"White working class voters are good people, they're not racist, not sexist" -Joe Biden

[Fogdog]

Yes, only if establishment Democrats cede control of the party over to actual progressives, which they won't. Watch what happens in the next 2 years with the fight for control over the Democratic party. They won't because they can't, because if they do, their donors won't keep funding their campaigns. So personally, I think unless we win the fight over control of the party, Republicans will continue to win elections. People can see corporatism within the Democratic establishment. That's not why we signed up to the party, that's why a lot of people are leaving. We want workers rights, investments into the middle-class, education, climate change, universal healthcare and college, a raise to a living wage, etc., We don't want to elect Republican light so they can blow smoke up our asses and pretend they care about us while they only focus on corporate interests and blame zero progress on Republican obstructionism. They had complete control of the government for 2 years when Obama won, look what they got us.. An individual mandate, Romneycare.

I am not impressed. The corruption is blatant.

I assume you are speaking for the millenial generation in your post. Not arguing but asking: how does what you say square with the fact that 60% of millenials voted for Clinton and 32% voted for Trump?

Also, if donors won't support a corporatism free coalition, how do the candidates from this coalition run a campaign? This said with a Republican congress in power that won't change campaign laws, no way, no how. So, how does this ideal gain traction?

Corruption in the US is mostly due to actions by the kleptocracy who have access to the lawmakers of the land. Trump and his presumptive cabinet represents the worst of this corruption ever in US history. Once they take power and enact voter suppression laws, backed by the SCOTUS, it's going to be that much harder to get them out of office. My biggest fear in all of this is that we might not be able to peacefully remove the bastards now that they own all three branches of government.

I'm completely in alignment with wanting "workers rights, investments into the middle-class, education, climate change, universal healthcare and college, a raise to a living wage, etc." I just don't understand how Trump won if the majority of voters in purple states cared about these issues like you and I do. Just saying maybe you won't get a candidate that fits 100% of issues on your list. You OK with that?

 

[UncleBuck]

Jill Stein tried. Failed

everything is a conspiracy theory, got it.

 

[UncleBuck]

I'm completely in alignment with wanting "workers rights, investments into the middle-class, education, climate change, universal healthcare and college, a raise to a living wage, etc."

huh. so was hillary.

 

[tangerinegreen555]

Jill Stein tried. Failed

You're a teacher? Of what? Sunday school?

 

[Padawanbater2]

and let Trump win.

In spite of the fact that Republican held presidency is going to completely rape and set back the efforts to slow global warming by decades? In spite of the fact that Republican controlled government is going to end the right of women to choose?

So, then, if white majorities in Rust Belt States are not racist, why did they vote for a man who clearly supports a white racist agenda? Was there some moral high ground achieved in this?

I'm comfortable with the assertion that white voters in the Rust Belt voted in what they perceived as their best interest and fuck the moral high grounders. This at least gives us an idea of what to work on going forward.

Have you actually heard from working class voters in Ohio or Pennsylvania? The places that made the difference in the election? The common theme among most of these people is economic anxiety; they're worried about their paycheck. Call that whatever you want, these are real people with families to take care of, they voted for the man who gave them hope and promised them change in 2008 because George Bush and the Republican party who held power for nearly a decade before that had also failed to make their lives any better. We all wanted change, we were willing to vote for anyone who offered that. Obama won and we got incrementalism. Hillary Clinton campaigned on it and it lost her the election. Trump campaigned on draining the swamp, complete change. Anyone paying attention can see the pattern. The American people are fed up with the crony capitalism, business as usual model that we've been using. So fed up in fact that enough of us were willing to vote for a maniac just to get someone we perceived as an outsider in power.

 

[Fogdog]

The ones I know in Appalachia are mostly on SSI or dealing. My wife works for a Dr. I was fortunate enough to leave many years ago. Some work and make $7 an hour. Kasich just blocked cities from passing minimum wage. Sorry but the people I know are angry white men and women who have gottom to my age and can't make it on just Social Security. They can't retire and they truly believe that trump will make it like it was a long time ago. I actually know a preacher in an unnamed town who has been walking and praying through a small town he lives in to bring jobs back. They have been gone 40 years. He voted trump. He got a bit angry when I said grab em by the pussy! When they work for third world wages they may bring low tech jobs they could do back. It is sad. I don't visit that often.

I don't understand why the southern voter is so staunchly against unions and collective bargaining but it has always been this way. Many of these states take in more federal aid than the pay in taxes -- by a wide margin. Yet time and again, they vote for presidents and congressmen who work against the very aid that they need. I admit to bias against what I think are ignorant hillbillies but in my opinion, they are just voting against the party that was in power when the civil rights act and voting rights act was passed. In other words, they want to roll the laws back to jim crow and segregation. In my mind they are the base of the republican party and the republican party can have them. They are not a factor in my thinking on how to eject the swamp dwellers.

I think the GOP is going after cuts in SSI. We'll see if Appalachia and the South can swallow that. It's my guess they will. For them, the Civil War wasn't that long ago.

 

[ttystikk]

stop buying into the "elitist" bullshit.

Lol, gtfo

Unless I'm willing to 'donate', aka BRIBE, my political representatives they aren't going to give me the time of day.

Last I checked, that wasn't the definition of democracy.

It IS the definition of elitism.

 

[Padawanbater2]

I assume you are speaking for the millenial generation in your post. Not arguing but asking: how does what you say square with the fact that 60% of millenials voted for Clinton and 32% voted for Trump?

Also, if donors won't support a corporatism free coalition, how do the candidates from this coalition run a campaign? This said with a Republican congress in power that won't change campaign laws, no way, no how. So, how does this ideal gain traction?

Corruption in the US is mostly due to actions by the kleptocracy who have access to the lawmakers of the land. Trump and his presumptive cabinet represents the worst of this corruption ever in US history. Once they take power and enact voter suppression laws, backed by the SCOTUS, it's going to be that much harder to get them out of office. My biggest fear in all of this is that we might not be able to peacefully remove the bastards now that they own all three branches of government.

I'm completely in alignment with wanting "workers rights, investments into the middle-class, education, climate change, universal healthcare and college, a raise to a living wage, etc." I just don't understand how Trump won if the majority of voters in purple states cared about these issues like you and I do. Just saying maybe you won't get a candidate that fits 100% of issues on your list. You OK with that?

Millennials still support corporatist Democrats over insane maniacal Republicans. The lesser of two evils argument garners ~60% of the millennial vote, apparently

They fund a campaign by using individual campaign contributions. It gains traction by people being involved politically

Trump won because he's a con artist, he tricked people who felt the only other option was worse. Worse than Donald Trump..

I am OK with that, Bernie Sanders didn't fit 100% of the issues on my list. The most important thing for me is walking the walk, Sanders record is crystal clear on that. That's how you know he holds credibility. Clinton is the complete opposite, her political opinions change with the tide of American public opinion, that's how you know she's a career politician. That's just another scent she gives off that disgusts the American people. People can taste it on her when they hear her speak. It's repulsive. Robotic. Jeb! like in nature. All it took was a reality TV show star to beat her, that is evidence of exactly how sick of this type of politics people are.

 

[tangerinegreen555]

But I know for a fact that Pennsylvania Trump voters weren't hurting

Me too.


But for a lot of them, that will be changing sooner than they heard on their fake news reports.

Yeah, so why didn't Clinton win

She did win the popular vote by a bigger margin than many successful presidents did. I know that doesn't matter but for some reason I just like saying it.

 

[ttystikk]

huh. so was hillary.

That's a lie and you know it

 

[Padawanbater2]

She did win the popular vote by a bigger margin than many successful presidents did.

No doubt about it

But if Democrats were so concerned about the EC, why didn't they voice their opinions until after they lost the election? You can see why this makes it seem like sour grapes, right? Say Republicans lost the EC vote but won the popular vote, do you think Democrats would be supporting the same idea that the person who wins the popular vote should be the president?

 

[Padawanbater2]

That's a lie and you know it

Well, technically, publicly, she was for the middle-class and workers rights..

It's those privately held positions she has about wholeheartedly supporting TPP, that universal college is a crazy left-wing idea, or her kid's contention that marijuana has killed people that most reasonable people probably don't buy..

 

[UncleBuck]

Lol, gtfo

Unless I'm willing to 'donate', aka BRIBE, my political representatives they aren't going to give me the time of day.

Last I checked, that wasn't the definition of democracy.

It IS the definition of elitism.

members of my family and friends of my family have met with the current president, first lady, and hillary simply through volunteering or working on their staff. my father in law met at the white house with senior administration officials to discuss sustainability and climate change because of the line of work he's in.

i met michael bennett while canvassing this year too.

the "elitism" meme is hitler tactics. purge it from your vocabulary or you are playing into trump's playbook.

 

[tangerinegreen555]

No doubt about it

But if Democrats were so concerned about the EC, why didn't they voice their opinions until after they lost the election? You can see why this makes it seem like sour grapes, right? Say Republicans lost the EC vote but won the popular vote, do you think Democrats would be supporting the same idea that the person who wins the popular vote should be the president?

I have been an opponent of the EC since November, 2000. I have posted that in this forum, long before 2016. I'd have to look around to find it, but it is here somewhere.

 

[UncleBuck]

That's a lie and you know it

sorry, but it isn't.

people have this weird conception of hillary as anything and everything evil, all encapsulated into one person.

it turns out that these fantasies have nothing to do with who she is, they reflect more on each person's definition of evil.

hillary clinton is a good woman who would have advanced our goals as much as or more than obama did. she was respected in congress as someone who knew every issue front and back, and mroe importantly, how to garner enough support from each side of the aisle to actually implement the agenda.

 

[ttystikk]

members of my family and friends of my family have met with the current president, first lady, and hillary simply through volunteering or working on their staff. my father in law met at the white house with senior administration officials to discuss sustainability and climate change because of the line of work he's in.

i met michael bennett while canvassing this year too.

the "elitism" meme is hitler tactics. purge it from your vocabulary or you are playing into trump's playbook.

Oooooo nice strong arm play, but it doesn't wash.

I see what she did and it drowned out whatever she says.

And I'm anything but alone in this assessment, or she'd be picking cabinet members right now.

 

[ttystikk]

I have been an opponent of the EC since November, 2000. I have posted that in this forum, long before 2016. I'd have to look around to find it, but it is here somewhere.

And I'm with you all the way. The electoral College is just another way to subvert the will of the People. Maybe that wasn't its original purpose, but that's how it functions NOW.

 

[ttystikk]

sorry, but it isn't.

people have this weird conception of hillary as anything and everything evil, all encapsulated into one person.

it turns out that these fantasies have nothing to do with who she is, they reflect more on each person's definition of evil.

hillary clinton is a good woman who would have advanced our goals as much as or more than obama did. she was respected in congress as someone who knew every issue front and back, and mroe importantly, how to garner enough support from each side of the aisle to actually implement the agenda.

I NEVER EVER said she was or is evil. She's playing her hand like a veteran State Department officer; speaking to power on the issues they want to hear.

That just doesn't leave much room for the other 90% of us.

 

[UncleBuck]

I have been an opponent of the EC since November, 2000. I have posted that in this forum, long before 2016. I'd have to look around to find it, but it is here somewhere.

i was always for the EC because it gave dems a major advantage, and no other reason. we would start out about 50 points ahead. if MN and ME are swing states now though, we're both starting at 200.

i say EC reform rather than popular vote. make every state allot proportionally. that would have given us a 270-267-1 clinton win this year, pretty much reflective of her popular vote win. and it would make every single vote in every single state count.

imagine the drama it could bring if it came down to how the last electoral vote in idaho would tip.

but since that won't be happening under the trumpence regime, we need to just figure out how to win 538 another couple times.

 

[Padawanbater2]

hillary clinton is a good woman who would have advanced our goals as much as or more than obama did. she was respected in congress as someone who knew every issue front and back, and mroe importantly, how to garner enough support from each side of the aisle to actually implement the agenda.

What do you base this on? Specifically the bolded