USA presidential elections 2016

woodburner · Post by **woodburner** » 26 Nov 2016, 22:55

UndercoverElephant wrote:I actually miss Biff. It would be nice if he were to come back and admit that actually we had a point all these years and help to try to explain some of it to his own peers. But perhaps he is still coming to terms with what has happened, and specifically his own role (or rather him and lots of people who think like him) in creating the current situation.

We most definitely told him so, though. And he most definitely would not listen.

Given the unacceptable abuse Biff suffered it's not surprising he's not here any more. Debate is one thing, but few are going to put up with what was thrown at Biff. Several others got it too, though to a lesser degree, and they have gone too. Then there's others who have gone because what they saw was unacceptable.

The abusers know who they are, yet they "justified" their unacceptable comments because they couldn't or wouldn't accept a different view.

woodburner · Post by **woodburner** » 26 Nov 2016, 23:07

UndercoverElephant wrote:Hits the nail on the head:

"Brexit and Trump: A disaster for liberalism caused by liberal elites

by Robert Wragg

2016 has borne witness to perhaps the biggest rise in anti-establishment anger in a generation, but it hasn’t come from the usual suspects. No longer is it the radical left protesting the political elite, but rather it is regular working class voters, and they’re looking to the right. Culminating in the British public’s vote to leave the European Union, and the election of Donald Trump in the USA, liberal left parties are struggling to gather enough support from the electorate. The same is true on both sides of the pond, as in many others countries. So why is this happening?

[continues]
http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2016/11/21/br ... al-elites/

Biff? Biff Vernon?

Please come back and talk about the future with us. The real future.

Wragg should look at history, this has happened before. Look at the 1930s and the rise of Hitler.

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 27 Nov 2016, 00:17

Yes indeed it has happened before. And the Social Democratic Party in Wiemar Germany at the time was the nearest analogue of the bourgeoisie-liberal-left of today and they made all the same mistakes. They ultimately sought to prop up the whole stinking pile of corruption, despite their public hand-wringing, of the existing system. The reason being the same as today. Namely, that they belonged to the section of society that were doing okay.

In doing so, they lost all credibility with the mass of the proletariat. They failed utterly and that failure ushered in Nazism as the German people inevitably and instinctively went looking for answers elsewhere. Is this all sounding familiar? It should be because it is a carbon copy of what is happening right now. Today, the liberal-left has lost all cultural and political currency with the mass of the proletariat due to pissing about with the minutiae of identity politics as a consolation prize for losing the economic wars to the neo-cons thirty odd years ago. All the while ignoring the biggest identity of all that lies above race, gender, sexuality and any thing else. Namely that of CLASS. And so, the proletariat is looking elsewhere for answers to their economic woes and, just as in the 1930s, the Far Right is stepping into the vacuum all too willingly.

And yes, I DO hold the Biff Vernons of this world responsible for all of the above

UndercoverElephant · Post by **UndercoverElephant** » 27 Nov 2016, 01:33

Noam Chomsky on the new Trump era - UpFront special

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jB54XxbgI0E

woodburner · Post by **woodburner** » 27 Nov 2016, 20:02

And for those who have heaped hatred on trump's rival https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=wBMgehDxiSU

Never mind, you think trump is a better choice.

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 27 Nov 2016, 21:07

you just don't get it do you. Clinton did not lose because she was a woman and Trump was elected irrespective of all of the personality flaws he so demonstrably has.

The reason she lost was because she was the establishment personified. and the reason Trump won is because he was the only available candidate who was not of the establishment. Or, at least, he was able to portray himself as such. God help us but there should have been someone else. But there was not and so he won and it will lead to where it leads. But, what did you expect the blue collar proletariat were eventually going to do when their woes remained undressed for decades and where, when they complained, they were told to cut their dicks off and check their "white privilege".

But still, those on the losing side will trot out the tired, shop-worn tropes of racism, sexism, bigotry and all the rest of the micro-identity slurs they can muster in terms of impugning the motives of the people who voted for Trump. This was about CLASS and about the ECONOMY and if the liberals don't grow up and begin to acknowledge this and fast, then what comes after Trump will make him look tame by comparison.

woodburner · Post by **woodburner** » 27 Nov 2016, 21:20

. Try I love trump

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 27 Nov 2016, 22:36

And?

So, why do you suppose people voted for him then?..Racism? Bigotry? Stupidity? .....Right?

FFS

woodburner · Post by **woodburner** » 27 Nov 2016, 23:57

As it happens, more people voted for Clinton.

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 28 Nov 2016, 06:51

Accept reality and answer the question please. You are now being ridiculous wood burner. Why did nearly 50% of the popular vote go to Trump? Why did over 50% of the popular vote go to Brexit? Why is the far right on the rise all over the Western world?

Are they all just racist, bigoted sexist morons then?

johnhemming2 · Post by **johnhemming2** » 28 Nov 2016, 06:52

Little John wrote: Stupidity? .....Right?

I think you are right about that.

In the sense that many people are unhappy with the Status quo and stupid enough to think that Trump will improve the situation.

Little John · Post by **Little John** » 28 Nov 2016, 06:54

No, they are unhappy with the status quo and have nothing else available to them than Trump and have sufficiently little left to lose to give a shit about the consequences. I swear to God, it's as if Jokers on your side of this debate want the bloody far-right to be in the ascendancy because I can think of little more you could be doing in terms of (lack of) intelligent analysis as to why people are voting this way, to bring about that precise outcome

UndercoverElephant · Post by **UndercoverElephant** » 28 Nov 2016, 08:36

woodburner wrote:As it happens, more people voted for Clinton.

]

That is meaningless though. People voted - or chose not to bother - based on the existing voting system. That means that in California, for example, everybody knew that Clinton was going to win. So how many Trump supporters didn't bother to vote, especially given that a lot of them only saw Trump as the lesser of two evils and felt no particularly reason to cast a losing vote for him just to make a point?

We have no way of knowing which candidate would have won if the system was one-person-one-vote with no electoral college.

Post by **clv101** » 28 Nov 2016, 09:06

UndercoverElephant wrote:
woodburner wrote:As it happens, more people voted for Clinton.
That is meaningless though. People voted - or chose not to bother - based on the existing voting system. That means that in California, for example, everybody knew that Clinton was going to win. So how many Trump supporters didn't bother to vote, especially given that a lot of them only saw Trump as the lesser of two evils and felt no particularly reason to cast a losing vote for him just to make a point?

We have no way of knowing which candidate would have won if the system was one-person-one-vote with no electoral college.

Absolutely. Appeal to the 'popular vote' argument here just indicates someone's trying to make a political point. The results can only be interpreted with respect to the rules. Different rules would have resulted in a different popular vote.

Lord Beria3 · Post by **Lord Beria3** » 28 Nov 2016, 19:29

All these feminists who attack men and woman who failed to vote for Hilary Clinton as misogynists, I wonder, will they be accusing the French who fail to vote for the first female candidate with a serious chance of becoming madame president as well?

Nahh... didn't think so. Those same self-styled feminists will say that voting for Marine Le Pen, who would crack the glass ceiling by becoming the first female president in French history in 2017, doesn't count as they will say they fundamentally disagree with her policies and politics.

Well, the same can be said for those millions of Americans who couldn't vote for Hilary. They didn't vote against her because she was a woman but because they disagreed with her policies and politics.

When will the liberal-left learn?