This is a discussion on the relative merits of her and Donnie. And I mention them both equally with equal disgust. They were good friends remember. And hopefully will be again.
The fact is that the Democrats were equally culpable in the Passion of the Trump, because if they had put up a decent candidate it would have been a cakewalk for them.
And by decent, I mean even slightly left of Reagan.
Not quite. msmith537 commented on how uniquely unqualified Trump is for the job. You decided to drag Hillary in and kick her again for good measure.
No argument there.
There you go again, Evan Drake, dragging in names that have nothing to do with the conversation. 
Hillary won. Registered Democrats and born-again Democrats voted for her in the primaries. Not a fan of hers, didn’t vote for her or against her because I am not a Democrat. But she won fair and square, within the confines of what that means in politics.
Did the Dem leadership reject Bernie, even knowing he would have won? Seriously? Did the rank and file Dems vote against Bernie because he had bad hair? What is the case being offered here?
To be fair, she would likely have won if Comey hadn’t shit all over the race. At least according to Nate Silver.
She did a reasonable job, it’s just a perfect storm of Bernie or Busters forwarding RW hatchet jobs, nonstop congressional investigations over Behghazi and EMALS!!1, an opponent that shamelessly spouted lies that the flyover stupids vapidly believed, the fucking Russians, the FBI, and she still got more votes than anyone in history but Obama.
Is she perfect? No. But she still did pretty good, IMHO.
That said, I don’t want her to run again.
Because the electorate is constantly getting bigger, I tend to discount the “more votes than anyone” argument. It’s like saying My Big Fat Greek Wedding was a better movie than Gone With the Wind because it made more at the box office.
She did a HORRIBLE job. What exactly did the Russian hacking reveal that was so game changing? How exactly did the Bernie supporters ruin her chances? an opponent that lies and says what the voters want to hear? Isn’t that Trump AND Clinton AND Bush AND every politician ever?
The only thing that you can possible argue was the Comey thing right at the end but even that excuse is bullshit because has she ran a decent campaign that hiccup means she gets 400 EVs instead of 405 EVs. Would she had won if Comey hadn’t done his 3 Stooges impersonation that last week? Maybe but I guaranty she would have won despite Comey if she had actually shown up and campaigned in the swing states.
Well, most politicians, at least they pick one set of lies and stick to them. Trump would tell three contradictory lies about the same subject in the course of a single sentence.
S
So he’s a great multitasker.
Haven’t you read the article? They voted more against Clinton than for Trump.
I wish that I was so optimistic. I am concerned that the takeaway message from this election is that you can fool all the people all the time. That you are far better off not being constrained by reality in your campaign, and that actual knowledge and ability is not nearly as important as the ability to bullshit convincingly.
No need for concern. The reality is that the takeaway message from this election is that too much of the electorate has been governed against its will for too long a time…by both parties.
Piffle.
Too many citizens have sat back and refused to engage in actual politics and then whined when the elected politicians responded to the actual voters. One cannot be governed “against one’s will” when one has refused to actually participate in expressing one’s will in the electoral process. Even the sometimes true but often overstated influence of money can be overridden by actual participation by sufficient numbers of voters. The electorate has generally provided the governance it wanted, but too many citizens have refrained from engaging as members of the electorate. In 2016, fewer than 58% of eligible voters bothered to cast votes, at all.
Or when one has stubbornly persisted in ignoring the realities of actual policy in favor of feel-good rhetoric about ideological positions.
By now, Trump voters have no excuse for not knowing that Republican policies in general prioritize the interests of corporations and the wealthy far above the interests of the working and middle classes. They have deliberately chosen to vote for Republicans who want to shrink their social safety nets, privatize their federal entitlements and education system, ignore infrastructure and social services needs, etc., for the financial advantage of large business interests and the wealthy minority.
Non-wealthy Republican voters have been desperately clinging to the fantasy that Republican politicians are actually “on their side” because they make sympathetic noises about gun rights or “the gays” or minorities or other socially conservative/old-fashioned bigotry issues. All these Republican voters who feel screwed over by the government under Republican-dominated legislatures are getting exactly what they voted for.
But they are so caught up in ideological partisanship and conservative media disinformation that they can’t pull their heads out of their asses and actually see it.
They sure are, especially if you quote some of the more, er, uninhibited bits instead of just paraphrasing the more respectable-sounding parts as in your OP:
The so-called “chaos and tantrum” voters seem to have played a large role, as well as the just plain pitifully uninformed.
And the “I’m angry that I can’t call niggers niggers or faggots faggots anymore” people, too.
When the public first got whiff of what lay in store for them in terms of the presidential race, it was quite a commotion. I remember joking with my family about the fact that this guy (that I knew him only from a couple of those “Crazy lifestyle of the Rich” YouTube channels, that seem somewhat interesting but end up being a tremendous waste of your time) was running for president. I remember everybody chatting about his outrageous statements and the fact that he wouldn’t even get farther than the primaries. Well when that happened, people resorted to plan B, he wasn’t getting elected at all, there was no way that he was going to pass the vote on the 8th, and definitely no way he was passing the EC vote later on. But of course, he went on to pass both of them, with no problem at all (not a landslide victory, but a significant and surprising one none the less).
Before these elections, I could not have cared less about what went on at the top of the ladder, never needed the info, never used it, and so I went on learning of other magnificent things in this world of ours. But like many people, I suddenly had an urge, and innate urge to learn all about this newly found "orangutan" and the workings of that pretty white house that lies in the middle of our capital. I followed the urge, but it took me places, which I had never ventured to. Coming from the bluest state of them all, California (the Bay Area to be quite exact), I knew quite a lot of the behavioral patterns of the so called liberals and democrats. I never minded them, and never noticed them to be quite honest. But the more I looked into this complex issue of ethics, economy, politics and much more, I began to notice terrible flaws in the ways of thinking that other people had (being the reserved person that I am, I never said anything about it).
Of course sometimes this different ideology that I recently adopted, became cumbersome to constantly conceal and maintain a secret, so sometimes it leaked out and created mini-messes but it was all containable. Because of the fact that I went to a very hippy high school, I encountered many times the typical liberal, speaking grotesquely of topics that they most likely knew very little of, (by saying this by no means do I intend to imply the fact that I believed I knew more, I just knew when people didn't know what they were talking about). And I swallowed all of it, venting here and there to the few people I knew I was safe to talk to without being eaten alive by the masses. I know this sounds like I might be dramatizing this entire experience, but it was not far from the truth. For with these people, there was no reasoning, no extended conversations about logic and ethics, no speaking at a moderate volume, no, there was only shouting nonsensical things until one person decided to quit.
I decided to side with Trump, because quite frankly I was scared of the people on the other side, and what they could do to this country if they got a hold of it. While I admit the fact that I disagree with Trump in many things that he says (his stance on immigration, the wall, among other things), but the list for Hillary was just too damn long, and contained things that were on my no-fly list. I sided with the logical side, and with the side that proved to have least damage on this country at our current time. If anyone is curious about those reasons, I'd be more than happy to write another one of these luxurious letters out again dedicated to that topic, but for now... that's itI made some errors, tried to correct them, but didn’t work. Sorry
There is a a paragraph that is to go between 2 and 3:
I sided with the Right, the terrible Right the unforgiving-sin-bearing Right. There is something in the word Right (politically speaking) that scares whoever you are talking to on the left, it has a special ability to make you stand out in a crow when you associate yourself with it, the reason for which I shall always be kept in the dark from. I moved to the right because of the fact that I enjoy the logic and reason in things, I feel safe in believing the fact that the ideal government is one that rules in small quantities and is wise. There is a certain feeling that people like me feel when we discover such ideas as Capitalism and Republics, it is a feeling of finding the eternal logic in a system that works just as its supposed to and provides the expected results. When one speaks of Capitalism, people immediately think of the 1% and Wall Street, when in fact they should be thinking of small government, the "american dream" (what ever that means anymore), and Adam Smith. They often get confused with corporatism, the system which consumes the U.S now, a system in which the big companies write the laws and the government is wall street's slave. Many of the problems that are created by this system, the left attempts to fix them with economy-crippling welfare and pain-inducing taxes, many of which end up burning the economy even more. I seek to find the logic and reason in things, and the only place where I could find that is a tiny area I like to call Right Wing Libertarian, slightly behind conservatism, but in front of liberalism. This is where I have found my home, and I don't see myself moving anytime soon.Or, in other words, she would have won if she hadn’t brought all this trouble on herself in the first place by behaving in a stupid and careless manner with her email server.
That I could agree with.
I would be curious where you found “logic and reason” in efforts to impose religious beliefs in law, impose Creationism in classrooms, deny the science behind discussions of Climate Change, attacking Iraq because a badly written term paper suggested that we could turn the Middle East into an American clone simply by forcibly removing one dictator, a slavish devotion to the notion that market capitalism always provides better service than government despite the glaring failed examples of private prisons and the outsourcing of military logistics, current efforts to privatize Medicare, despite is decades long success, and any number of other issues. (I make no claim that the Left is free of corresponding nonsense, but your claim was that you moved Right because of “logic and reason” and I see no reason to ascribe such silly claims to that movement.)
Then, rather than scorning the Left for not sharing that belief, you should be working much harder on the Right to promote your views, which are long out of date on the Right, despite any lip service its leaders may give it before retreating into their boardrooms.
You wouldn’t exactly be the first high school student who adopted a contrarian viewpoint because he wanted to be different from his peers, so that much is completely understandable. It gets muddier where you disdain corporatism, the 1% and Wall Street, and yet choose the party for which this is the Holy Trinity.
I’ll just add it to my growing list of incomprehensible leaps, along with “America should be run like a business— so let’s put a guy who bankrupts companies, doesn’t pay his debts, and lies about how much he earns in charge.”