, certainly. The majority of his message was positive, making America great again, bringing back the jobs, helping veterans, building the military, etc.

I mean, literally compare campaign slogans. Trump was running on Making America Great Again.

Hillary was running on "I'm with Her", so her platform in one word was.... Hillary?

[The Derpy Democratic Republic Of Herp]

So, do you guys think I did a good job on NSG to get people to vote for Hillary?

[Paddy O Fernature]

Considering that I literally couldn't watch a single commercial segment without a "Trump is a bigoted devil!" smear ad for almost a month straight, I'd even go so far as to say that the tactic might have even backfired on her as I'm sure I wasn't the only person tired of the sheer volume of hate coming from her camp.

But totally cool with the Trump campaign's hate. Mmkay.

The problem is that she was right. Trump is a demonstrably misogynist, bigoted, racist, narcissist who ran on a campaign of way over the top lies and fear of everyone who wasn't a white male. His voters may not have shared his hatreds (though many clearly did and do), but they tacitly condoned it with their vote. They said these things are okay in an American president. And that is just unconscionable.

Instead of taking any heed of Trump's conspiracy-theory campaign, his supporters just responded with strawman and ad hominem bullshit while cramming their fingers in their ears.

Trump spewed exactly what cowards and bigots already believed. And now we have to live with the consequence of less than half the country's fear. Certainly can't bitch about tyranny of the majority.

I can't speak for how Trump ran his campaign, as I literally can count on one hand how many commercials of his I saw during the entire 2016 election here locally. The media bias was pretty much absolute in this regard here.

As for your view on Trump and his follows, I can't help but laugh my ass off as you literally are screaming about how horrible they are while doing exactly what you are supposedly decrying in the first place. Textbook definition of Irony, at it's absolute finest.

[Eol Sha]

At the very least, Trump had a message of change. Something that Clinton didn't have. That was probably one of the biggest deciding factors in his victory.

The "hope and change" candidate seems to do the winning nowadays,k even if it is for the worst.

I think that is the number one rule of American presidential politics regardless of era. The person running on a platform of change has a solid chance at winning.

[East Klent]

But totally cool with the Trump campaign's hate. Mmkay.

The problem is that she was right. Trump is a demonstrably misogynist, bigoted, racist, narcissist who ran on a campaign of way over the top lies and fear of everyone who wasn't a white male. His voters may not have shared his hatreds (though many clearly did and do), but they tacitly condoned it with their vote. They said these things are okay in an American president. And that is just unconscionable.

Instead of taking any heed of Trump's conspiracy-theory campaign, his supporters just responded with strawman and ad hominem bullshit while cramming their fingers in their ears.

Trump spewed exactly what cowards and bigots already believed. And now we have to live with the consequence of less than half the country's fear. Certainly can't bitch about tyranny of the majority.

But did Trump campaign on that? I don't remember him doing so, certainly. The majority of his message was positive, making America great again, bringing back the jobs, helping veterans, building the military, etc.

I mean, literally compare campaign slogans. Trump was running on Making America Great Again.

Hillary was running on "I'm with Her", so her platform in one word was.... Hillary?

Muslim Registry and the wall were part of his campaign, both of which could be interpreted as racist or not, depending on who you speak to.

[G-Tech Corporation]

But did Trump campaign on that? I don't remember him doing so, certainly. The majority of his message was positive, making America great again, bringing back the jobs, helping veterans, building the military, etc.

I mean, literally compare campaign slogans. Trump was running on Making America Great Again.

Hillary was running on "I'm with Her", so her platform in one word was.... Hillary?

Muslim Registry and the wall were part of his campaign, both of which could be interpreted as racist or not, depending on who you speak to.

The wall was in his stump speech, sure, but that has a positive "more jerbs" component. I don't recall him actually stumping the registry, though of course my exposures to all of his speeches was rather limited.

[Eol Sha]

But did Trump campaign on that? I don't remember him doing so, certainly. The majority of his message was positive, making America great again, bringing back the jobs, helping veterans, building the military, etc.

I mean, literally compare campaign slogans. Trump was running on Making America Great Again.

Hillary was running on "I'm with Her", so her platform in one word was.... Hillary?

Muslim Registry and the wall were part of his campaign, both of which could be interpreted as racist or not, depending on who you speak to.

Certainly bigoted in my eyes.

[Cymrea]

But did Trump campaign on that? I don't remember him doing so, certainly. The majority of his message was positive, making America great again, bringing back the jobs, helping veterans, building the military, etc.

I mean, literally compare campaign slogans. Trump was running on Making America Great Again.

Hillary was running on "I'm with Her", so her platform in one word was.... Hillary?

The majority of his message was Mexicans and Muslims and how we need to kick/keep them out. Make America Great Again was just a ripoff of Reagan's slogan in an attempt to steal political valour. The man was a Democrat for how long? And the strong implication was that America was no longer great, and that it was because of outside influences - just feamongering. Simultaneously jingoistic and self-effacing, but that's Trump, playing both sides as always.

Bringing back jobs, just none of the ones creating Trump brand products overseas. Helping veterans, but not in any definable way. Building the military, but not on a single dime of his own.

[Paddy O Fernature]

But did Trump campaign on that? I don't remember him doing so, certainly. The majority of his message was positive, making America great again, bringing back the jobs, helping veterans, building the military, etc.

I mean, literally compare campaign slogans. Trump was running on Making America Great Again.

Hillary was running on "I'm with Her", so her platform in one word was.... Hillary?

Muslim Registry and the wall were part of his campaign, both of which could be interpreted as racist or not, depending on who you speak to.

A registry for immigrants coming from known terrorist hot spots that hate America doesn't seem like a bad or illogical idea, especially considering right now you can get put on a "No fly list" without legal representation and everyone seems to be ok with that.

Border reform also is a solid topic and needs to be addressed to curb the tide of incoming illegal aliens into this country. A wall, either physical or metaphorical, isn't a bad idea. Though I would prefer the money spent on more physical assets then a static wall, such as doubling if not tripling the horribly understaffed and overworked USBP.

Like it or not, crossing into another country regardless of intent without consent is still illegal and in violation of the law, thus making illegals just that and they should be treated accordingly.

[East Klent]

Muslim Registry and the wall were part of his campaign, both of which could be interpreted as racist or not, depending on who you speak to.

The wall was in his stump speech, sure, but that has a positive "more jerbs" component. I don't recall him actually stumping the registry, though of course my exposures to all of his speeches was rather limited.

We had a few of them in Cincinnati, he mentioned a few times, mainly in the context of 'security', so that could be vaguely positive, I guess.

[G-Tech Corporation]

But did Trump campaign on that? I don't remember him doing so, certainly. The majority of his message was positive, making America great again, bringing back the jobs, helping veterans, building the military, etc.

I mean, literally compare campaign slogans. Trump was running on Making America Great Again.

Hillary was running on "I'm with Her", so her platform in one word was.... Hillary?

The majority of his message was Mexicans and Muslims and how we need to kick/keep them out. Make America Great Again was just a ripoff of Reagan's slogan in an attempt to steal political valour. The man was a Democrat for how long? And the strong implication was that America was no longer great, and that it was because of outside influences - just feamongering. Simultaneously jingoistic and self-effacing, but that's Trump, playing both sides as always.

Bringing back jobs, just none of the ones creating Trump brand products overseas. Helping veterans, but not in any definable way. Building the military, but not on a single dime of his own.

I'm not sure you understand that I'm not supporting Trump, I'm pointing out what the tone of his campaign was. But you can keep arguing with your strawman if it helps you sleep better at night.

[Cymrea]

I can't speak for how Trump ran his campaign, as I literally can count on one hand how many commercials of his I saw during the entire 2016 election here locally. The media bias was pretty much absolute in this regard here.

He was spending campaign funds on anything more than he had to, given that he can pocket what he doesn't spend.

As for your view on Trump and his follows, I can't help but laugh my ass off as you literally are screaming about how horrible they are while doing exactly what you are supposedly decrying in the first place. Textbook definition of Irony, at it's absolute finest.

I'm not screaming at all, literally or otherwise. Your presumptions continue.

Stating the horrible things Trump and his supporters do - things that are public record - is not "doing exactly what (I am) supposedly decrying". It would indeed be irony if I were, but since it isn't you're 0/2.

[East Klent]

Muslim Registry and the wall were part of his campaign, both of which could be interpreted as racist or not, depending on who you speak to.

A registry for immigrants coming from known terrorist hot spots that hate America doesn't seem like a bad or illogical idea, especially considering right now you can get put on a "No fly list" without legal representation and everyone seems to be ok with that.

Border reform also is a solid topic and needs to be addressed to curb the tide of incoming illegal aliens into this country. A wall, either physical or metaphorical, isn't a bad idea. Though I would prefer the money spent on more physical assets then a static wall, such as doubling if not tripling the horribly understaffed and overworked USBP.

Like it or not, crossing into another country regardless of intent without consent is still illegal and in violation of the law, thus making illegals just that and they should be treated accordingly.

Putting any group of people on a registry can lead down a slippery slope, one we have already started on in terms of surveillance. And getting put on the "No fly list" without due process is wrong and in violation of the Constitution which applies to anyone within the US, not just citizens.

So people should be treated as criminals for wanting a better life here (The American tradition) simply because they did not have the resources to do so legally and had to make the dangerous and not at all easy journey across the border? For having committed no other crime than wanting to have a better life for their families, something everyone wants, and merely not having the proper paperwork?

The wall would be too expensive, and take too long to construct to be effective. Also, walls can be tunneled under, especially since there are already tunnels under the border. EDIT: One of the few 'successful' border walls was the Berlin Wall and that was only worked because they shot the people making the crossing, and it was under the control of the military.

The Border Patrol should indeed have more resources, that I agree.

[Cymrea]

The majority of his message was Mexicans and Muslims and how we need to kick/keep them out. Make America Great Again was just a ripoff of Reagan's slogan in an attempt to steal political valour. The man was a Democrat for how long? And the strong implication was that America was no longer great, and that it was because of outside influences - just feamongering. Simultaneously jingoistic and self-effacing, but that's Trump, playing both sides as always.

Bringing back jobs, just none of the ones creating Trump brand products overseas. Helping veterans, but not in any definable way. Building the military, but not on a single dime of his own.

I'm not sure you understand that I'm not supporting Trump, I'm pointing out what the tone of his campaign was. But you can keep arguing with your strawman if it helps you sleep better at night.

No, I'm responding directly to your post, point for point. That's not remotely a strawman. Your support for Trump or lack thereof is immaterial to my response.