United States - 2016 Election Thread

[meiji]

I was a bigger fan of that comic when it was about the Democratic Party.

 

[DocMcStuffins]

The party used to be the party of the working class and people who didn't have a voice or the funding and guts to stand up to the elitist of Washington who at the time were rich white people and more often then not they were Republicans. They stop focusing on the issues and got into bed with the Media and Hollywood and lost all touch with what it meant to fight for the working class. The people in the inner cities, industrial areas, the farmers. They began to lose State legislative seats and State senate seats in mass so much so that it is ridiculous and the fact that you have Heartbeat bill going through the Ohio State house and senate shows just how much the dems fucked themselves. They continued to lose seats in the House and Senate and lost more and more states to republican governors. The dems need to refocus themselves

can you provide an example? I see marketing issues but not policy ones.

Trump kicked hillary's ass on free trade, but I don't see any serious person that believes he will do much.

 

[static]

can you provide an example? I see marketing issues but not policy ones.

I think a telling one was where Hillary said she was sympathetic to the coal miners, but coal is outdated and we need to work towards more energy efficient technologies. Trump responded with looking into clean coal. I forget the details of it, I think it was during the second debate.

If I was a coal miner, what I would have heard was "Sorry bro, learn new skillz, if you elect me, I'll put you out of work," whereas Trump said that he was looking to advance their industry.

 

[meiji]

If I was a coal miner, what I would have heard was "Sorry bro, learn new skillz, if you elect me, I'll put you out of work," whereas Trump said that he was looking to advance their industry.

So essentially Trump told them what they wanted to hear (ie, he lied, as usual), even though "clean coal" is a fantasy, and coal is a dead-end energy source right now just on cost alone compared to natural gas and solar. Coal is done for. People need to either move to where the jobs are, or develop a new industry in their own area. This isn't impossible - there's plenty of towns like Pittsburgh and some in Ohio that are as good or better off now than they were during the coal and steel days. There's others that are developing arts and crafts industries on a micro-factory or work from home basis. Heck, a lot of the support people Apple hires these days are work-from-home.

The big problem with centrist Democrats (both Clintons and others in their camp) is that they are gung ho about free trade but basically give lip service to those affected by it. People saw what happened after NAFTA and the promises for job retraining. It didn't really do them any good, and they weren't going to give Clinton a second bite at the apple when she had to be dragged kicking and screaming a little bit to the left in order to put a $15/hr minimum wage in the Democratic platform, for example.

"Retraining" after NAFTA wasn't enough, and people couldn't get by without a job in the interim. There's lots of solutions here, too, but centrist Democrats aren't really interested in those solutions, only the next international agreement to increase profits for corporations.

 

[static]

stuff

Yep! Exactly!

"Retraining" after NAFTA wasn't enough, and people couldn't get by without a job in the interim. There's lots of solutions here, too, but centrist Democrats aren't really interested in those solutions, only the next international agreement to increase profits for corporations.

Yep, totally. I agree that people should retrain themselves when their jobs become obsolete. I'm totally fine, especially when the US is a capitalist society (at least in principle), people getting devoured unless they adapt to changing times.

I was simply giving an example to how Clinton was snubbing the working class. And were I part of the working class, I would have taken it as a snub.

 

[MossBoss]

Strange times in the US. The election is over. Yet certain sections of the media like Yahoo publish negative stories about Trump every day. Some of these stories can be justified such as his nonsense on social media but many of the stories are just garbage. The media is using stories which are essentially positive or neutral and twisting them so they become negative ones about Trump. It is so transparent that I feel almost embarrassed for the writers.

Come on America! Get behind your leader. The world needs a strong and united America.

 

[DocMcStuffins]

Strange times in the US. The election is over. Yet certain sections of the media like Yahoo publish negative stories about Trump every day. Some of these stories can be justified such as his nonsense on social media but many of the stories are just garbage. The media is using stories which are essentially positive or neutral and twisting them so they become negative ones about Trump. It is so transparent that I feel almost embarrassed for the writers.

Come on America! Get behind your leader. The world needs a strong and united America.

Hmm, no thanks.

 

[Wwanderer]

The world needs a strong and united America.

You might get strong (in some senses of the word), but you just aren't going to get united any time soon. That train left the station quite a while back.

-Ww

 

[static]

You might get strong (in some senses of the word), but you just aren't going to get united any time soon. That train left the station quite a while back.

-Ww

IMO, it feels like a lot of people are hoping Trump fails. Seems counterproductive, like hoping your pilot crashes the plane you're riding because you don't like him.

Like him or hate him, he's our president and is going to represent the country on the world stage, and make decisions that are going to affect the rest of the world. I hope he does a fantastic, amazing job. I hope he gets people working again, and a health care service that works, and fixes the fuck ups going on around the world that we caused. I hope he curbs excessive government spending and gets our deficit back to a surplus, and I hope he cuts down our debt to other countries.

I don't hope for him to fail though.

 

[Jbagz]

To be fair, this is what republican voters wanted - smaller government, run by an outsider with no experience. Nothing surprising so far.

Trump doesn't seem like a smaller government guy to me. Between his huge wall project that has boondoggle written all over it, to his protectionist anti-trade talk, and the stuff he has said about health care, and pumping money into the military, he sounds very much like a big spending big government guy.

He is all over the map with the crap he says. There is no telling what he will actually do.

I do know that changing the direction of the government is like turning an oil tanker, you don't do it quickly.

 

[Chocoballs]

Trump's first week was interesting for sure. Last few days weren't very positive but this video might give you a new perspective.

Remember The Time Bill Clinton Got A Standing Ovation For "Cracking Down On Illegal Aliens"
Before Trump, there was President Obama's Iraqi refugee ban and seven nations of terror proclamation.
But before Obama there was Bill Clinton who received a standing ovation for demanding stronger border defenses, and deporting criminal illegal immigrants.

"We are a nation of immigrants.. but we are a nation of laws"
"Our nation is rightly disturbed by the large numbers of illegal aliens entering our country...
Illegal immigrants take jobs from citizens or legal immigrants, they impose burdens on our taxpayers...
That is why we are doubling the number of border guards, deporting more illegal immigrants than ever before, cracking down on illegal hiring, barring benefits to illegal aliens, and we will do more to speed the deportation of illegal immigrants arrest for crimes...
It is wrong and ultimately self-defeating for a nation of immigrants to permit the kind of abuse of our immigration laws that has occurred in the last few years.. and we must do more to stop it."
[Standing Ovation]

 

[static]

Meh, people have amnesia when it comes to their favorite people. Right now, everyone is looking for a reason to hate Trump, and this serves as another reason.

No one remembers that it was Obama that wrote the executive order originally (and picked the countries). Trump just signed it.

 

[DocMcStuffins]

Meh, people have amnesia when it comes to their favorite people. Right now, everyone is looking for a reason to hate Trump, and this serves as another reason.

No one remembers that it was Obama that wrote the executive order originally (and picked the countries). Trump just signed it.

Can you provide an alternative media source for that?

As for Clinton, any true progressive now understands the racial games he played. He wouldn't be able to get away with it again without a lot of protest.

 

[static]

Can you provide an alternative media source for that?

As for Clinton, any true progressive now understands the racial games he played. He wouldn't be able to get away with it again without a lot of protest.

I'll check for it, right now the search is basically a shotgun blast of left wing media sources trying to "debunk" it. I want to find an article from that time. Just gets hard when people get too good at SEO.

 

[Ken1988]

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/158/text
https://homeland.house.gov/press/mc...-travel-restrictions-for-visa-waiver-program/

 

[hkAlone]

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/158/text
https://homeland.house.gov/press/mc...-travel-restrictions-for-visa-waiver-program/

We are living in a tweeter world where people make their mind based on incomplete short informations. I just read threes two links.
Thes previous administration was asking for a deeper screening for people who visited the "7 Muslim" countries even if they come from a country with a waiver program.
It has nothing to do with a general Muslim ban for people with a passport from these countries.

 

[TAG Manager]

We are living in a tweeter world where people make their mind based on incomplete short informations. I just read threes two links.
Thes previous administration was asking for a deeper screening for people who visited the "7 Muslim" countries even if they come from a country with a waiver program.
It has nothing to do with a general Muslim ban for people with a passport from these countries.

+1 - Read an article about the airlines doing their part for the screening process and people blaming the airlines who are ultimately liable for allowing travel to someone who doesn't meet the qualifications to be granted entry. (...and the knee-jerk reactions abound)

 

[Frenchy]

+1 - Read an article about the airlines doing their part for the screening process and people blaming the airlines who are ultimately liable for allowing travel to someone who doesn't meet the qualifications to be granted entry. (...and the knee-jerk reactions abound)

Yes, clearly not the airlines'fault. Often I was asked to show my Japanese resident card before boarding a plane back to Tokyo and didn't make a fuss about it.
Regarding DJT's ban (or whomever actually decided this before him) I think it's a bit hard to understand the full logic given that foreign terrorists who actually did commit crimes in the US (notably 9/11) were not from these countries. Saudi Arabia and Pakistan not on the list?! Come on... where did Ben Laden come from and where did he find shelter ?

 

[Ken1988]

We are living in a tweeter world where people make their mind based on incomplete short informations. I just read threes two links.
Thes previous administration was asking for a deeper screening for people who visited the "7 Muslim" countries even if they come from a country with a waiver program.
It has nothing to do with a general Muslim ban for people with a passport from these countries.

I had thought so, too. I should have properly linked the references. My apologies.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-pres...-nation-foreign-terrorist-entry-united-states
In Section 2, para (c), it refers to:
212(f) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1182(f) "Suspension of entry or imposition of restrictions by President"
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1182
and to:
217(a)(12) of the INA, 8 U.S.C. 1187(a)(12)
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1187

Technically it's not Muslim ban. Travel ban on certain nationalities.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-immigration-syria-christian-idUSKBN15D0UN
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-immigration-syria-lebanon-idUSKBN15D0R3

His choice of 7 countries is controversial.
https://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/terrorism-immigration-risk-analysis

Nevertheless, it's legal in a way that they have already been identified as "countries of concern" by another legislation though its primary objective is different.