I accept that the electoral college selects the president and Trump won it handily, but shouldn’t he be more considerate of the fact that he did not win the popular vote. Not considerate as in denying it but considerate of the fact the most of the country did not support his proposed policies or want him to be president. The country is very divided right now and even Trump seems to think people should have known he didn’t mean everything he said. Apparently this was common sense to his supporters. So he certainly can tone down and reach out to the democrats without losing standing with his supporters. Instead he keeps saying he one in a landslide, claiming he won the popular vote and touts a mandate. At best, I am hoping his candidate selections are standard Republican, because when they aren’t they are terrifying.
He does little to speak out to protesters or groups he marginalized during the election and help them feel better about his candidacy. Telling people to stop it one time on 60 minutes is not enough. Not even close. I can understand his desire to go on a “Thank you” tour of the Rust Belt, but shouldn’t he have a discussion with the protesters or those blue areas too? It seems like if he really cared about bringing the country together, he would accept that he did not win the popular vote and reach out to the other side more. I know he isn’t even in office yet, but I from what I see of the tone of the president-elect now, I don’t see how he has any intention or appreciates what needs to be done to bring the country together.
Certainly he should have some restraint and be considerate of others’ feelings, and he may well try that.
An interesting thought is that his share of the popular vote would have only been 15%-20% had the Democrats run a different candidate.
I’m very curious about your basis for this supposition. Consider others’ feelings? This is a serious question. Name an instance when he stepped outside his own reality and considered 1) another’s feelings and/or 2) facts.
The fact is, he lost the popular vote by a YUUUUGE margin. Most people who voted did not vote for him. In his reality, he won by a landslide. He’s not capable of seeing anyone or anything in the factual world that the rest of us live in.
Given his present stance that he actually did win the popular vote, except for all the illegals who supposedly masked it from him, I don’t think he considers himself beholden to try to be bipartisan in any way.
The Establishment Republicans had no great chance: they crumpled before a fucking Trump — essentially nullities. The defeated Republicans then had to run Trump. Bucking the normal alternation of parties, the election was the Democrats for the taking.
Had they run any other, from Malley and Webb, or from dozens in all their ranks ( excluding Biden who would also be an Establishment goon ) they would have won against the horror that is the Trump; in an anti-establishment year Sanders could have done much better than they.
This is against the coarseness and brutality of a Trump.
To their credit the DNC deliberately decided to lose rather than have their choice slighted, despite her incompetence and dishonesty; and she managed to lose to a Trump.
And I don’t mean to rag on poor old Hillary: she has had a truly terrible experience, especially since her inane self-importance and self-love has always assured her of the inevitability of her being chosen; she had to fight off many lies and many truths. Worst of all, two months before election day death hit a friend: President Karimov died.
A good friend and generous donor, along with his lovely daughter — now missing —who was a fundraiser for the Foundation, this must have been the Crack of Doom for Mrs. Clinton. Grief depresses even in imperceptible ways. He was able to be of some service by having his business partner give trucks to the Clinton Foundation, which enabled her as Sec-State days later to lift sanctions on unhappy Uzbekistan.
His long years of service, spanning decades, to his people would be an inspiration to her: his sudden death, a portent of life’s uncertainty.
If a candidate promises to do X and his opponent promises to do Y and he gets elected should he do X or Y? Shouldn’t politicians try to keep their promises?
No. The liberal protesters generally aren’t interested in a rational discussion. They’re pissed, and they want everyone to know it. It would be a complete waste of the President-Elect’s time to try to talk to those people.
As for the blue areas, maybe less of a waste of time, but I prefer to see him spending time on making deals with Carrier and showing that he appreciates fly-over country.
Why bother? The Democrat collective isn’t ready to accept anything Trump does. The Democrats have been attacking Trump since he declared his intention to campaign for POTUS. And the attacks have continued even after it has became obvious that Trump has won according to the rules. When the Democrat collective calms down, there will be plenty of time for both sides to reach out/work together. Or not. The Democrat collective is welcome to stand on the sidelines, ranting, raving, and holding their breath until they turn blue, if they so chose.
Many in the news media, entertainers, comedians, pundits, and the suckers who believed them were shocked, SHOCKED, that Trump won. They didn’t believe it was possible. Now they’re embarrassed. How could they have been so wrong?
Who convinced you that Trump couldn’t win? Maybe you should reassess that relationship?
Obama (remember him?) is the current President and does little to speak out to protesters or groups he marginalized during the election. Perhaps he could lead by example?
This is a silly argument. Hillary won the primary handily in every objective measure and Trump exceeded expectation at every turn. The DNC did not manipulate the primary to give it to Hillary, she won it. The assertion that Bernie could win the general election but not the primary is itself, far fetched and unknowable. I believe main reason Hillary didn’t win was because of complacency. Between people thinking a 3rd party candidate was a safe vote to people no thinking they had to vote because Hillary was so favored led to Trump winning. Hillary banking on the Rust Belt seemed an obvious mistake too.
DNC emails that show the favor of one candidate does not mean the primary was rigged for Hillary. It means the DNC favored a life long democrat, which should surprise no one. Besides whiny and scheming emails, the DNC did nothing to actively influence the primary.
Then let me ask directly: Hurr, Door, he says he would have won the popular vote if it had not been for the millions of illegal voters. You buy that? Or would you like to change the subject?
This is a good point, but 1) he is already considering or moving toward “Y” in some areas so it’s certainly something he is ok with and 2) I believe this goes beyond policy. He said many divisive things. If it was just campaign talk for him, why not do more to address the other side. How can you bring the divide together without addressing some of the main issues causing the divide? It seems like Trump can do what ever he wants and his followers will justify it, at least for now. I think he is missing an opportunity.
I was grimly amused to hear how many times Trump, in his speeches yesterday, boasted about his “landslide” victory, despite that Clinton now has a 2.5 million vote advantage in the popular vote. He really does live in his own reality.
If Trump wins the electoral vote, but loses the popular vote, then the electoral vote is the Best Thing Ever, and anyway, he really won the popular vote because he says so.
If Trump wins the popular vote, but loses the electoral vote, then the election was stolen from him, because he won.
If Trump lost both the electoral and popular vote, then the election was rigged and unfair, and he really did win. Sad!
This is really, actually how his mind works. He really would believe each of these scenarios.
So ignore areas that didn’t vote him in? How does that bridge the divide? He said he wants to represent all Americans. Well the protesters and the blue states are American too. The majority that voted in fact. Also it sure would be nice for people to stop disregarding another’s concerns simply because of political ideology. If the flyover country and the Rust Belt are so angry over being ignored, perhaps they would understand the consequences of ignoring the blue states. Some of them were blue until very recently.
“Elections have consequences, and at the end of the day, I won.”, President Obama, less than one year after he was sworn in. And a sentiment that pretty much every other president had as well.
Carrier bent Trump over a barrel, but it’s the taxpayer who got screwed. It’s easy to fleece your adversary if you know he’s desperate. If this is the brilliant deal maker in action, I think we’d all better off if Trump stayed in his pajamas making his pathetic rants on Twitter instead.
well, there are practical considerations. “Winning” in such a flukeish fashion (even though the same thing happened a mere 16 years ago) should mean that a politician concerned about reelection would be trying to govern in such a manner that you actually could get a majority of the popular vote as well as the electoral next time, simply because that makes it likelier that you’ll win.
Maybe they’re counting on suppression to make that happen.
I mean that’s silly, they’re taking I think $700,000/yr in tax incentives, as far as we can tell, in exchange for not saving about $30m in costs (moving the full 2100 to Mexico I believe would’ve saved them $65m.) I think the reality is Carrier probably realized they were in a rough spot–their outsourcing was front page news, and they were uniquely vulnerable to government reprisal since parent company United Technologies gets about 10% of its gross revenue from DoD contracts.
It’s not a particularly meaningful deal, nor a model for fixing the problem of offshoring (one of the biggest problems is it’s just too small, many more jobs are being offshored this year but they aren’t front page news so didn’t get Trump’s attention), but to describe it as more than it was, “Carrier bending Trump over a barrel” is a little silly.
He should bother because it’s gonna be his boat for the next 4 years. Obama has repeatedly reached out and encourage people to be patient. Why don’t you think democrats will listen? Some won’t sure, but some will. There already seems to be some calm in the LGBQT community since Trump has said he won’t try to roll back their rights. Why not speak out more against the hate crimes that are being done in his name? Obama can’t do that for him? Otherwise who did Obama marginalize during the election? When a black man was arrested by an officer for breaking into his own house, Obama reached out to both after he made negative comments about the police department’s handling of the situation.
I believe that similar outreach would be beneficial for Trump and help calm the democrats down. I don’t know of a large group that was marginalized by Obama unless you want to say it was the middle class Rust Belt folks, but I believe that is debatable and those people were absolutely not marginalized in the same way Trump has marginalized Mexicans, immigrants, women and Muslims.
Did I say that something that indicated someone said he couldn’t win? This comment doesn’t make much sense to me.