it's sad, yeah
i appreciate your perspective on not wanting centre left to extend too quickly
that is very wise and strategical thinking

i think being to "radical" too quickly can have terrible consequences
though on the other hand, i suppose any, even small change, will be fiercly opposed cause that's how political opponents roll (on both sides)
so maybe, in some situations, if you are able to successfully enforce a radical change without a destructive backlash, that is better than slowly and continously rattling the opponent's chain
but i think if you manage to create a radical change, then you need to lay low for a while so that everybody adjusts to new reality

And if they are experienced and knowledgeable, then it comes off as scripted, robotic, establishment owned and not trustworthy. As Nate pointed out, this election came down to 1 vote in 100 swinging the election either way in the rust belt. Vagina baggage could easily have changed that swing, and if it didn't, Comey probably did. I've been saying for years that democrats ****ed up wasting Obama on their easiest election macros in 08' election in modern history. Imagine Hillary winning 2008 and then having a more seasoned Obama for 2016.

Think this is a really good way of explaining the rural white anger. Thanks for posting it Hue

^Shuffle ****ing gets it.

*standing ovation*

Top representative of the will of the people, offering most of America the answers to their problems, loses the popular vote in a depressed-turnout election, garnering ~the same number of votes as last election's losing candidate.

Yep, story checks out.

Trump's transition team filled with lobbiests. What a ****ing shock.

The gaslight presidency begins as we all knew it would.

This coming from a guy who cheered about Obama being elected and then stated "we have taken the country back!" after Trump wins. Dude, you don't get anything besides your #feeeeeeeelings.

And Gingrich, Meese and sundry other young firebrands shooting out of the blue, what with Trump having destroyed the Republican party in the primaries, don't you know.

Can honestly picture the guy tearfully saluting his television when Ohio gets called for President-Elect Inanimate Carbon Rod.

Nah. The rest is enough to dismiss your thesis. There are no major conclusions about "the will of the American people" to be drawn from this election. There are probably at best only minor conclusions to be drawn about ideological alignments among the political classes. The big-hitter story is about the business of waging and winning electoral campaigns. That's what's changed and that's what there is to learn about. All this bushwah about the will of the people is for the birds.

It's all so insane I'm literally losing my mind.

It's like, all these white people needed was a racist and xenophobic cartoon character telling them socialism was ok for it to be, ok.

You know, a nationalist sort of socialism

Maher had a good point last night... if a white male lives in a crappy town where the only job is serving fries at McD's or cashier at Family Dollar Store... his problems are REAL, to HIM. All this blathering about his white privilege means nothing to him. People concentrate on their own problems.

So this idea that the Dems shouldn't have to "cater to white men" (the response of Ana Marie Cox on the panel) gets it wrong. They have to appear to be genuinely concerned about the problems of working America, period. Everyone. Perhaps they are, but their branding needs work.

Swing and a miss. I made no claim about the nature and purpose of elections in general. I made a claim about the conclusions to be drawn from this election specifically. Like, Reagan-Mondale '84 - you can draw conclusions about popular will there. From far narrower victories, even. Not from this.

How much of these people voted Trump vs Clinton?

Bringing up awval election night posts when he was 8 drinks deep at 3am.
Come on bro.

But yes, "take our country back" wasn't the best use of my beautiful words. Not bigly!

That ain't no godwin's law, some of these people are literally close to arguing for naziism. There won't be any gas chambers and probably not any deportations and bannings, but just in a normative philosophical sense, talk about an overton shift.

And what about all the poor and working class minorities, not just in the major cities but the small towns and suburbs and rural areas? Naw homey, I'm talking about the will of the Real American People.

You won't even reflect on the real point of that post was. That's the sad part lol.

Well, then the electoral College system is almost the worst possible form of expressing that will. And I am not even talking about Hillary winning the popular vote, but effectively telling millions of conservatives in states like California oft New York anf liberales in states like Texas that they have no Wayne of contributing to "the will of the people"

fmp

back to square -1

You know what that is an excellent point.

Spot on. The disdain big-city liberals have for flyover country is obvious. It cost us the election.

Trae Crowder was on Maher last night and he stressed that in redneck country where he was raised, "You're no better n' me!" is a powerful foundational ethos of how they see the world. So to be talked down to, and disdained, by the liberal elites in places like San Francisco or NY is not going to be overlooked. It will even make many people vote for an uninformed, xenophobic bully. Just to show the elites. Trump branded himself as the guy who cared about these people. Hillary didn't, not even a little bit.

I can think of about 1 to 2 million reasons why the Electoral College is not such a great idea any more.

Pvn you know I respect you but you're missing the point of what Gizmo was saying and what I'm saying.

And the obama-->trump voter is a unicorn floating around from people trying to make sense of all this.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...6d4_story.html

They exist.

*raises hand*

And the DNC continuing to deny it will cost them the Midwest for a generation.