Posts: 38,881
Threads: 1,711
Reputation:
55832
Joined: May 2015
Location: SW PA
Mood:
Someone on ABC, early in the evening said this was a "punch to the face of the elites".
I disagreed then and still do now.
The VAST majority of incumbents were re-elected. The only change is the Presidency.
So if one of the themes is "not liking career politicians" why did so many get re-elected?
Your anger and ego will always reveal your true self.
Posts: 1,597
Threads: 54
Reputation:
4098
Joined: Jun 2015
Mood: None
people are stupid, and hillary is a evil
People suck
Posts: 609
Threads: 16
Reputation:
2543
Joined: May 2015
Location: Frazeysburg
Mood: None
(11-09-2016, 09:07 AM)GMDino Wrote: Someone on ABC, early in the evening said this was a "punch to the face of the elites".
I disagreed then and still do now.
The VAST majority of incumbents were re-elected. The only change is the Presidency.
So if one of the themes is "not liking career politicians" why did so many get re-elected?
I think it is. Just because most incumbents won doesn't mean it's not. I can't think of any race other than president where both candidates weren't career politicians who are already beholden to lobbists.
Posts: 11,328
Threads: 19
Reputation:
77117
Joined: May 2015
Location: Where Mr. Kotter was before returning
Mood: None
I agree with the OP.
I feel Trump won because he rallied the masses who feel that their life sucks, and it sucks because somebody (Clinton, Obama, Mexicans, Syrians, NAFTA, China, etc....) did them wrong.
I'm gonna break every record they've got. I'm tellin' you right now. I don't know how I'm gonna do it, but it's goin' to get done.
- Ja'Marr Chase
April 2021
Posts: 10,718
Threads: 63
Reputation:
57608
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(11-09-2016, 09:07 AM)GMDino Wrote: The VAST majority of incumbents were re-elected.
(11-09-2016, 10:00 AM)mallorian69 Wrote: Just because most incumbents won doesn't mean it's not.
It speaks volumes.
Kentucky swung heavily in favor of Trump. It's also swung heavily in favor of Mitch McConnell for 30 years. The mixed message there is "we don't want conventional political candidates except when they're OUR conventional political candidates."
Posts: 609
Threads: 16
Reputation:
2543
Joined: May 2015
Location: Frazeysburg
Mood: None
(11-09-2016, 11:51 AM)Benton Wrote: It speaks volumes.
Kentucky swung heavily in favor of Trump. It's also swung heavily in favor of Mitch McConnell for 30 years. The mixed message there is "we don't want conventional political candidates except when they're OUR conventional political candidates."
Notice you didn't quote my entire post. As I said before as far as I know Trump was the only person up for election at the national level (with a realistic chance of winning) that hasn't already been elected to public office.
All other candidates with the exception of McMullen already have ties to lobbists and the Washington elite. If there had been several other viable candidates with no political background and they had all lost i might agree with you.
Posts: 24,853
Threads: 624
Reputation:
228958
Joined: May 2015
Location: Jackson, OH
Mood:
I'd say more of an absolute rejection of the PC culture, the Progressive Agenda, and all other radical idealisms that have been forced upon the lives and altered the cultures of plain Americans, ever increasingly for the past 8 years.
Volson is meh, but I like him, and he has far exceeded my expectations
-Frank Booth 1/9/23
Posts: 28,167
Threads: 40
Reputation:
122541
Joined: May 2015
Location: Parts Unknown, PA
Mood:
(11-09-2016, 02:53 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: I'd say more of an absolute rejection of the PC culture, the Progressive Agenda, and all other radical idealisms that have been forced upon the lives and altered the cultures of plain Americans, ever increasingly for the past 8 years.
Agreed. I'm sure you can't wait to go to the courthouse and get legally separated from that man the liberals forced you to marry in 2014. Welp, Trump is in office...time to go see which assault rifle the right-wing forces me to purchase!
Posts: 16,257
Threads: 415
Reputation:
60100
Joined: May 2015
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Mood:
Kind of like in 2010, IIRC, this isn't really a repudiation of anything, though the GOP will try to say it is. Voter turnout was remarkably low. The Democrats increased their seats in both chambers of Congress and won the plurality of the popular vote for POTUS. So even while the GOP retains control of both chambers and won the white house by electoral votes, the people that voted actually went left, and more of them would have if the Democrats had put up a decent candidate.
It was business as usual with a slight lean to the left.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
Posts: 28,167
Threads: 40
Reputation:
122541
Joined: May 2015
Location: Parts Unknown, PA
Mood:
(11-09-2016, 02:53 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: I'd say more of an absolute rejection of the PC culture, the Progressive Agenda, and all other radical idealisms that have been forced upon the lives and altered the cultures of plain Americans, ever increasingly for the past 8 years.
47% of voters chose the purportedly socially conservative candidate = absolute rejection of the progressive agenda
Again, the majority of voters went with the Democrat and the absurdly socially liberal 3rd party candidates and we're supposed to read this as America clearly rejecting such things? Trump is the president, but some of the conclusions you are drawing don't quite add up.
Posts: 19,126
Threads: 143
Reputation:
154632
Joined: May 2015
Location: Covington, Ky
Mood:
(11-09-2016, 09:18 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Kind of like in 2010, IIRC, this isn't really a repudiation of anything, though the GOP will try to say it is. Voter turnout was remarkably low. The Democrats increased their seats in both chambers of Congress and won the plurality of the popular vote for POTUS. So even while the GOP retains control of both chambers and won the white house by electoral votes, the people that voted actually went left, and more of them would have if the Democrats had put up a decent candidate.
It was business as usual with a slight lean to the left.
The popular vote is always a little skewed by NY and especially California. Clinton had a net + of 4 million in those two states alone. With that advantage, she still only won the popular vote by about 185,000 out of a total of 1.18+ million votes.
"The measure of a man's intelligence can be seen in the length of his argument."
Posts: 16,257
Threads: 415
Reputation:
60100
Joined: May 2015
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Mood:
(11-09-2016, 10:09 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: The popular vote is always a little skewed by NY and especially California. Clinton had a net + of 4 million in those two states alone. With that advantage, she still only won the popular vote by about 185,000 out of a total of 1.18+ million votes.
But that is still winning the plurality, and with a significantly decreased voter turnout from previous elections that was primarily made up of Democrat base. Doesn't negate what I am saying.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
Posts: 19,126
Threads: 143
Reputation:
154632
Joined: May 2015
Location: Covington, Ky
Mood:
(11-09-2016, 10:13 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: But that is still winning the plurality, and with a significantly decreased voter turnout from previous elections that was primarily made up of Democrat base. Doesn't negate what I am saying.
I'm not trying to negate what you said. Plurality or majority, I just don't think using a gauge that is that skewered because of two states is a good way to make a point when there are 48 other states that make things look different.
"The measure of a man's intelligence can be seen in the length of his argument."
Posts: 28,167
Threads: 40
Reputation:
122541
Joined: May 2015
Location: Parts Unknown, PA
Mood:
(11-09-2016, 10:37 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: I'm not trying to negate what you said. Plurality or majority, I just don't think using a gauge that is that skewered because of two states is a good way to make a point when there are 48 other states that make things look different.
Well Texas hasn't gone blue in 40 years so let's just toss that one out too?
Posts: 16,257
Threads: 415
Reputation:
60100
Joined: May 2015
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Mood:
(11-09-2016, 10:37 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: I'm not trying to negate what you said. Plurality or majority, I just don't think using a gauge that is that skewered because of two states is a good way to make a point when there are 48 other states that make things look different.
How does it skew when you are looking at an overall percentage of the national population, sans state borders? In a national popular vote, no state holds more weight than any other.
"A great democracy has got to be progressive, or it will soon cease to be either great or a democracy..." - TR
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much; it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little." - FDR
Posts: 37,609
Threads: 892
Reputation:
123486
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(11-09-2016, 10:47 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: How does it skew when you are looking at an overall percentage of the national population, sans state borders? In a national popular vote, no state holds more weight than any other.
Of course one state holds more weight than another on the popular vote, as do certain cities.
Our Nation is distributed by state, why shouldn't the vote? Could the EC use some massaging? Sure, but popular is not the way to go.
Posts: 19,126
Threads: 143
Reputation:
154632
Joined: May 2015
Location: Covington, Ky
Mood:
(11-09-2016, 10:44 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Well Texas hasn't gone blue in 40 years so let's just toss that one out too?
trump- 59,231,409 minus cali 56,264,755
clinton- 59,416,203 minus cali 53,934,037
trump- 56,264,755 minus ny 53,627,077
clinton- 53,934,037 minus ny 49,790,496
trump- 53,627,077 minus fl 49,021,562
clinton- 49,790,496 minus fl 45,304,751
trump- 49,021,562 minus tx 44,339,972
clinton- 45,304,751 minus tx 41,436,935
"The measure of a man's intelligence can be seen in the length of his argument."
Posts: 28,167
Threads: 40
Reputation:
122541
Joined: May 2015
Location: Parts Unknown, PA
Mood:
(11-09-2016, 10:53 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Of course one state holds more weight than another on the popular vote, as do certain cities.
Our Nation is distributed by state, why shouldn't the vote? Could the EC use some massaging? Sure, but popular is not the way to go.
How many times do we award the presidency to a person who got the 2nd most votes before we acknowledge something may be amiss? We're up to 5 at the moment.
Posts: 19,126
Threads: 143
Reputation:
154632
Joined: May 2015
Location: Covington, Ky
Mood:
(11-09-2016, 10:47 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: How does it skew when you are looking at an overall percentage of the national population, sans state borders? In a national popular vote, no state holds more weight than any other.
Maybe i'm missing something? How can it not hold hold more weight with a denser population and a clear leaning one way?
"The measure of a man's intelligence can be seen in the length of his argument."
Posts: 37,609
Threads: 892
Reputation:
123486
Joined: May 2015
Mood: None
(11-09-2016, 10:57 PM)Nately120 Wrote: How many times do we award the presidency to a person who got the 2nd most votes before we acknowledge something may be amiss? We're up to 5 at the moment.
I suppose as long as we are a Nation of united states. Once we do away with the whole state concept then we can focus on the popular vote.
|