Will this be considered a stain in American history?

[Berengil]

It got like that because those towns, those regions and those people became economically obsolete. They did not keep up with a world that changed.

I am not sympathic. Decades ago Massachusetts was a manufacuring hub. It too all fled. And you know what? It was gradually replaced. What Massachusetts is now is very far from what it used to be. Masschusetts used to be mill central and manufacturing was everything. A tech hub in the modern sense? Only in the last 30 years really.

We live in a free market capitalist country. How deeply ingrained is your capitalist cred? Because what you're arguing is that, these regions and these people are special. They're not. They don't deserve any exception, any special deals, anything. They are not entitled to their job, their livlihoods and their way of life. Cruel? Oh you bet. It's ice cold. But it's also the truth: economic forces don't give a shit about feelings. Protesters at the WTO in Seattle nearly 20 years ago knew that. And now the rust belt knows that.

I'm not sure really what you, or the people living there, expect. Those jobs are never coming back. Those regions, often depopulating, are dead, and they aren't coming back. No... I get why they voted. I still think it is morally indefensible. But they voted for something that can't be delivered upon. The next wave... the oncoming storm that is automation, will only lock in those job losses, and worsen others.

When Red State voters sneer socialism in all its forms, they should keep in mind that the converse of that, unrestrained capitalism, creates a world where they are at particularly high risk. I am an ardent capitalist (though I recognize where socialism does tremendous good) because I strongly believe in the motivating power of competition to produce innovation of all times. Fear of change and risk leads to stagnation, and future rust belts.

So while I sympathize, it sounds so much like they want something that is in both direct conflict with their beliefs and can't be delivered upon. Change is difficult, but it's also inexorable. There is no turning the clock back to the America they knew.

All of this, Skroe, all of this looking-down-your-nose attitude towards a segment of your fellow Americans, is why they voted the way they did.

The vitriol you and those like you spew against them only reinforces their belief in their choice. The sort of grinding your boot in their face, slandering what they believe, the frankly venomous tone you take in your posts on this matter ensures 1 thing: an enduring divide within our country.

People in flyover country are done being crapped on. I have my problems with Trump (gay rights among others), but he has given a voice to people who have been ignored for too long.

And frankly, I have zero problems with America First as a guiding principle in all our policies, and taking a hard line against those who export jobs. The internationalist, democracy crusading, coastal technocrats can take free trade/globalism and shove it right up their backside.

A lot of people in this election essentially voted with their middle finger, and though I have some problems with what they believe, I understand why they did it. The political establishment ignores their concerns at their own peril.

[Berengil]

Spoiler alert: "America first" is the principle underlying the entire global order.

Don't be obtuse, Nixx. You know exactly what I'm talking about.

[Berengil]

Globalization and globalism have been hugely beneficial to us

Go to those states that flipped from Obama to Trump and preach that. Let me know how that goes.

[Wyrt]

All of this, Skroe, all of this looking-down-your-nose attitude towards a segment of your fellow Americans, is why they voted the way they did.

The vitriol you and those like you spew against them only reinforces their belief in their choice. The sort of grinding your boot in their face, slandering what they believe, the frankly venomous tone you take in your posts on this matter ensures 1 thing: an enduring divide within our country.

People in flyover country are done being crapped on. I have my problems with Trump (gay rights among others), but he has given a voice to people who have been ignored for too long.

And frankly, I have zero problems with America First as a guiding principle in all our policies, and taking a hard line against those who export jobs. The internationalist, democracy crusading, coastal technocrats can take free trade/globalism and shove it right up their backside.

A lot of people in this election essentially voted with their middle finger, and though I have some problems with what they believe, I understand why they did it. The political establishment ignores their concerns at their own peril.

So, what you're saying is you want a safe space from all us mean coastal elites?

You don't give a shit about America first. You want your conservative 3rd world shithole states first. International trade is a major part of the economy in coastal states. Harming that trade is detrimental to their economies and people. Are they not American people? Do they not matter in your America first policy?

Seems all you want from the liberal coastal elites is our money to subsidize your failing states. Flyover states don't give a shit about us. They're more than happy to bitch incessantly about how evil California is and belittle the people here while also supporting a political system where Californians are under represented in the government.

Stop pretending America first is your policy. You want what's best for you and if it fucks over Americans on the coast it's all the better for you.

You know who's ignored in presidential elections? It sure as fuck isn't Ohio or Michigan or Wisconsin. It's those evil coastal elites who get ignored by the candidates.

[May90]

Go to those states that flipped from Obama to Trump and preach that. Let me know how that goes.

And Iran flipped from a semi-free monarchy to a Sharia-based totalitarian theocracy... Go to Iran and preach that Western values are better than a religious tyranny.

That people are sometimes ignorant isn't exactly a news.

[Masark]

People in flyover country are done being crapped on. I have my problems with Trump (gay rights among others), but he has given a voice to people who have been ignored for too long.

No, they ain't. They've fallen for a con artist who insists that he can stop the volcano from erupting.

[LilSaihah]

On the original topic

Yes-ish-maybe.

America has been staining itself for the last 20 years, between Clinton's infidelities, Bush's wars and Obama's indifference.
Has Trump's election been a stain? I'd say so, but probably not because he was elected. Trump was not solely responsible for the absolute shitshow that was the 2016 presidential race. Between DNC malfeasance, the MSM's manipulation and the 'activists' in racially motivated groups like BLM and La Raza, to blame Trump exclusively would be absurd. There is a reason Trump looked like the best way out.

Will Trump's presidency be a stain? I guess we'll see. I think the success of his term is entirely outside of his control, but I am not so bold as to understate his potential to screw it up.

[Deleted]

Lets take a moment to realise:

Most of us are nerds typing our opinion in an online forum
Most of the trump supporters have no idea how to run a country
Most of the trump haters, also have no idea how to run a country

Trump is accustomed to billion dollar transactions, has proven himself to be a "shark" in the corporate world. He knows the political ropes - (probably, as most other companies - hes bribed politians)

My positives for trump are : If someone knows how to "play the game" its trump. If theres a chance that someone doesnt care about the game, its also trump. Hillary definitely wouldnt have brought about any significant changes to the US. Theres a good chance trump will.

An extreme example:
Im from austria - Even though i dont think hitler was a good guy, i think he was (in the end) good for the country, because we lost. Losing the war made germany humble, and have much more "normal" views - overall germany is one of (if not the biggest) powerhouse in economic growth today.

Its funny how when you talk to avarage americans, theres still this "were the most important, best country in the world" cockyness in their tone - similar to how germany was before the war.

[cubby]

It most certainly will. Trump's two short years of Presidency will be the most embarrassing ever in the United States' history.

[Endus]

All of this, Skroe, all of this looking-down-your-nose attitude towards a segment of your fellow Americans, is why they voted the way they did.

The vitriol you and those like you spew against them only reinforces their belief in their choice. The sort of grinding your boot in their face, slandering what they believe, the frankly venomous tone you take in your posts on this matter ensures 1 thing: an enduring divide within our country.

This attitude, right here, is exactly the problem. You're freely admitting that you made your decision at the ballot box not because of policy. Not because of an ideological viewpoint. But primarily out of spite, and partisanship. Yes, Trump's election is a demonstrating of this "enduring divide", but it's this spiteful, blindly partisan attitude that is the divide. You cannot meet anyone in the middle, because you've decided that compromise is treason to the cause, even if you can't actually identify what that cause ideologically is.

Don't tell us it's because "middle America" or "flyover country" or "the Rust Belt" or whatever other particular segment was ignored and crapped on by the Democrats. That claim is a flat-out lie. Here's the 2016 Democratic Platform; https://www.democrats.org/party-platform
You'll note there's a lot of addressing of the concerns of middle America, those communities that have fallen behind economically, and so forth. Their plan involved revitalizing those communities, bringing back prosperity to that region and those people. Claiming that you were being ignored is blatantly and objectively incorrect, and the only way you can make that statement is if you had literally no idea what the Democrats were offering, because you never bothered to even look. You blindly picked a side, and shut your eyes and ears to any facts that might demonstrate it was the wrong choice.

Yes. There's an ugly divide rooted in condemning and denigrating significant parts of the nation, but that divide is not coming from the Democrats. It's coming from rhetoric like yours.

Criticism of that willful ignorance is not a condemnation of you as people, it's a condemnation of your attitude, and an indirect appeal that you start behaving decently. Literally all Skroe was doing was pointing out economic realities that Trump has no chance of overturning. Refusing to admit them does not make them less true, and none of it was an attack on the character of those living in those regions. He offered an ideological hand to help you up, and you snarled about looking down at you and slapped that hand away. The one behaving poorly, there, isn't Skroe.


Spite and ignorance are not solid baselines for forming your political opinion. Nor am I trying to say that's all the Republicans were offering; plenty of Republican candidates were offering solid policy options from their own ideological perspectives. I might disagree with that ideological view, but it's a justifiable outlook. I don't know if we'd have seen less spitefulness from the electorate if Jeb Bush had won the nomination and won against Hillary, but Jeb at least wouldn't be wearing the Spite King's crown and dancing a jig from the Spite Throne.

[Berengil]

This attitude, right here, is exactly the problem. You're freely admitting that you made your decision at the ballot box not because of policy. Not because of an ideological viewpoint. But primarily out of spite, and partisanship. Yes, Trump's election is a demonstrating of this "enduring divide", but it's this spiteful, blindly partisan attitude that is the divide. You cannot meet anyone in the middle, because you've decided that compromise is treason to the cause, even if you can't actually identify what that cause ideologically is.

Don't tell us it's because "middle America" or "flyover country" or "the Rust Belt" or whatever other particular segment was ignored and crapped on by the Democrats. That claim is a flat-out lie. Here's the 2016 Democratic Platform; https://www.democrats.org/party-platform
You'll note there's a lot of addressing of the concerns of middle America, those communities that have fallen behind economically, and so forth. Their plan involved revitalizing those communities, bringing back prosperity to that region and those people. Claiming that you were being ignored is blatantly and objectively incorrect, and the only way you can make that statement is if you had literally no idea what the Democrats were offering, because you never bothered to even look. You blindly picked a side, and shut your eyes and ears to any facts that might demonstrate it was the wrong choice.

Yes. There's an ugly divide rooted in condemning and denigrating significant parts of the nation, but that divide is not coming from the Democrats. It's coming from rhetoric like yours.


Spite and ignorance are not solid baselines for forming your political opinion. Nor am I trying to say that's all the Republicans were offering; plenty of Republican candidates were offering solid policy options from their own ideological perspectives. I might disagree with that ideological view, but it's a justifiable outlook. I don't know if we'd have seen less spitefulness from the electorate if Jeb Bush had won the nomination and won against Hillary, but Jeb at least wouldn't be wearing the Spite King's crown and dancing a jig from the Spite Throne.

Endus, I don't know how you got from that that I voted for Trump. I voted for Bernie in the primaries and Clinton in the general. But I understand why people voted for him. You'll notice how I spoke of Trump voters in a tone that made it clear ( I thought) that I wasn't one of them.

And frankly, it matters fck-all what the party platform was when they put the worst possible candidate up against Trump. Literally almost anyone other than Clinton would have beaten Trump. She was perceived by many of the voters we're talking about as indifferent to the concerns of rural Americans, and instead as a puppet of coastal technocrats.

I had a sinking feeling when she won the Dem nomination that Trump had a good shot. Bernie would have rolled over Trump hard. Largely because he was perceived as more in tune with kitchen-table issues than Clinton.

Again, I voted for Bernie and then Clinton. And I was partially afraid when she won the nomination that Trump had a chance because she was a sht candidate. The Dem party platform means nothing when she just doesn't seem to care for anything but her coastal and urban pals.

Notice in the last lines of my post I wrote: I understand why they did it. Not me. They.

Reading comprehension is a thing.

[Endus]

Endus, I don't know how you got from that that I voted for Trump. I voted for Bernie in the primaries and Clinton in the general. But I understand why people voted for him. You'll notice how I spoke of Trump voters in a tone that made it clear ( I thought) that I wasn't one of them.

Whether you were speaking for them, or speaking as one of them, my statements still apply, frankly. I was addressing the attitude in question.

And frankly, it matters fck-all what the party platform was when they put the worst possible candidate up against Trump.

Frankly, if you think the platform doesn't matter, you've got no business voting in the first place. The platform is all that matters. You're voting in your political leadership for the next 4 years, and that platform is all you have to go on to know what they'll do for that term of office. I agree that Clinton was a poor candidate, and I've been saying that here for like a year now, but she was a poor candidate precisely because I knew ignorant and blindly partisan people would refuse to vote for her on principle, regardless of the reasons they'd manufacture to justify it to themselves. It doesn't mean they were justified, it means I understood that they wouldn't care about making a justifiable decision. My criticism of that attitude still applies. Kind of the same way I recognize that murders are always gonna happen, without supporting people choosing to murder other people.

[Berengil]

Whether you were speaking for them, or speaking as one of them, my statements still apply, frankly. I was addressing the attitude in question.



Frankly, if you think the platform doesn't matter, you've got no business voting in the first place. The platform is all that matters. You're voting in your political leadership for the next 4 years, and that platform is all you have to go on to know what they'll do for that term of office. I agree that Clinton was a poor candidate, and I've been saying that here for like a year now, but she was a poor candidate precisely because I knew ignorant and blindly partisan people would refuse to vote for her on principle, regardless of the reasons they'd manufacture to justify it to themselves. It doesn't mean they were justified, it means I understood that they wouldn't care about making a justifiable decision. My criticism of that attitude still applies. Kind of the same way I recognize that murders are always gonna happen, without supporting people choosing to murder other people.

Well, then, I'm glad we understand each other. I would have far more preferred Bernie. And why Clinton was a bad candidate is kind of irrelevant. If the party leadership knew ( and for God's sake how could they not, were they living under a rock?) that there was a large chunk of the population who would vote for Satan before her, they should never have allowed her to get as far as she did.

I think some of the superdelegates got it, but not enough and too late.

[Orbitus]

Lol Endus infracted this as trolling because apparently pointing out the faults of a group of people and what they can do to be better is trolling. How this guy even gets out of bed in the morning without hurting himself is beyond me... Well, maybe he does hurt himself.

Probably because the Democrats aren't the racist bigoted people of this country? You know that whole facts thing likes to get in the way.

[Slicer299]

Yep, it will be a stain alright.

[Blobfish]

Probably because the Democrats aren't the racist bigoted people of this country? You know that whole facts thing likes to get in the way.

I recently watched the movie Lincoln .
And the Democrats where certainly advocates towards Slavery and abuse of black people

It was the Republicans led by Lincoln who fought against the abuse of the black person.

[Wyrt]

The Dem party platform means nothing when she just doesn't seem to care for anything but her coastal and urban pals.

Fucking bullshit. Clinton campaigned primarily in the same swing states Trump did. Flyover states. States that get all of the attention in the election. They're the ones the campaigns get catered to.

California gets ignored. California is underrepresented. California's votes did not matter. As defenders of the electoral college like to point out, Trump lost the popular vote because of California. You know what that also means? California's votes didn't count for fucking shit.

So, fuck your flyover states that get all the attention from national campaigns or have disproportionately high voting power. Fuck them. They have no right to bitch.

- - - Updated - - -

I recently watched the movie Lincoln .
And the Democrats where certainly advocates towards Slavery and abuse of black people

It was the Republicans led by Lincoln who fought against the abuse of the black person.

Welcome to history where the Republicans used to be the liberal party and democrats used to be the conservative party until they switched sides.

[Irian]

It absolutely will and has, but not for any deep political reason or because of what Trump stands for. It will because Trump is Trump.

Peel away everything he stands for that could be perceived as good and you have an insecure, petty manchild who has a talent for playing people like fiddles and not much else. He has virtually no political experience, he stands for "what will get me the most votes in the demographics I need to win?" and he'll spend his time in the white house floundering like an idiot in a positive he isn't qualified for. He champions this set of beliefs of this new age of gullible people who, in their heads, imagine him to stand for whatever unpopular belief they think he does because he's an abrasive pig of a human being who belittles and insults to lift himself higher.

Other than that? No, not really. If Trump had been, say, Pence (who has much more radical right-wing beliefs by far than Trump himself) he would come and go without an eyelash batted. It's a trainwreck because of the individual, not because of the policies.

[turboether]

Ask me again when it is history.

[Eliseus]

Probably because the Democrats aren't the racist bigoted people of this country? You know that whole facts thing likes to get in the way.

Uhh you must be living in a bubble.

- - - Updated - - -

Newsflash: That was over 100 years ago.

Newsflash: You mock people for their history then deny yours.