Election predictions

Clinton

9 (69.2%)

Trump

4 (30.8%)

Hung college

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 13

[Alan Klein]

In the meanwhile, let's give the man a chance.  He may surprise all of us and turn out to be a good President.

[James Clark]

In the meanwhile, let's give the man a chance.  He may surprise all of us and turn out to be a good President.

Alan, I sincerely hope that's the case. 

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Chris, I like your photography.

[James Clark]

Chris, I like your photography.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

If there has ever been a proof in the history of democracy that democracy works, this must be it. The whole weight of the System, Da Man, establishment, elite, pundits, media, Hollywood, CIA, generals, economists, Nobel prize winners, diplomats, former presidents, even his own party, everyone and his mother-in-law, a kitchen sink too, united against one man. And yet, the people spoke otherwise. If anyone thinks money buys votes...Bush outspent him 10:1 in the primary, and Hillary 10:1 in the election...and yet, the people spoke otherwise. Think about it.

[Chris Calohan]

Chris, all the arguments you made were made by your side over the last year.  They weren't enough to defeat Trump.  The election is over.  Next time, in 2020,  pick a better Democrat to run against him.  You have 4 years to find him or her.   

The election may be over but the fight has just begun. Though slight (200,000 +/- 10K) she won the majority and it tells you that over half the country has no faith or trust in the President elect. This is going to be a highly contentious four years and frankly, I am not sure we will survive it in the fashion we've survived other bad Presidents. I have to give him a chance, because while I do not like, nor trust him, the office of the President is to be honored; to be anything else for me is to be un-American.

[Chris Calohan]

Thanks, James and Slobodan.

[Alan Klein]

Chris  How do I see your photos?  Can't find the link in your profile.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Only if Trump wins. Any organized violence typically comes from the left, as already exemplified in this election.

For our friend Bill:

Man reportedly beaten over Trump vote; Chicago police seek attackers in video

http://via.wgntv.com/qt35D

[Alan Klein]

The Big Lie. The Republicans and conservatives are always being accused of violence that is really the trademark of the Democrats and liberals.  Oregon declared protests against Trump a riot..

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/the-latest-los-angeles-mayor-condemns-destructive-protest/2016/11/10/3a468c14-a7a4-11e6-ba46-53db57f0e351_story.html

[pcgpcg]

There are several groups protesting in Portland tonight. The anti-Trump protesters have been peaceful and the chief of police acknowledges this. He just stated a few minutes ago that the group causing damage (apoears to be about a dozen masked individuals armed with baseball bats) are a group of anarchists who are well-known to the police. Basically these are hoodlums that get their jollies from spraying graffiti and smashing windows. The same group routinely shows up at any large protest in Portland because it is easy for them to insert themselves into a large crowd and not be identified or caught. Police have asked the anti-Trump protesters to move to Pioneer Square (and they are) so that they can isolate and arrest those who are damaging businesses in a trendy neighborhood several blocks away. The anti-Trump protesters are not rioting. I am not an anti-Trump protester, nor do I sympathize with them.

[Manoli]

The Big Lie. The Republicans and conservatives are always being accused of violence that is really the trademark of the Democrats and liberals ...

Yes, yes of course it is ..

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-elections/donald-trump-president-supporters-attack-muslims-hijab-hispanics-lgbt-hate-crime-wave-us-election-a7410166.html?utm_content=buffer35dcb&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

.. and we're absolutely not to believe the motion clips being shown on CNN and other press sites of children in school shouting 'build-the-wall, build-the-wall..' and attacking other 'immigrant' classmates.

The truth is that this violence is the hallmark of the ' great unwashed' - whether they be far right ultra-nationalists,  neo-cons or far left extremists, anarchists and wannabe-communists. And anyone who condones it or excuses it is as repugnant as the perpetrators themselves - (not saying or implying that you are, Alan).

[myotis]

And yet, the people spoke otherwise.

The flaw with this, is that more people voted for Clinton than Trump!!

So the "people" wanted Clinton, and the system gave them Trump.

Just an observation, not a criticism of the system.

We have the same thing in the UK, where fewer people have sometimes voted for the elected government than voted for the opposition. So we don't get the government the majority want, we get the the government that the sytem gives us.

Cheers

[Rhossydd]

That changes nothing about my point.

Well it should because you're factually wrong.

[Rob C]

Yes, yes of course it is ..

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-elections/donald-trump-president-supporters-attack-muslims-hijab-hispanics-lgbt-hate-crime-wave-us-election-a7410166.html?utm_content=buffer35dcb&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

.. and we're absolutely not to believe the motion clips being shown on CNN and other press sites of children in school shouting 'build-the-wall, build-the-wall..' and attacking other 'immigrant' classmates.

The truth is that this violence is the hallmark of the ' great unwashed' - whether they be far right ultra-nationalists,  neo-cons or far left extremists, anarchists and wannabe-communists. And anyone who condones it or excuses it is as repugnant as the perpetrators themselves - (not saying or implying that you are, Alan).

+ 100%. It's their only language.

Rob C

[Alan Klein]

The American Electoral system where a majority (over 50% of the electoral votes) is required to become president is the reason we have a two-party system ( mainly except this time where some votes went to third party candidates but who didn't get any of the electoral votes anyway). If votes are spread out to more than two main candidates and parties, as in a Parliamentary system, you wind up with no one who has over 50%.   Then no one could be elected as President and it would go to the House of Representatives to decide..   

So the Electoral system creates the two party effect.  Yet for most times, this also creates a result where there popular vote is also above or at least near the 50% mark, much greater and more often than in a Parliamentary system where the candidates also have to form alliances in Parliament to become a majority.  The Founders of our Republic didn't want that because they wanted to have an adversarial division between Congress and the President to prevent too much Presidential power or legislative power.   

In any case the people did want Clinton because the campaign only focused on the swing states, around 12 of them.  The other 38 were already baked in a republican or Democrat.  So there was no campaigning where minds could have been changed.  Also many people don't vote in those states because they know there vote isn't necessary or will count for anything anyway.  So the popular is very distorted.  You don't really know what it would have been if we were actually a true popular vote system and not an Elector system. 

[Jeremy Roussak]

Yesterday I learnt from Paul Krugman that I, a Trump voter, am really an uneducated, racist, rural white male with a deep rage.

Congratulations, Rajan! You are, it seems, as perverse in your views as everyone in the UK who voted to leave the EU. Apart from the "rural" bit.

Jeremy

[Jeremy Roussak]

Then Lancet and the BBC got it wrong too.

It was presented as an argument about working times, career progression, pension entitlements, whether women's time on maternity leave should count towards routine seniority increments and so on. In reality, it became an argument over money; but "pay differentials" has never been suggested as relevant in any respect.

Medical training in the NHS has changed hugely over the past few years, in part as a result of the European Working Time Directive, which severely restricted the house junior doctors could work, and in part because the profession itself has demoralised its own juniors. I spoke at length in September to Professor Sir Simon Wessley, president of the Royal College of Psychiatrists, who expressed precisely those concerns. Training is certainly vastly different to the training I underwent for a decade in the 80's/90's.

The matter is hugely complicated. The British Medical Association postures but is no more than a trade union, and one run by those very firmly on the left of the political spectrum. The BBC is a pretty unreliable source of any information which requires understanding in its presentation.

Anyway, according to a report in today's Times, even the BMA has now admitted defeat (that is, accepted reality).

I'm not sure how relevant any of this is to the actual topic under discussion, but facile misrepresentations of a complex issue are invariably unhelpful.

Jeremy

[Otto Phocus]

I will share my predictions about Trump.  My simuliar predictions about past presidents has been absolutely correct. 

He will do things that some may not like
He will do things that some may like

He will make decisions that some will disagree with
He will make decisions that some will agree with

He will take credit for stuff that he had very little influence.
He will take the blame for stuff that he had very little influence.

There will be people who will dislike him no matter what
There will be people who will like him no matter what
There will be a bunch of people who will be neutral about him

We will have plenty of time to like/hate him in the next four years.  Let's wait until he does something before praising/condemning him.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Yes, yes of course it is ..

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-elections/donald-trump-president-supporters-attack-muslims-hijab-hispanics-lgbt-hate-crime-wave-us-election-a7410166.html?utm_content=buffer35dcb&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

.. and we're absolutely not to believe the motion clips being shown on CNN and other press sites of children in school shouting 'build-the-wall, build-the-wall..' and attacking other 'immigrant' classmates.

The truth is that this violence is the hallmark of the ' great unwashed' - whether they be far right ultra-nationalists,  neo-cons or far left extremists, anarchists and wannabe-communists. And anyone who condones it or excuses it is as repugnant as the perpetrators themselves...

From the same article you quoted:

Btw, the above is a false equivalence. I this country, left and right violence are far from being the same. In my posts, I carefully worded the difference: the vast majority of mass and organized violence comes from the left. And historically, across the world (feel free to tally the victims of cummunist regimes). The right wing violence is currently, here, individual and sporadic.  And if observing this difference and making this statement makes me repugnant in your eyes, so be it. I do not, however, condone any type of violence, organized or individual, left or right.