Congratulations President Elect, Donald Trump!

[Bengalzona]

I'm not getting why people are demonstrating. It seems counterproductive to me. Are they demonstrating because they feel President-elect Trump is a scumbag? Newsflash: At least half of the people who voted FOR Trump think he is a scumbag (and the other half aren't so sure about him). And he still won. Sort of reminds me of Bill Clinton (Democrats: "Yes he is a scumbag. But he is our scumbag!"). Americans electing scumbags is nothing new. Look at Nixon...

[SunsetBengal]

(11-10-2016, 08:55 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Oh, Lord, slacking off and taking handouts!  LOL

Something like that, boss is salaried and I'm hourly.  He was just extending some of that managerial privilege to me, as once I attain State License, I'll be a salaried guy as well.

[samhain]

(11-10-2016, 09:33 AM)Bengalzona Wrote: I'm not getting why people are demonstrating. It seems counterproductive to me. Are they demonstrating because they feel President-elect Trump is a scumbag? Newsflash: At least half of the people who voted FOR Trump think he is a scumbag (and the other half aren't so sure about him). And he still won. Sort of reminds me of Bill Clinton (Democrats: "Yes he is a scumbag. But he is our scumbag!"). Americans electing scumbags is nothing new. Look at Nixon...

I don't love it, either.  To the victor go the spoils.  He won, plain and simple.  There will be opportunities to re-group and do battle with him very soon.  These protests do nothing.  Now is the time to get ready to fight tooth and nail, not throw tantrums in the street. 

[GMDino]

(11-10-2016, 10:58 AM)samhain Wrote: I don't love it, either.  To the victor go the spoils.  He won, plain and simple.  There will be opportunities to re-group and do battle with him very soon.  These protests do nothing.  Now is the time to get ready to fight tooth and nail, not throw tantrums in the street. 

These kinds of marches will become smaller but I don't think protests will stop.  Nor should they as long as they remain peaceful and civil.


It's what the left every side does.  

[Belsnickel]

(11-10-2016, 09:33 AM)Bengalzona Wrote: I'm not getting why people are demonstrating. It seems counterproductive to me. Are they demonstrating because they feel President-elect Trump is a scumbag? Newsflash: At least half of the people who voted FOR Trump think he is a scumbag (and the other half aren't so sure about him). And he still won. Sort of reminds me of Bill Clinton (Democrats: "Yes he is a scumbag. But he is our scumbag!"). Americans electing scumbags is nothing new. Look at Nixon...

Yeah, it's pretty ridiculous. They vandalized the GOP offices in Richmond and the VA Dems have been helping with the cleanup. There is no need for this sort of stuff. It's concerning because the losers are acting out, and some of the winners are doing some heinous things as well. This is a concerning time and I think that people will calm down. I get that there is going to be a period of grieving for people, but it doesn't need to involve violence, intimidation, harassment, and destruction.

[SunsetBengal]

(11-10-2016, 10:58 AM)samhain Wrote: I don't love it, either.  To the victor go the spoils.  He won, plain and simple.  There will be opportunities to re-group and do battle with him very soon.  These protests do nothing.  Now is the time to get ready to fight tooth and nail, not throw tantrums in the street. 

But they aren't protests, they're riots.  I looked up the difference, a protest is a peaceful event to be held at a predetermined time and place, with a lawful permit.  These temper tantrum fits being thrown in the street are nothing more than unlawful assemblies, that sometimes develop into riotous acts.

[Bengalzona]

[Mike M (the other one)]

(11-09-2016, 07:39 PM)McC Wrote: He beat two parties.

And 2 dynasties (Bush and Clintons)

[Mike M (the other one)]

(11-09-2016, 08:13 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I am not salty about the result, at least not as much as some. I just find this comment funny being that it is made about a candidate that failed to achieve a plurality of the votes, let alone a majority.

Since when was the goal of the race to win the popular vote?
If that was the goal, then the way they went about it would have been vastly different.

[Bengalzona]

(11-10-2016, 12:40 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Since when was the goal of the race to win the popular vote?
If that was the goal, then the way they went about it would have been vastly different.

Ultimately, this is why the Republicans won so big: The RNC knows how to "play the game". They are well-led and play a 'long-game' strategy. 

[SunsetBengal]

(11-10-2016, 12:51 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: Ultimately, this is why the elections are so competitive: The RNC and DNC know how to "play the game". They are well-led and play a 'long-game' strategy. 

FIFY

[Bengalzona]

(11-10-2016, 01:04 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: FIFY

Not really.

The DNC isn't playing the game on the same level as the RNC. It is sort of like a game between the Patriots and Browns right now. This is not an insult to the RNC. It is their job to win elections. Obviously, they are doing it well.

And the DNC hasn't been playing the 'long-game' strategy at all. The Nixon resignation was a political disaster for the GOP. During the seventies, they shifted their concentration to securing local elections first, then state-level elections and finally national elections. They have done this quite successfully. If you look at your local elections for city and county offices, you will generally see many more Republicans than Democrats. Sometimes they are even unopposed. This is why red states are red. It is bottom to top. Win at the grassroots level and build from there. Success on the national level is based upon thousands of smaller elections. Democrats have neglected this over the years. They had a huge amount of political capital after Watergate and have gradually squandered it over the years.

They also developed a core doctrine that most Republicans adhere to religiously (no evangelical reference intended). They have centralized messages that most Republicans successfully hear, incorporate and spread.

I'm not a conservative (though I do have a few conservative values). That said, I can't help but appreciate their political machine. The Democrats would be wise to rebuild their own party on this model.

[tigerseye]

I think the DNC picked the wrong candidate. HRC is a nightmare. They kept saying Trump was unelectable with HRC sitting there. It made no sence.

HRC was a terrible choice.

Just my 2 cents.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(11-10-2016, 10:51 AM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Something like that, boss is salaried and I'm hourly.  He was just extending some of that managerial privilege to me, as once I attain State License, I'll be a salaried guy as well.

I was just joking with you. 

Salary is nice up to a point. We had a change of ownership almost three years ago. New company's salary rules were different than I was accustomed to. Took four different contracts for them to finally get the the agreement correct. Plus I requested to be switched from salary to hourly based upon their rules which is better for me. 

[SunsetBengal]

(11-10-2016, 02:01 PM)tigerseye Wrote: I think the DNC picked the wrong candidate. HRC is a nightmare. They kept saying Trump was unelectable with HRC sitting there. It made no sence.

HRC was a terrible choice.

Just my 2 cents.

They failed to realize that Bernie Sanders was their wildly popular, lightning in a bottle type of candidate.  But, the DNC choose to go the establishment route.   Because, it was "her turn"...

[GMDino]

(11-10-2016, 05:05 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: They failed to realize that Bernie Sanders was their wildly popular, lightning in a bottle type of candidate.  But, the DNC choose to go the establishment route.   Because, it was "her turn"...

I literally just said today the democrats followed the republican playbook by running the person who was "suppose" to be the next president.

I had said the same when they ran Bob Dole and and W. Bush and Romney.  Although Bush was probably more their Obama in that it seemed it was McCain's turn and Bush had the better campaign team.

[SunsetBengal]

I can't believe that some are still willing to label this man a racist.

[Benton]

(11-10-2016, 10:28 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote:

I can't believe that some are still willing to label this man a racist.

I don't think he's racist, but not going down in fractions drives me crazy 6 out of 12 times.

[samhain]

(11-10-2016, 05:11 PM)GMDino Wrote: I literally just said today the democrats followed the republican playbook by running the person who was "suppose" to be the next president.

I had said the same when they ran Bob Dole and and W. Bush and Romney.  Although Bush was probably more their Obama in that it seemed it was McCain's turn and Bush had the better campaign team.

The establishment in the democratic party is toast.  There's no way the party base will allow them to continue the status quo.  Dems typically close ranks a lot faster than Reps, so I don't necessarily see a tea party revolt in the mix, but something coming.  Every article I've read about the post-election strategy from the perspective of the left says the exact same thing.  Fire everybody at the DNC, get ruthless and relentless replacements, move forward.

Trump has just shown them that you don't really need the big money donors if you can get a message that resonates with voters. The old party elders are now beholden to the Sanders wing and all that comes with it. Equal and opposite reactions and all.

[Griever]

(11-09-2016, 06:28 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Dude, you're just plain salty.  Perhaps you should wait a day or two before blowing off at the mouth?

so trump isnt going to do away with gay marriage, kick 20 million people off healthcare (and possibly remove pre-existing conditions from being covered), take away rights from women, and keep religious groups out of the country that he doesnt like?

i must have seen a different trump over the last year then...