General Question

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

Was Trump’s surprise and stunning victory more attributed to those who did not get out and vote for Hilary, those that did not help her by writing in Sanders or others, or she was plain not good enough to be elected?

Asked by Hypocrisy_Central (26783points) November 10th, 2016

If some thought her like Teflon, could not be beat so they did not get to the polls to vote, is that not like a de facto vote for Trump? Likewise, those that did get out and vote but cast a ballot for Sanders, Mickey Mouse, etc. out of protest, did they not by default help Trump? Hilary had two bites at this cherry and came out with a pit each time, is it just she just don’t have what it takes to be elected to the High Office, even against someone who never held and office of any sort, not even on the school board?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

146 Answers

kritiper's avatar

Probably more attributed to those who didn’t vote for Hillary or Trump, but a third party candidate.

YARNLADY's avatar

It was probably because at least half of the people who voted this year agree with the things Trump stands for/against.

SQUEEKY2's avatar

@YARNLADY what does he stand for one second he says he is pro choice, next second he is pro life.

I will say this he flip flops like a true Rep/con.
He goes on and on about this stupid email thing when he has a Rape allegation and fraud charge coming up but the email is way more serious.
After it just a rape allegation.

Zaku's avatar

No to all of the above, as below:

Was Trump’s surprise and stunning victory more attributed to
– More attributed by whom?
– The main stun I’m aware of is more about “OMG Trump the reality TV fool is president oh gawd…”

those who did not get out and vote for Hilary
– No. BTW Hillary has two l’s.

those that did not help her by writing in Sanders or others
– No. Even if there were many of those, it’s ridiculous to claim that voters that won’t for a candidate had some kind of duty to do so, or would have.

or she was plain not good enough to be elected?
– No, she was the only well-qualified candidate after Sanders left.
– And no, she actually won the popular vote.
– Also there’s no such thing as “plain not good enough” – that’s always a simplifying value judgement, and if taken impartially would seem more viably aimed at all of the other candidates, unless you’re talking about something other than qualifications.

If some thought her like Teflon, could not be beat so they did not get to the polls to vote
– Was that a thing? That’s a new suggestion to me. Don’t think so.

is that not like a de facto vote for Trump?
– No it’s not, in many many ways which involve basic logic and not asserting weird random ideas.

Likewise, those that did get out and vote but cast a ballot for Sanders, Mickey Mouse, etc. out of protest, did they not by default help Trump?
– Are you really that logically impaired?
– If someone is not willing to vote for someone, and also doesn’t vote for the opponent, no just no, that is not helping Trump, unless you’re coming from some ridiculous mindset that Clinton was owed votes by everyone. That mindset (i.e. people telling others they need to vote Clinton or they are helping Trump, or other untrue aspersions), however, definitely soured and turned off voters who might otherwise have voted for her.

is it just she just don’t have what it takes to be elected to the High Office
– No. Again, she actually won the popular vote. And she had what it takes – mountains of money and corporate media support and the DNC.

even against someone who never held and office of any sort, not even on the school board?
– That’s what the stupid brain-dead disgustingly pathetic and retarded single-vote election system gets you. The two-party gangs can offer us shit candidates and we buy that we have to vote for one of them or else we’re wasting or vote or helping the more sucky scum we don’t want, as you suggested, they get everyone to accept and call democracy. It’s hardly democracy when the “only viable candidates” have negative approval ratings. It’s only that way because of the stupid voting system which only allows one vote for, no matter the number of candidates, and no way to indicate that someone is unacceptable or unwanted.

There are many more factors why the election went as it did, and they, all 59,000+ of them, are all true. Single generalizations, in particular most of the ones you suggested, are only about 1/60,0000 of the truth, if even that, even the semi-viable of the ones you mentioned (but not the silly and just wrong ones).

Thanks for giving me a target to vent at.

ragingloli's avatar

the only people to blame are trump voters, for voting for trump, and hillary, for being a shit candidate.

stanleybmanly's avatar

The blame must fall on us all. Those who stayed home, those who voted for Trump, and those of us whose contempt for and revulsion of the man blinded us to the possibility that there could possibly be enough malcontents in the country unhappy enough to elevate a tasteless joke to the Presidency. Here’s hoping the Donald can rise to at least a mediocre level of competence. Nothing would please me more than to have him turn out to be a great President, but I think the odds are better that he will be the last President.

ucme's avatar

Blame? Fucking children, he won, democracy prevailed…let it go.
Yes, he’s a fucking joke & yes a large sway of his supporters should be shot on general principle, but bottom line is he’s president, no amount of grieving & dissecting the why’s & wherefore’s is going to change that.

Seek's avatar

46% of eligible voters DID NOT VOTE.

There’s your blame.

Fuck all those people.

rojo's avatar

@Seek Would love to see a demographic breakdown on non-voters. We are probably better off that they do not vote, see what happens when a few actually do.

si3tech's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central “Trump’s surprise and stunning victory” is an awakening of the sleeping giant. We, the people have finally been heard. We elected Trump! He was the only candidate who heard the cry of the people.

rojo's avatar

@si3tech No, he was not the only candidate but Sanders, a popular favorite who understood the mood, could not garner the support of the Democratic Leadership who, for some reason, pushed a flawed, unliked candidate and did whatever it took to get her nominated.

jca's avatar

Let’s give Hillary credit – she did win the popular vote.

jca's avatar

To those who did vote for Trump based on the fact that he is not a career politician, guess who he’s going to stock his cabinet with? Career politicians.

JLeslie's avatar

@jca took the words right out of my mouth. Hillary won the popular vote.

I really thought she would prevail, but Trump won for many reasons. It’s not because half the country is racist. That’s bullshit. Half our country is not racist. People need to listen to Michael Moore and have some respect for each other. Are there racist people in our country? Sure. It’s just not what should be the focus in my opinion. It just offends people and causes them not to want to listen, creates a more devided country, and gets them to go out and vote.

rojo's avatar

Still think they could show that the election was rigged but no-one would be. It would “not be in Americas interest” to find out at this time. But I say there is no better time.

SecondHandStoke's avatar

@Seek

Any person that can’t be bothered to vote probably shouldn’t.

@JLeslie

So I should listen to Michael Moore.

Should I also watch nothing but Oliver Stone films and waste my life obsessed with my persecution complex?

si3tech's avatar

Michael Moore’s explanation of Trump is spot on.

Strauss's avatar

-@Seek 46% of eligible voters DID NOT VOTE.

I think many of those who did not vote made an active decision to refrain. The right to vote is one of the most precious of freedoms offered by the United States; but because it is a right, and not a requirement, we also have the right not to vote.

OK, Monday Morning Quarterback time:

Popularity can be manipulated.

If something is said loudly enough and often enough, it is more and more likely to be perceived as the truth.

The Clintons have been deemed to be pariahs by their foes for a long time. They have been under some type or other of journalistic or government investigation since 1975. Little has been made to stick. Even under impeachment, Bill Clinton was acquitted by Congress, with the votes aligned along party lines

Of all the money and time spent by Congress (and others) through the years to investigate Hillary, the only court that has received and judged any “charges” is the court of public opinion, which has been manipulated by some of the more sensationalist press outlets. For many voters, when these “charges” were editorialized as fact, it became a reason to dislike (and even hate) her, and to believe she is a dishonest criminal.

Paul Weyrich in 1980 said ”I don’t want everyone to vote”. For him and other conservatives, a high voter turnout would not be good. What better way to suppress voter turnout than to make people believe their vote will not count, or that they can not support either candidate?

Hillary has been castigated, interrogated, investigated, violated, and litigated; she has never been charged or tried. But people still think believe she’s a criminal.

Donald Trump came across as a brash, powerful, spoiled overgrown brat. Many people did not like him for many reasons. He is as responsible for his detractors as he is for his victory.

IMHO, many of the 46% of registered voters who did not vote (thanks @Seek) might have exercised their right not to vote as a form of protest, meaning they could not bring themselves to vote for either Republican or Democrat, and saw little point in voting for Johnson or Stein.

Seek's avatar

Silence is not a protest. Silence cannot be distinguished from nonchalance.

In a voting system, silence is consent.

Strauss's avatar

@Seek Silence is not a protest.

I disagree. I do not support non-voting, nor would I ever decide not to vote. But I can understand why a person would not vote because they could not support either the candidate they have been taught to hate because “she must be guilty of something!” or the candidate who seems to them to pander to an extreme demographic.

ucme's avatar

“Half our country is not racist…”

Exactly the same ignorant shite was thrown at us Leave voters, not least from these pages.
Obviously some are, but everyone?
Just because they voted for something you don’t believe in? Nah, just nah!!
What goes around comes around.

rojo's avatar

@Seek Who was it said “If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice”?

Seek's avatar

Negan?

I don’t know. Lots of people. But even in Henry Viii ‘s time, silence was a “yes” vote.

If you don’t care enough to speak up, you aren’t protesting.

rojo's avatar

^^ ;) ^^

actually it was Neil Peart

Strauss's avatar

@rojo Who was it said “If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice”?

Freewill by Rush

JLeslie's avatar

@SecondHandStoke Did I say only?

Hillary lost. If you want to think everyone who voted for Trump is a piece of crap go ahead. It won’t help change their minds. A lot of Trump voters were not right wingers. They were people who need an economic change in their own pockets. They believed Trump will do that for them. A lot of the Midwest blue collar guys have been hurt the last 20 years. They were already Catholic, but voted Democrat for work reasons. The Democrats are losing their hold on that worker I think. That voter already has issues they are conservative on. Calling them idiots isn’t helping.

si3tech's avatar

I find it curious as well as astounding that both the media and the polls were completely out of touch with the people! We need to re assess their relevance.

rojo's avatar

@JLeslie

A quote from Neal Gabler:

“If there is a single sentence that characterizes the election, it is this: “He [Trump] says the things I’m thinking.” That may be what is so terrifying. Who knew that so many tens of millions of white Americans were thinking unconscionable things about their fellow Americans? Who knew that tens of millions of white men felt so emasculated by women and challenged by minorities? Who knew that after years of seeming progress on race and gender, tens of millions of white Americans lived in seething resentment, waiting for a demagogue to arrive who would legitimize their worst selves and channel them into political power?”

si3tech's avatar

We, the people elected Trump to be our president. President of all our people. Not just blacks, whites, reds, yellows and the disenfranchised. Unbelievable to see college students walk out and can’t take exams! In California both students and teachers have walked out! Let us unite as a people whose similarities far outweigh superficial differences. We can be one if we want to. And I definitely want to.

JLeslie's avatar

@rojo I think people hear what they want for the most part.

Look at the hypocrisy displayed by the American people. Both Democrats and Republicans.

The conservatives hated Bill Clinton, and couldn’t understand how anyone would vote for such a supposed womanizer. They now ignore that Trump is basically the same. The people who ignored it regarding Bill can’t understand how anyone overlooks it with Trump. It’s stupid in my opinion.

Bill Clinton talked about sealing up the borders better. In fact many presidents have.

Obama has deported many many people. We are already “breaking up families.”

We do already have lots of hoops Syrians have to go through to be able to come into the country. Trump talked about suspending immigration from there until he feels good about the process. People who see him as a bigot saw it as him banning all Arab Muslims. People who liked him saw it as a criticism of our own government having shitty checks in immigrants. We do have a lot of immigrants who overstay visas, work in tourist visas, etc. our process is imperfect.

From the beginning I’ve hated how crass Trump is and inflammatory. I do not think he has behaved in a way that says President to me. I have worried he will offend leaders of countries who have very different cultures than ours.

When I have watched Trump I never heard him say all Mexicans are criminals, but that what was all over the media. I felt they twisted it, imagine how a Republican felt about it. I have friends who I think are smart and lovely people, and definitely not racist, and definitely not deplorable. A large portion of people when they are told they can’t do something become more committed and more inspired. This is trait of ambitious accomplished people. I think it’s very similar to calling someone stupid, and they will show you! I think the right leaning media and facebook helped motivate his voters.

When he talked about black ghettos being hell, I heard that as he was talking about black ghettos, not that all blacks live in ghettos. Don’t most people, liberals, want living conditions improved in ghettos? I want all Americans to live in safe neighborhoods with parks for children and good schools. I want ghettos to be a thing of the past actually. Have people less economically and racially divided.

Mostly, for me, I have wanted Hillary for 8 years! I’m pretty disappointed the country never had the opportunity to have her as our president.

The media was not really talking about people who were pro Hillary. Towards the end they began mentioning why she is so qualified. Mostly, they talked about how no one likes each candidate and it’s a Supreme Court vote. I think that’s a shame.

MrGrimm888's avatar

A look onto the mind of a non voter;

The ‘non vote,’ is a very powerful vote. As evidenced by this election. Those who don’t believe the voting actually counts,or hate the voting system, or hated all candidates (in my case all three) didn’t give the government the satisfaction of ‘playing along’ in this BS game.

As punishment for having an outdated,untrustworthy system, with 3–5 people I have no interest in, my vote was not cast.

Now,the country is indeed in for a turbulent next few years. IMO, that’s exactly what it deserves.

All those who voted for Trump will suffer the consequences. All those who went 3rd party bet on a horse with no legs. Many who voted for Hillary were just voting against Trump.

None of them deserved to be president IMO,so none got my vote. I refuse to cast a vote for such a pathetic lot. Voting in this election only further supports the continued decline in quality choices for candidates. It’s astonishing to me,that these were the two ‘best’ people who could lead our nation. The fact that those two rose to the top speak’s volumes of how broken the entire system is.

If NO ONE voted.(not 1 voter) The government would have had to take a strong introspective look at the entire process. Just like if you own a company and all of a sudden, nobody is buying your product. You’d have to assume that your product is undesirable, and have to make sweeping cages to keep your business working.

Now. Both parties are having to self examine. The Republicans have the majority, but they’ll have to see if Trump will be a help, or hindrance. Surely he wasn’t the candidate the GOP wanted either. The dems have been completely defeated, and will also now have to look inward to try and fix things.

Trump’s presidency will be like a wildfire. Terrible things will probably occur and as a result the government will have to make changes. If we’re all still standing when the smoke clears ,many lessons will have been learned. (Hopefully )

As the world picks up the pieces, it will be realized that this cannot be allowed to happen again. This country only learns the hard way.

Greed, corruption, lack of political teamwork, and the role the media played should be seen as areas in need of wholesale changes. Or next election it could be even worse.

America held a voting party. Turn out sucked because the party sucked. Not because people don’t want to party.

So. My non vote, may destroy the world, and will certainly make my life more difficult. But at least I wasn’t one of the sheep that was being herded into one of two unsavory directions.

As long as people vote, the government can always blame the people. Instead of being forced to appointe decent choices for candidates. And make changes to the system, most importantly, the electoral college, and a consistent and reliable way of casting votes.

If anyone views what just happened as a healthy, functional democracy, instead of a total dumpster fire, let’s just say we disagree.

Please stop blaming people who didn’t vote. We didn’t make Trump the R candidate, or Hillary the D candidate. Personally I didn’t care much for any of those running in either primary.

The only candidates that seem to make it that far are full of flaws.

The entire system is a complete, pathetic joke. Now the country will have to lay in the bed it’s made.

rojo's avatar

For those interested Stats on Voter Turnout

Looks like the election with Coolidge, Davis and LaFollette garnered the least interest.

filmfann's avatar

Apparently, Obama was wrong during the 2008 debates.
She isn’t likable enough.

si3tech's avatar

Some who did not vote showed up to vote but did not realize “I guess you have to register” Duh!
Think about it. If you spend all your time keeping up with the Kardashians, facebooking, twittering you simply can not be expected to know what happens in the real world.

Strauss's avatar

Today i heard someone say:

What good does it do to have a new chef when it’s the oven that’s broken.

Seek's avatar

Maybe the choices of new chefs include one who wants to feed us three day old shellfish, and one makes a bland, if tolerable, green salad?

Pandora's avatar

Hillary lost because of the apathy of the voters. Both were so busy bashing in the other side that many didn’t see what difference their vote would make.

Funny thing about apathy. There is no real fix for it. A great deal of people in this nation never exercise their right to vote. Even with a great deal of people registering this year, we apparently must’ve lost even long time voters. The good news though, is that it means about ¾ of the country could care less for Trump. She still got the popular vote. I think a great many people believe they were both powerful people and like all other politicians before them, nothing will change for the better in their lives.

http://heavy.com/news/2016/11/eligible-voter-turnout-for-2016-data-hillary-clinton-donald-trump-republican-democrat-popular-vote-registered-results/

Zissou's avatar

(Haven’t read the answers yet, just responding to the OP)

All of the above. In order of importance:
1. Not good enough.
2. Lack of turnout.
3. 3rd party/write in votes.
Also
4. October surprises (more email trouble from Comey and huge Obamacare price hikes)

The voters rejected the status quo and wanted real change. The Democratic Party could have offered that but didn’t.

ragingloli's avatar

If you are going for the ‘chef’ analogy, it is more like one of those restaurants on Kitchen Nightmares:
– The chefs are incompetent, ignorant, lazy and in denial.
– The kitchen is filthy with dead rats and cockroaches in the corners.
– The pantry is full of rotten, 5 year old food.
– Gordon Ramsay might be able to “reboot” it, but after 2 months everything goes back to the old ways.
Only solution: Close it down for good.

YARNLADY's avatar

Elections are NOT the voice of all the people, only the voice of those who choose to vote. The rest of the people either don’t care, or don’t believe in the “system”.

Strauss's avatar

@YARNLADY The rest of the people either don’t care, or don’t believe in the “system”.

Anyone who has declined to vote, whether “as a protest”, or out of apathy, by doing so, has also declined full participation in self-government.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@Zaku The main stun I’m aware of is more about “OMG Trump the reality TV fool is president oh gawd…”
So, you believed he had a decent chance and not having NO CHANCE as many thought?

BTW Hillary has two l’s.
She lost one for being a loser LOL

No, she was the only well-qualified candidate after Sanders left.
She did not win, so you must be indicating the US people want a no experienced person at the helm which makes all she had politically not good enough.

No it’s not, in many many ways which involve basic logic and not asserting weird random ideas.
If you are going to be a grammar fanatic, get your commas in. OK, let’s run with that reasoning, those who could have voted for Hillary (with 2 Ls) but did not, not that they were obligated to, did not help trump be default. Let’s say a very popular old lady on the block runs from her house and says she was being robbed. Neighbors activate and charge her home, they catch the perp trying to vault the backyard fence and drag him into the street. There are nine people there, four say they should take him down to the tracks and go caveman on him, beat him down with chains, sticks with nails, rebar, whatever they can lay hold of. One person says they should wait until the cops get there and hand him over. If thy looked to the other four and asked ”What say you?” if they say don’t ask us, we are not in this, did their science add weight to those wanting to go caveman on the perp because if they would have said something against it, it could have nullified their choice, but with their science it becomes four against one.

Are you really that logically impaired?
You should ask yourself that….or maybe logically in denial.

@Seek 46% of eligible voters DID NOT VOTE.
I guess if 20% of them would have and in favor of Hillary we might be speaking of a different history making even. But you would never convince @Zaku of that.

@jca Let’s give Hillary credit – she did win the popular vote.
Apparently the popular vote means little, but this election still will not give the US the cajones to scrap the Electoral College.

@rojo Who was it said “If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice”?
Getty Lee said it and it is true. If five people say let’s burn it, and eight other people stand by and say nothing, they may not have actually said let’s burn it”, but they technically supported the burn vote because they had a voice to dissent but let the burn vote stand unchallenged.

@JLeslie The conservatives hated Bill Clinton, and couldn’t understand how anyone would vote for such a supposed womanizer. They now ignore that Trump is basically the same. The people who ignored it regarding Bill can’t understand how anyone overlooks it with Trump. It’s stupid in my opinion
That is no surprise, it happens here every week, people always like logic and reason when it bolster what they want to champion, but when the same rules work to obliterate their beliefs and such, then they don’t like it. One could point out Clinton was actually exposed as being committing adultery, I might be wrong, but I have not seen any concrete evidence that Trump committed adultery.

We do have a lot of immigrants who overstay visas, work in tourist visas, etc. our process is imperfect.
There are many, I met some in years past, but because they did not look Hispanic, or some other nationality that was on the radar, they hardly got bothered if any; guess it is good to look European if you want to skirt the visa and immigration laws.

When he talked about black ghettos being hell, I heard that as he was talking about black ghettos, not that all blacks live in ghettos. Don’t most people, liberals, want living conditions improved in ghettos?
Interesting fact didn’t the fact that more police shooting and killing Blacks and walking away Scot free happen under the watch of the Party of Twiddle Dee? Surely they would not want anyone to highlight that.

@MrGrimm888 Now,the country is indeed in for a turbulent next few years.
We don’t have any real proof of that, just speculation, Clinton may have none no better, it is an unknown right now.

All those who voted for Trump will suffer the consequences.
You do not believe in any divine aspirations so how do you know Trump being president will punish his voters any more or less than Clintion?

The government would have had to take a strong introspective look at the entire process. Just like if you own a company and all of a sudden, nobody is buying your product. You’d have to assume that your product is undesirable, and have to make sweeping cages to keep your business working.
The government doesn’t have the stones for that and the people do not have the moxie to force them to change, if they just overhauled campaign financing it might be a start, but on one has the moxie to even start there.

Trump’s presidency will be like a wildfire. Terrible things will probably occur and as a result the government will have to make changes.
Clinton’s presidency could have been like a slow kill from a large dose of radiation, right now just how good or bad things will be is up in the air.

@Pandora Hillary lost because of the apathy of the voters. Both were so busy bashing in the other side that many didn’t see what difference their vote would make.
That is where campaign reform would make a difference, if they treated the money like fuel in a Formula 1 race, what you start with is all you get, and you have to finish the race with that, maybe they will spend the money telling us what they are going to do, instead of wasting all that money trying to tell me what a douche bag the others are.

CWOTUS's avatar

The simple fact is that Hillary simply failed to energize a base. Looking only at overall vote totals for the last three presidential elections:

The totals 2008–16:
2008 — Obama 69,499,428, McCain 59,950,323
2012 — Obama 65,446,032, Romney 60,589,084
2016 — Clinton 60,071,781, Trump 59,791,135

Clearly, Trump did not have massive appeal. He won fewer votes than either of the past two Republican contenders. (This despite the fact that by all accounts he was setting records in Republican votes during the primaries.)

In addition, as previously noted (in another way), a lot of potential voters … did not exercise the franchise:
Of the 231.6 million Americans eligible to vote only 56.8 percent did. Some 99.8 million didn’t cast a ballot.

Italicized quotes from this link

In addition to the foregoing, the US presidential vote is based on an electoral system, whereby voters “by state” elect the delegates / electors who will cast the state’s Electoral College votes that actually determine the president. So a lot of this has to do with “the campaigns” that each candidate ran. The Trump campaign worked hard – obviously! – in the crucial states that had to be swung from “likely Clinton support” to make them Trump states instead. They swung the swing states, and that tipped the balance.

I think a lot has to be said against the effect that the media had on likely Democrat voters. Every poll taken prior to the election – every single one that I saw before Tuesday – was confident to the point of being blasé about it – that Clinton was a shoo-in for the Presidency. That’s why the final tally was such a shock, I think. The polls and every media outlet had this election in the bag for the Democrat. Consequently, apparently some 5 to 9 million (or more) Democratic voters stayed home on Tuesday (and every day prior to that on which their state allowed early voting, something fairly new in my experience, aside from absentee ballots which have always been a thing). In fact, it would only have taken a few hundred thousand voters in nearly any one of Pennsylvania, Ohio, Florida, Michigan to have tipped the balance the other way.

It was a near thing.

As it is, we seem to have elected the second-to-last person that most of us wanted as President. w00t. yay. go us. At least we avoided electing the last person that so many seemed to want.

YARNLADY's avatar

@Yetanotheruser Many people do not care about or believe in full participation in self-government.

Zaku's avatar

So, you believed he had a decent chance and not having NO CHANCE as many thought?
Yes, very much so.

BTW Hillary has two l’s.
She lost one for being a loser LOL
LOL

She did not win, so you must be indicating the US people want a no experienced person at the helm which makes all she had politically not good enough.
You seem to very frequently want to have one true thing to say about a subject that is far more complex and/or open to various perspectives, which seems silly to me. My own sense about that idea is that they wanted someone who was not part of the establishment most people are sick of, and who in fact would shake things up and at least match their level of “fuck you” towards establishment politics and journalism. Even a person who is dangerously random – at least he’s often entertaining and saying “fuck you” in random ways, in the realm most of us feel pretty powerless and upset about. Something like that. I think (and polls suggest) that they would rather have had the Bernie Sanders version of that, but the DNC made sure Sanders wasn’t an option.

No it’s not, in many many ways which involve basic logic and not asserting weird random ideas.
If you are going to be a grammar fanatic, get your commas in.
Where do you suggest I insert commas?

OK, let’s run with that reasoning, those who could have voted for Hillary (with 2 Ls) but did not, not that they were obligated to, did not help trump be default. Let’s say a very popular old lady on the block runs from her house and says she was being robbed. Neighbors activate and charge her home, they catch the perp trying to vault the backyard fence and drag him into the street. There are nine people there, four say they should take him down to the tracks and go caveman on him, beat him down with chains, sticks with nails, rebar, whatever they can lay hold of. One person says they should wait until the cops get there and hand him over. If thy looked to the other four and asked ”What say you?” if they say don’t ask us, we are not in this, did their science add weight to those wanting to go caveman on the perp because if they would have said something against it, it could have nullified their choice, but with their science it becomes four against one.
It didn’t add weight to the cavemen. It just also didn’t add weight to the law-abider. Also not all voting systems are caveman systems like our voting system, where a single question is forced, a selection is demanded, and simple majority rules. For example, even if a simple quorum were needed, the four cavemen would still not prevail. And even in the caveman voting system we do have, unless you assert that the non-voters do prefer law-abiding to violence, they are probably not voting for some sort of reasons.

gorillapaws's avatar

Clinton lost the election because she was the worst presidential candidate in history. We know this because she lost to a guy with the highest disapproval ratings in a presidential candidate…ever (literally ever). She lost to a child raping, bigoted, failed businessman buffoon. She lost to an orange reality TV star with the intellectual capacity of a 12-year-old. And despite the popular vote, it was an absolute bloodbath in the electoral college—not even close.

The problem was Clinton and the choices she made selling out the working class over the course of her career. No amount of varnish or spin could cover up what a fucking horrible choice she was. The DNC rigged the elections, disenfranchised millions of primary voters via closed primaries and voter purges. They conspired to alter the narrative via superdelegates, tried to limit the exposure of Bernie’s message, by limiting the number of debates and having them at odd times. The DNC colluding with the media, funneled money into Clinton’s campaign and using the “neutral” resources of the DNC to work on Clinton’s behalf.

Clinton disrespected Bernie’s supporters at the convention, and her VP choice was the nail in the coffin. After Debbie Wasserman Schultz was revealed to be violating her neutrality and rigging the primary, having to step down in shame, Clinton brought her onto her team. What a massive “fuck you” to Bernie Supporters. She was already to the right of center and she moved even further right for the general election… and now people have the fucking gall to blame the loss on the progressive voters who either didn’t turn out, or voted for a 3rd party candidate (if not directly for the prick himself).

Clinton, her neoliberal agenda, her super pacs, her fawning speeches to the evil fucks who trashed our country’s economy in 2008, her corporate media cheerleaders, and her supporters/donors are the reason we have President Trump instead of President Sanders.

jca's avatar

@gorillapaws: The reason we have President elect Trump instead of President elect Clinton is because of the Electoral College, not because Hillary is so awful despite Trump being a child raping, bigoted buffoon.

gorillapaws's avatar

@jca If that’s the lesson you (and others like you) take away from this loss, then we’re doomed to 8 years of Trump instead of 4.

JLeslie's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central When Bill Clinton was running for president the law suit was about him committing more than adultry, but sexual harassment. Trump is basically being accused of at minimum harassing women.

Plus, the specific detail doesn’t matter. To a Christian Right voter who is basing their vote on some sort of morality gauge, and they don’t like swearing and using words like pussy, Trump certainly is just a big a sinner as Clinton.

MrGrimm888's avatar

Please don’t compare Bill to Trump. Apples and orange people.

Strauss's avatar

@MrGrimm888 Now that Trump has been elected, he’s in the same club as Bill Clinton

kritiper's avatar

Geez, who doesn’t have skeletons in their closet…or front porch.

JLeslie's avatar

@MrGrimm888 Really? When it comes to women? Maybe Bill didn’t talk it up like Trump, I don’t know, but he let a girl in her early 20’s suck him off when he was in his 50’s while he was married, president, and quite obviously in the public’s eye. Really nice. That’s not including other women who for years have said he was inappropriate.

I didn’t care about it, I don’t care about Trump talking about women as he did, but anyone who cares about one and not the other is a hypocrite in my book. I shouldn’t say I don’t care, I wish there weren’t men like that.

Berserker's avatar

About non voting; if you decide to protest by not voting, could you not spoil your ballot? Like draw a big X on it, or a huge dick or something? Then it will be known that it was done on purpose, and that you went down there to express your discontent with the candidates.

Or is it all done electronically? This is Canada, so I don’t know, we still use paper. With no option to pick nothing?

JLeslie's avatar

@Berserker Some states are paper and some electronic. Each state conducts the election as they see fit. I think when someone votes for other offices and amendments, and leaves the vote for president or writes in Mickey Mouse it’s basically considered a protest vote.

Having said that I know of at least one person who didn’t vote for a presidential candidate, but she meant to. She said she didn’t see the category on the ballot. I was a confusing ballot, but I can’t imagine that mistake was widespread.

Berserker's avatar

So, instead of not voting, one could spoil one’s ballot. Hopefully such ballots aren’t distributed to candidates as seen fit.

MrGrimm888's avatar

I’ve not personally read, or heard of the write in % being a big deal. Usually it’s mentioned on a pie chart ,but other than that, it gets no attention.

When Trump destroys the world, that will get attention.

In essence I’m letting a child hurt itself, in hopes that it learns a lesson.

It takes more restraint than you’d think. But Hillary winning just would have been a bandaid on a broken system.

JLeslie's avatar

@Berserker I’m not sure what you mean by spoil. Nothing I mentioned really spoils the ballot, it’s just basically a no vote for the office of the president. All the other votes on the ballot would still count.

JLeslie's avatar

@Berserker I’m not sure what you mean by spoil. Nothing I mentioned really spoils the ballot, it’s just basically a no vote for the office of the president. All the other votes on the ballot would still count.

Seek's avatar

16,000 people wrote in Harambe the dead gorilla.

That’s 16,000 people that made a better choice than staying home.

That is a protest vote. It can be counted as something other than “I’d rather stay home and catch up on Big Bang Theory reruns”.

MrGrimm888's avatar

^Disagree.

Write ins are still less powerful than a non vote.

Still playing the game.

If they had a button calling for mass change talk, then I’d go,and hit that button.

Berserker's avatar

How are they less powerful? You can’t tell if non voters were protesting or just don’t give a shit, whereas a write in gives the message.

MrGrimm888's avatar

^Writing in a weird name is no different than debasing a bathroom wall. And no doubt taken with the same respect.

Are people really thinking that by writing in Mickey Mouse , that they are taken seriously?

Come on…

Ridiculous. .......

gorillapaws's avatar

@MrGrimm888 They should be take seriously. They took the time go go out to the poll and the the trouble to write in the name of a cartoon character. Think about how much effort that is for someone to go through. That person cares enough about politics to take the time to go through all of that, and is delivering a message: “I’m NOT buying what any of you are selling, but I would if you had something worth buying.”

Berserker's avatar

@MrGrimm888 Are you even serious? Exactly what @gorillapaws said. They took the time to go and express discontent, which is more than the non voter has done. I ask you again, since you’ve not answered. How are we to know if the non voters are protesting, or don’t care? Because a lot of people who don’t vote don’t care. How is that more powerful?
You started talking about Disney and bathroom walls and haven’t addressed my point, seems like you just want to justify your non voting as much as possible.

Seek's avatar

As I said in the other thread: Non-voters have numbered close to half for the last 100 years. The voting age population turnout in 1900 was 73%. 1904 it was 65%, and it hasn’t been that high since.

If silence is the voice of dissent, no one is hearing it.

MrGrimm888's avatar

How are we to know that people who write in Mickey aren’t people who don’t care? There are plenty of trolls on the Internet that take lots of time to just screw with people. Devotion of time doesn’t equal care.

I’m not sure what question I haven’t already answered @Berserker . Maybe I’m confusing this with one of the 17 other trump threads I’m in.

Besides, I’ve already stated that protest was only one of three reasons I didn’t vote.

2. It’s not real.(I’m fairly certain it’s an illusion of power.) Or in need of massive overhaul.

3. The candidates ,to me, were PATHETIC.

MrGrimm888's avatar

@Seek . With all due respect your numbers mean very little to this thread. Could minorities or women vote back then?...

Would those not be important variables?

Reasons for why a bunch of white men 100 years ago didn’t vote must certainly differ from today no?

MrGrimm888's avatar

Besides. Some are listening. You for instance, and the other jellies who mostly disagree with my stance. @Seek . I wager you may have even discussed it with your child. Even if just to teach what not to do.

Voter turnout is important, or it wouldn’t be tallied and talked about.

I haven’t heard a peep about any write in votes. I’ve heard from just about every news source about the 46%.

Who was the majority write in candidate? If you want to find out you’ll have to dig.

My non voter numbers are far more talked about.

Weather the government is wise enough to care is not my concern.

MrGrimm888's avatar

There are also campaigns like ‘rock the vote.’ Designed to get people like me out.

Plenty are listening.

Seek's avatar

Those numbers are, as I said, a percentage of eligible voters.

Not the population as a whole.

MrGrimm888's avatar

Ok. So what relevance do numbers from the 1900’s hold today?

Seek's avatar

You’re being obtuse.

Half or less than half of the eligible electorate has chosen not to vote for over a hundred years.

Your silence is an ineffective protest.

Seek's avatar

That is, half or nearly half.

MrGrimm888's avatar

I agree it’s been ineffective….

I’ve protested in the streets before with picket signs,with lots of other people. That didn’t change anything either.

Does that mean I/we should never protest?

Seek's avatar

Picketing and protesting has a long history of being quite effective. The Suffragette movement, for instance. Prohibition, for another. Both began as street-level protests and ultimately changed the Constitution.

Strauss's avatar

@Seek Let’s not forget how effective picketing and protesting were in the civil rights movement, the war in Vietnam, and and the labor movements!

Seek's avatar

The civil rights movement was wildly effective. What the hell are you talking about?

stanleybmanly's avatar

I assume that last remark not addressed to user.

Seek's avatar

I read sarcasm into that. Should I not have?

stanleybmanly's avatar

Not if read literally

MrGrimm888's avatar

Well. I’ve been protesting for black lives matter since Zimmerman. Zimmerman has since done fine, and black people are getting shot with frequency.

Guess I’ll keep it up though. I don’t know what else to do.

Strauss's avatar

@Seek! I don’t have a sarcastic bone in my body!~

Seriously, though, there was no sarcasm intended with that post. It was meant in *support * of your previous post!

Seek's avatar

I’m that case I apologise. I’m a bit on edge lately.

ragingloli's avatar

@Seek here is some fitting music.

Strauss's avatar

@MrGrimm888 Guess I’ll keep it up though. I don’t know what else to do.

I would encourage that, if that’s what you support. Although demonstrations and protests have been effective in the past, the results were not immediate.

MrGrimm888's avatar

^Correct. But it’s discouraging. I’ll keep it up though.

Strauss's avatar

@MrGrimm888 That happens to be a cause that I can support. But even if it were not, I would still encourage you to continue to demonstrate Democracy is not a spectator sport .

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

Hey, were there any republicans out there rioting or just the dems who tout themselves ad being civil, peaceful people?

Cruiser's avatar

@Seek it is very wrong of you to blame the voters who did not turn out for the outcome of this election. Over the last 20 years the average eligible voter turn out was right at 50%. Early estimates are that 57.5% of eligible voters voted this year and that number is right around the number of voters in 2008 the highest in many decades. Plus Hillary won the popular vote by more than a few votes.

The bottom line is Hillary was a dumb choice for President. Was she qualified? Absolutely!! But she was festering with scandals no amount of glossing over by the media could hide. The most fatal mistake was made by the DNC early on who corornated her their Presidential candidate. You could see the fix was in for Hillary during the first debate when the first words out of Sanders mouth was how he would not attack her. Sander was on a tear with his followers and would have easily beat her had he not backed down near the end. Sanders would have demolished Trump in the general election. The blame for the election results rest squarely on the shoulders of the DNC…though I will add that the Trump campaign team ran an aggressive campaign that out clearly out maneuvered the complacent campaign the Hillary team ran. The Trump team deserves just a little recognition for the outcome.

I would even go so far to say that IF 100% of the voters voted that Trump would have won both the popular vote and the electoral vote.

MrGrimm888's avatar

I disagree that Trump would have won if 100% of people voted…

I do agree that Hillary wasn’t a good candidate. Unless voting is mandatory, the government has to get people excited about one of the candidates. Some people are of the mindset that if they don’t like either candidate, they just don’t vote…

Trump energized and excited his parties’ base. They went out and, unfortunately , voted for Trump… Simple.

Strauss's avatar

@MrGrimm888 …the government has to get people excited about one of the candidates

It’s not the government’s job to get people excited about the candidates, it’s the candidates themselves, and their organizations.

MrGrimm888's avatar

^Correct. I could have phrased that better. The candidates do form the government though.

I was mainly referring to the people in charge. The they.

Most candidates, at some point, are endorsed by standing politicians, holding some office in our government. Obviously most endorse a candidate that is in their own party. So. In a big way,the government is trying to support the candidates.

I’m of the blame the dems party. They chose to go with Hillary because they thought she was a sure winner. Not because she was their best candidate.

stanleybmanly's avatar

Once again I feel pushed to defend Clinton despite whatever unease I feel regarding her. I remain convinced that her defeat is much more about the long term hammering from the right in the most relelentless and protracted smear campaign in the history of politics. In fact, I don’t doubt for a second that this effort is far more responsible for the election of Trump as well as Obama than we are prepared to accept.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

^ I remain convinced that her defeat is much more about the long term hammering from the right in the most relelentless and protracted smear campaign in the history of politics.
For what little (and very little) I got following this past campaign because both hardly rose above camel dung to me, the most maligning I did hear was against Trump and those who supported him, that he was a Klansman in disguise, his followers were bigots, racist, Klansmen, homophobes, and misogynist, on top of being little more than uneducated hicks, inbreeding up in the hills somewhere. If it was said about Hillary in that manner, the trump team did not do as good of a job because I did not catch it in the wind without trying as the DNC did against Trump, not that I am saying I am his supporter, but, go figure……

Cruiser's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central You left out undesirables…

Strauss's avatar

@stanleybmanly, @Hypocrisy_Central …long term hammering from the right…

HC, this “hammering” to which Stanley refers is not merely a thing of this past election cycle. It is a long-term effort by a certain group of people, shouted into the echo chamber. How many times does one person have to be investigated before those doing the investigation can finally admit that there is nothing to prosecute. This was going on way longer than the previous three election cycles. As a matter of fact, its been going on, in one form or another, since the impeachment proceedings in the 1990’s failed to convict.

If something is repeated often enough and loudly enough, it starts to sound like the truth, whether it is or not.

Seek's avatar

They’ve been going on since she said during Bill’s first campaign that she wouldn’t be spending all her time in the White House baking cookies and twirling in her high heels.

stanleybmanly's avatar

@Hypocrisy Central You raise an interesting point. Which of the candidates do you believe garnered the votes of klansmen, bigots, racists and inbred uneducated hicks? Could he have pulled it off without them? Which candidate gave the appearance of openly courting those folks and rode their endorsements straight through to the finish line?

stanleybmanly's avatar

You can argue that Trump is not a racist, misogynist, bigoted, etc., but the spectacle of legions of these defectives bubbling out of the sewers in rapt adoration undermines whatever patina of integrity his fans might suppose.

Cruiser's avatar

@stanleybmanly Are you suggesting and making the argument that these alt-right “klansmen, bigots, racists and inbred uneducated hicks” are the voters in Wisconsin, Michigan, Florida and Pennsylvania that is the real reason Trump won those swing states and ultimately the election?

ragingloli's avatar

@Cruiser
no, that is because trump committed voter fraud, clearly.

Strauss's avatar

Let’s face it…This election, by and large, was more about who wasn’t going to be elected. Many who “held their noses” and voted for Donald did so because they had been convinced that Hillary was guilty of something, even if it was guilt through association with Bill, who had been acquitted of any illegal wrongdoing 20 years ago.

rojo's avatar

@Cruiser I think what they are saying is that racism, misogyny, bigotry, etc. can all be measured on a spectrum and that while a person may not be as racist, they certainly fall on the spectrum. And yes, I believe Trump is a racist and that those who voted for Trump fall within the spectrum and lean heavier toward his end. He is not the most racist person out there but does not have a problem with those who are more racist than him.

I do not believe racism, misogyny, etc is Trumps biggest failing. I believe that they are more symptoms, a consequence of his narcissism and the resultant belief in his own godhood.

Cruiser's avatar

@rojo I understand your point, but anyone who uses the descriptors klansmen, bigots, racists and inbred uneducated hicks to characterize the voters who got Trump elected is IMO is low information, clueless or just that desperate to rationalize that Hillary lost the election. They were so desperate to have Hillary win that they spun this spurious association of the alt rights support of Trump as a klansmen, bigots, racists and inbred uneducated hicks? The hypocrisy of this narrative/tactic only gets worse when Ku Klux Klan leader Will Quigg endorsed Hillary Clinton for president and nothing was ever said of that. It must have been when Hillary called all Trump supporters “deplorables” that all the klansmen, bigots, racists and inbred uneducated hicks that were supporting Hillary realized holy shit we are supporting the wrong candidate and flocked to Trump. Yeah, that must have been what tipped the scales towards a Trump victory.

YARNLADY's avatar

I think it was probably because so many people want someone to blame for all their problems and Trump is very good at blaming.

SQUEEKY2's avatar

So simple and so spot on ,nice answer @YARNLADY .

MrGrimm888's avatar

I’ve said it before. Not all Trump voters are racist. But all racists voted for Trump…

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@stanleybmanly @Hypocrisy Central You raise an interesting point. Which of the candidates do you believe garnered the votes of klansmen, bigots, racists and inbred uneducated hicks?
It could be said that eight years ago the person elected President did so because he energized the slothful, hedonistic, gay, poor, uneducated, less mature, pot smokers, but you can’t blame that on him unless you want to say he aligns himself by believe with them not that his message just happen to line up more to what they were seeking. If Trump energized a base with those traits, it would be because his message was closer to what they wanted than Hillary’s.

If Hillary had such a more superior message, how come the members of the party of Twiddle Dee (the Dems) did not come out in droves to seal the deal for her like they did Obama?

@Strauss Many who “held their noses” and voted for Donald did so because they had been convinced that Hillary was guilty of something, even if it was guilt through association with Bill, who had been acquitted of any illegal wrongdoing 20 years ago.
It was not so much I thought she actually was guilty of anything that could be proven, even the questionable stuff like what happen to the Haiti money, or if I leaked or had as many unsecured emails as her I would be in fetters tucked away in some cell at Gitmo, or something, but Bill going on the stump lying about how much he loves Hillary did not sit well, because if you TRULY love someone, you never will cheat on them. The largest above all was the disastrous High Court picks she would have had at her disposal, that might have drove me to Canada or elsewhere.

@rojo And yes, I believe Trump is a racist and that those who voted for Trump fall within the spectrum and lean heavier toward his end.
Well….I guess I will have to burst your bubble (and maybe a few more), not everything Trump says I am for. I do think we need to meddle less “over there” and focus more at home. I am not down with the wall. I think a better structure needs to be in place to deal case by case with illegals, some see no choice but to come here. If you can imagine your son is about to have his 14th birthday and the local arm of the cartel says he has to come work for them or he will die and maybe other members of your family too, what would you do? If you have an uncle in Chicago, etc. would you not leave everything you have to get to safety in the US with your uncle or try and hope the cartel waits until your visa clears? Not everyone coming here is simply greedy looking to send Yankee bucks back home. I might be wrong, what I have heard him say of heard that he said he never said we should get rid of all the Asians, repatriate the Blacks back to Africa and such stuff as that. I can’t see where all of the racist stuff comes from. My choking on my own vomit and voting for him doesn’t make me a racist by any stretch.

Cruiser's avatar

@MrGrimm888 Please if you could provide the source to support your statement…“Not all Trump voters are racist. But all racists voted for Trump”

MrGrimm888's avatar

^I suppose I could have said most…Watching the KKK parade down the streets, and the “alternative right” having a party doesn’t work as a source?

I honestly can’t remember the KKK celebrating anything ,let alone having parades.I’ve only ever seen them protest.
When the KKK, neo nazis, alt right, white power groups etc. flock to the streets to celebrate your candidates victory, it’s a hint…

Cruiser's avatar

@MrGrimm888 I have to still challenge you to qualify “most” voters. I find it hard to even justify the notion of just a couple percent if that of Trump voters who are this evil alt-right you seem to want to indict Trump voters as. Seriously. Please provide evidence other than your obvious over active imagination.

MrGrimm888's avatar

Most racists…Most voted for Trump.

Well. I’m not savy with the ‘ol inerweb. Or I bet I could find plenty of links.

We’ll chalk it up to my imagination…

stanleybmanly's avatar

Well I for one don’t believe that all or even most of the Trump voters are evil. That being said, there remains a truckload of handy pejoratives applicable to those responsible for placing a tasteless joke at the helm of the country. Based on every scrap of visible and audio evidence, the specter of Donald Trump as President defies any possible laudable motive, starting with common sense. I no longer care about just which particular defect an individual voter may or not evince. If a certified jackass is to be administered the oath of office, there is something clearly askew with anyone enabling it.

gorillapaws's avatar

@stanleybmanly “If a certified jackass is to be administered the oath of office, there is something clearly askew with anyone enabling it.”

I completely agree. I think the blame lies squarely with the Democratic Party and Hillary supporters for propping up the worst presidential candidate in history. The sad part is the Democratic party is trying to guarantee a 2-term presidency. They’ve just made Pelosi the House minority leader again… If the Democratic Party doesn’t get their heads out of their donor’s asses the party is completely fucked.

stanleybmanly's avatar

I will concede that the political system is corrupt, and that the Democratic Party is every bit as complicit as its Republican counterpart. But the remedy to the situation cannot possibly lie in choosing a fool

MrGrimm888's avatar

Apparently I need to clarify. I wasn’t calling all Trump voters evil, or racist. I was saying that almost all racists voted for Trump. I just don’t see many racists voting for Hillary…

How would Hillary have benefited any racist agendas?

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

^^ I will concede that the political system is corrupt,..]
Strange thing, everyone whines about it in reality society truly doesn’t have the cajones to do anything about it. If they woke up and grew a pair they would do something about campaign reform, the electoral college, and other elements they felt were corrupt, but…….

MrGrimm888's avatar

^If we fixed it all, greedy people would just manipulate it to their own benefit again.

America’s founding fathers tried to get it right, and make it adjustable to evolve to fit the needs of the people. Over the years lawyers have picked it apart,and bent everything to fit the greedy’s needs instead.

The only way to permanently fix any of it, is to somehow make people not greedy but….

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

^ If we fixed it all, greedy people would just manipulate it to their own benefit again.
I cannot see how. For instance, let’s say a person has X amount of money to run for Z office, and that goes for city, state, and federal. The amount of cash is for hard money, soft money, party money, etc. the money would be akin to the fuel in a Formula-1 racer, what you have you have to get through the whole race with. For argument sake of argument, let’s say for the office of President that amount is twenty-five million dollars. However, or wherever the money came from, the candidate’s own pocket, donors, fund raisers, sponsors, etc. once it hits twenty-five million that is it, the candidate is free to use it on buttons, flyers, robocalls TV ads, a combination thereof, but once the twenty-five million mark his reached, there is no more cash in the campaign. Parties can plug the party but no candidate, they can’t endorse anybody. What do you think the candidates will do, waste money trying to tell you what a douche bag the other guy was, or actually tell the people what they are about and what they are going to do and how? Knowing they have just so many opportunities within the money limitations they might not want to squander opportunities not getting their message out. If private citizens want to take out newspaper ads or buy TV time independent of the campaign, let them show their loyalty by their pockets. I bet half the junk and funk you get in the mail and see on TV during the elections will evaporate. How would the wealthy manipulate that? The only thing they can do is spend their money on ads, which is not official, they might be able to bash the other guy or say how much they love their guy, but they are no the official voice so anything they say is arbitrary.

Strauss's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central I agree with you that there is a he-e-ooge need for campaign finance reform. But until we can convince the politicians who benefit from the current system that they must legislate against their own best interest, there can be no change. The Citizens United decision created a situation where a candidate not only may receive corporate donations to their campaign, but must do so in order to keep the playing field level.

MrGrimm888's avatar

Most wealthy people have financial advisors, and lawyers that male their living circumventing laws regarding money and taxes paid.

Campaign finance reform, IMO, wouldn’t be a big obstacle for those with deep pockets. They would find ways around it. By calling contributions by different names ,or moving the money in a way it would be considered different than a contribution.

There are many laws currently in place specifically to ensure that the wealthy are transparent in their financial dealings, mainly for tax purposes. Offshore accounts, fake businesses, and corruption easily stiff arm such laws.

All it takes is money. Enough money can make almost anything possible.

We can make up all sorts of laws to try and contain or reduce the corruption. The wealthy make the rules though, and aren’t even bound by the rules they make…

Call me a pessimistic guy,I am, but I think the system is beyond permanent repair… All adjustments will eventually be overcome by the wealthy. In this world money gives too much power to too small a group of people.

As long as there is currency, and/or possessions there will be greed,and wealth. Greed and wealth will always trump ethics, and doing what’s best for the common people.

SQUEEKY2's avatar

Super great answer there @MrGrimm888 and oh so true, just make sure the working joe has his/her cell phone so they can text to their hearts content.

Cruiser's avatar

@MrGrimm888 You easily forget the congressmen you elected write the laws that my advisers I hire advise me on how to pay the least amount of taxes. It is not my lawyers that create this dynamic….it it the legislators you elect. Own it and deal with it for once.

stanleybmanly's avatar

Correction: it is the legislators we elect and your “advisors” buy. Who do you suppose finances the arranging of those loopholes, for which you aren’t yet big enough to reap the REAL gravy?

ragingloli's avatar

It is also those “advisors” at ALEC that write the legislation that the so called legislators just vote through without reading.

MrGrimm888's avatar

@Cruiser . You may have missed it in all these recent threads, but I don’t vote out of protest.

I have nothing to “own….”

I don’t run with the sheep…

Cruiser's avatar

@MrGrimm888 Then you have zero reason to comment on this or any election. You are entitled to STFU is all.

MrGrimm888's avatar

^Yawn….Coward….

Cruiser's avatar

Coward? @MrGrimm888 Seriously? You are the one who didn’t vote…you own the coward tag sir. Hang it around your neck and wear it proudly. Let the world know you didn’t vote and are part of the reason we have Trump as our President. I hope you are proud of yourself.

MrGrimm888's avatar

LOL. That’s part of a protest sir. You do wear it proudly.;)

You ,by your own admission, did vote for Trump. But I don’t think votes matter, so it’s not your fault….

As to the ‘coward’ comment. I don’t tell anyone on Fluther to “STFU.”

And you wouldn’t have the courage to say it to my face. Even if you did though, I’d brush it off. Rude rhetoric is not a replacement for content…

You’re mad because you’re racist, but you don’t want to be perceived as racist…

I’ve followed your responses. You need a LONG look in the mirror….

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@MrGrimm888 We can make up all sorts of laws to try and contain or reduce the corruption. The wealthy make the rules though, and aren’t even bound by the rules they make…
That would include some of the wealthy Dems in that gillnet, because the GOP doesn’t set all laws as if the party of Twiddle Dee (the Dems) sat idly by while the GOP (Twiddle Dumb) rammed through whatever laws they wanted to line their pockets, or their wealthy members, and constituents. Not all DNC members are working stiff, poor, or destitute, some of them have more money than Bubba Gump Shrimp, and I bet they don’t reject any laws saving them money at tax time out of spite, or protest.

Cruiser's avatar

@MrGrimm888 You judge me wrongly then…I would and have the courage to tell you to you face exactly how I feel…call me a racist again to my face and words will not be the only currency I tender your way.

MrGrimm888's avatar

^Pfft… I didn’t call you a racist. You have proclaimed yourself one by your words… Do you not recall your “black thugs” comments? That’s stuff racist people say. That’s the problem with the “alternative right. ” They are obviously racist ,but don’t have the balls to admit it .

Again, I say. Insults are a poor substitute for actual content.

This is a debate forum. If you read back through the thread, you’ll notice that my insults are reactive. I never start with the name calling or what have you…

You are in denial of your beliefs, because they are offensive. At least I have the courage to stand behind mine, and not hide from view points others don’t agree with.

You speak of “own .”

You need to “own” your bigotry, like you have the nerve to own your Trump vote….

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

^ Do you not recall your “black thugs” comments?
Now to be fair, are thugs only Black, or are their Asian thugs, Hispanic thugs, and i guess could you not call the KKK white thugs?

Cruiser's avatar

@MrGrimm888 “I didn’t call you a racist.” Really now? Your words not mine… “You’re mad because you’re racist” I am open to your wisdom of what to call a thug of any color that would fit in your perfect PC world that would not then get me labeled a racist by you. Would you be less offended if I had said African American thug?

MrGrimm888's avatar

^Yes. African American Thug is the non offensive term.

Cruiser's avatar

All good @MrGrimm888 Would I offend you if I referred to you as a shiny golden orb floating thug in the ocean thingy? Just checking…~

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

Yes. African American Thug is the non offensive term.
I would find “African American Thug” more offensive as it specifically targets citizens here, excluding Black Cubans, Jamaicans, Brazilians, Haitians, or elsewhere in the world that might be living here.

Seek's avatar

How about “thug” without the racial qualifiers, or better yet, using a more specific term to describe their actions, rather than a racially charged term often used to dismiss a person out of hand?

rojo's avatar

^Don’t know @Seek seems to me that it is racially insensitive to the people of India.

MrGrimm888's avatar

In America, at least in the south,certain words are considered straight racist. The words “thug,” and “boy” for instance. Context is clearly important. But using them when either addressing, or referring to black people, infers a conscious, or subconscious, racism.

A non racist wouldn’t say that they mugged by “two black thugs.” They would simply say they were mugged,unless someone asked for a description of the perpetrators…

@Cruiser . I’m actually not really offended. I was trying to make you aware of how this type of rhetoric can lead people to think that Trump voters are just a bunch of entitled, white, bigots. (Which some are.) Instead of just people.

Especially in this type of forum where there is relative ambiguity.

I don’t care if you’re racist or not. I personally think you aren’t, and that you’re justifiably angry you were mugged. Many black people have suffered at the hands of white people in this country. I wouldn’t think you would have them hate all white people though, because of the actions of others…

Have a heart…

rojo's avatar

“But as I travel around this big old world
Theres one thing that I most fear
Its a white man in a golf shirt
With a cell phone in his ear”

Tom Russell

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther