The Election News and Predictions Thread

Yup, that's one of my chief concerns, too. Even if his policies end up being reasonable, the lowering of the bar for discourse is troubling. Both in terms of vulgarity, and in the idea that you don't have to actually make arguments for things any more.

There's some upside in this, in that lots of politicians surely think awful things and don't say them, and I'd rather have that out in the open. I don't think leaders should be walking on eggshells with every public statement, so that saying the wrong thing once ends your career. But Trump clearly represents an over correction to this problem. And the behavior we aspire to, whether genuine or not, it still important in and of itself.

That said, I'd like to welcome my liberal friends to the "coarsening of the culture" debate, which conservatives have been talking about re: television and film for a couple of decades now.

I for one don't approve of the 'coarsening of the culture' and have said so in the past. I agree that movies, TV and media visit the' potty mouth' to often. It's a growing trend among young people. Mostly I was mocked for saying that, and will be mocked again.....But politeness and courtesy are not outdated ideas, they equate to respect.

Yeah, I personally believe political/election coverage needs to become far less about spectacle and far more about substance. I'm a nerd for facts and research, after all. I'm sure most people would find the kind of debates I'd like to watch intolerable. I say bring it on.

But it won't happen.

My fear is that Trump's win has essentially made it acceptable to say awful things without any sort of reckoning. It's rather breathtaking how he managed to (mostly) ignore criticisms and chastisement for his words, and still get elected. I remember thinking at various times throughout the campaign that any other politician, when faced with the backlash of having said similarly awful things, might very well have bowed out of the race. But Trump just kinda shrugged all that off.

I know a lot of people who liked Trump because he "tells it like it is." I'm sure we all do. Now that he's won, I'm getting a sense that these same people feel pretty emboldened to "tell it like it is," too, and that any sort of filter is a mark of cowardice or weakness. It's concerning.

Yes, good God yes, the hypocrisy on this front is mind numbing.

__________________
Letterboxd

Once we saw babies dead and people burning on the dinner-time news in the '60s and all the subsequent horrors of wrongheaded wars, we've been hellbound for a "coarsening of the culture".

__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page

Hi MoFo. Came to check on y'all after the election.

I don't think I popped in here during the primaries. Marco Rubio was my guy.

In fact, I was ABBTCPC: Anybody but Trump, Clinton, Pataki, or Carson lol.

Here is my attempt at level-headed analysis of the election that I posted on FB.

- Despite claims to the contrary, neither Hillary Clinton nor Donald Trump was ever going to tear this country down. Believing they might is failing to understand the balance of powers and the resiliency of the country.


- I did not like either candidate. Since everyone has different things they look for in a candidate in regard to policy, I'll only address what I believe are objective issues about the two that concerned me and should be acknowledged by both parties.


Trump: Sincere issues with ego and temperament. He is also very thin on details of his policies. He has stated policy goals, but never really shared with the voters how he was going to do any of it.


Clinton: She is corrupt. There is only so much that you can claim partisan witch-hunt if you are a supporter of hers. She has objective issues with honesty and abuse of power.


- I think the country is better off with a conservative justice filling Scalia's seat. The 4 conservative, 4 liberal, 1 swing court has produced thorough, intense review of each case and that's good for America. I don't think either side "owning" the Supreme Court is necessarily a good thing.


- Trump and his team deserve a ton of credit for winning blue-collar working states. The GOP has tried for years to chip away in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania without any luck. They hadn't won Pennsylvania and Michigan since Bush in 88 and hadn't won Wisconsin since Reagan in 84. Michael Moore's point that Trump was resonating with factory and blue-collar workers in the rust belt was correct. Stunning stuff.


- The Democrats in 2016 suffered from what the Republicans suffered from in 2008 and 2012: they decided it was someone's "turn" to be the nominee and prioritized it over general election apathy - particularly in the middle - to said candidate. That was their biggest error.


- I don't believe in the populist wave people are talking about this morning. Turnout was extremely low this cycle. The right voters turned out for Trump in the right states...doesn't really indicate a shift in the electorate, I don't believe.


- GOP has the House, Senate, and Presidency, but I don't believe they'll be able to get done as much of their agenda as Obama did with the super-majority from 09-11. The Senate majority is small and includes enough Trump skeptics (McCain, Graham, Cruz, Sasse, etc.) that they will probably function as allies to provide checks on certain Trump agenda items.


- Trump is not a pure conservative. His polices are moderate. He is also a businessman who wants to make deals. Conservatives should be prepared for Trump to reach across and try and get Democrats to join him in passing certain items. This will happen and rile you up when it does. Just be prepared for some of his actions to leave you less than thrilled.

This is what's troubling me, not only with you guys but on this side of the ocean too. In the U.K. there's no doubt that the harsh rhetoric used by some campaigners gave their supporters licence to attack individuals verbally and some physically too. It's reprehensible and really worries me. I hope this isn't something that gets worse

Cool, you can make your own map...

Attachments

 

__________________
"I may be rancid butter, but I'm on your side of the bread."
E. K. Hornbeck

Neato....election misinformation, just what we need.

Middle America gives middle finger to establishment. It's my tiny liberal artsy side getting stimulated.

There have been lots of reports of this already happening. Minorities getting threatened and told to go back to their countries. A child handing out fake deportation slips to minority classmates. Men trying to grab women by their genitals. Vandalism with Trump's own words. And it's not just in the red states that these stories are coming from. It's scary as hell.

__________________

Funny, I just picked up a pair for myself to put under the tree this Christmas. I'll be keeping mine and happily wearing them.

See video...
http://www.wsj.com/video/new-balance...1FFB1CBF3.html

Don't know if this has been discussed (but just to continue last night's conversation...) over the last day the anti-Trump protests have escalated to full blown riots in several cities. Police have been attacked, properties have been set on fire, innocent people have been ripped from their cars and brutally beaten.
Trump supporters and innocent bystanders have been hospitalized by violent Clinton supporters.

Talk about "deplorables." Someone needs to cue Cyndi Lauper's "True Colors."






And yet, last night on Anderson Cooper, Gold Star father, Khizr Khan said that since Trump was elected (only 36 hours before at that time) that Muslims in cities all over the country have been attacked by "Trump Supporters" (identified by Trump hats & shirts) - that they've assaulted Muslim women, ripping off their head scarves, that they attacked Mosques in at least three major cities.

The weird thing is there are no reports of any such activities since Trump was elected.
But, at no point did Anderson Cooper ask if there were any police reports confirming these claims. Why do such things just go completely unquestioned? How can a guy who was a Presidential debate monitor just sit there while someone makes totally outrageous claims that would make major headlines and not say a word or ask a question about whether any of this is true or not?

Here's the video and the claim is in the middle at around 3:20.
(Is this like, because there are all these reports of anti-Trump violence, this guy just has to deflect by making up stories about Trump Supporters attacking Muslim Women and Mosques all over the country when no such thing has occurred?)



And if anyone does have any information to confirm Mr. Khan's claim of sudden, mass violence against Muslims occurring in cities across the U.S. since Wednesday, please feel free to inform us.

Your type is part of the problem.

... or just Obama supporters who didn't vote for Clinton.

Blog request...

Please stop spreading unsubstantiated stories of Trump-induced terror.
http://reason.com/blog/2016/11/11/el...b-attack-false

You don't think so? Who's the side that's pissed off?

Sure...thats why hes supported by the KKK

__________________

Why are both parties acting as if they have the level headed side right now. Can we not admit that crazy exists in both parties and there is a hell of a lot of crazy going on right now. Come on guys. Mofo is full of a bunch of thoughtful people lets show it.