Live Presidential Forecast

Post by matwood » Wed, Nov 09, 2016, 5:35 AM UTC

Alex3917 wrote: post #197

75j wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How so? I'm not excited about a Trump presidency. My hopes are that 1) the media will keep a better eye on Trump (going off the last 8 years, they'll ignore any atrocity as long as it's committed by the blue team), 2) that Trump is not as smart as Clinton, and therefore less able to deceptively achieve his goals and 3) that 4 years of Trump will mobilize Americans to fix their electoral system and seek out real alter…

You realize that Republicans now control the presidency, the house, the senate, and the supreme court, right? This isn't our Brexit moment, it's our Islamic Republic moment.

Post by humanrebar » Wed, Nov 09, 2016, 5:36 AM UTC

castratikron wrote: post #93

keithnz wrote: post #88

Why isn't the president decided by the percentage of votes? Seems to me, there are a lot voters whose vote essentially are useless? I kind of understand the house and senate being more regional representation, but the president kind of represents all Americans, no?

It was originally designed to stop stupid people from throwing the election. We'll see tonight if it still works.

Post by throwanem » Wed, Nov 09, 2016, 5:38 AM UTC

M_Grey wrote: post #239

Inconel wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who very much dislikes the prospect of a Trump presidency, and is in fact well to the left of the Democratic party and Hillary Clinton on most social and economic issues, I find this line of thinking quite troubling. Perhaps rather than hoping for assassinations or voter fraud, those of us who identify as "progressive" could instead channel that mental energy into finding ways to better appeal to large gro…

You know what? People as a group are just too stupid and easily manipulated to be helped, and given that Trump now gets to pick (probably) 3 SCOTUS seats? We're cooked. Basically, for most of us here, the rest of our lives will have this election hanging over us, for the implications on the SCOTUS alone. As I said, people who can afford it are going to leave in droves.

Post by wyldfire » Wed, Nov 09, 2016, 5:41 AM UTC

551199 wrote: post #188

wyldfire wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"People over globalism" sounds like code for "protectionism". You can't give everyone back their large-wage-unskilled-labor jobs with tariffs. "Commerce with all nations, alliance with none, should be our motto." -Thomas Jefferson

Look I know where you a coming from but the way the country is lead doesn't really help average joes. When manufacturing and other jobs are outsourced who are going to buy the goods when your citizens can't afford them? You have people out of jobs instead of them producing stuff and creating more business.

Post by flukus » Wed, Nov 09, 2016, 5:42 AM UTC

andars wrote: post #64

jdavis703 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ideally politicians would be adults and work out deals, like in the old days. Or maybe this is why most democracies have parliamentary systems.

I'm not convinced that such "old days" ever existed. I'm open to the idea, but the more I learn of history, the more it seems like the deals were the exception, not the rule. The system was designed from the beginning to make things difficult.