Register - Login
Views: 86358847
Main - Memberlist - Active users - Calendar - Wiki - IRC Chat - Online users
Ranks - Rules/FAQ - JCS - Stats - Latest Posts - Color Chart - Smilies
10-17-17 11:29:38 AM

Jul - News - Trump won the election. New poll - New thread - New reply
Pages: 1 2Next newer thread | Next older thread
divingkataetheweirdo

Lantern Ghost
TCRF Super Editor
Level: 51


Posts: 655/763
EXP: 1009099
For next: 4839

Since: 07-09-11


Since last post: 15 days
Last activity: 3 days

Posted on 11-10-16 10:06:08 PM (last edited by divingkataetheweirdo at 11-18-16 03:12:10 AM) Link | Quote
So far, it seems like slightly more people voted for Clinton. However, due to the quirks of the Electoral College, not only has Trump won the presidential election against loads of people's odds (mine not included), but the Republican party now has the majority of both the Senate and the House. Congrats to them.

If the U.S. becomes authoritarian, I won't be shocked.

As you can imagine, loads of non-Trump voters are protesting. En masse. Oh, and attacks on voters, be they pro-Trump or anti-Trump, are becoming a thing.
Cuber456

Melon Bug
Don't mind me. Just passing through.
Level: 50


Posts: 696/747
EXP: 928280
For next: 19037

Since: 02-19-12
From: Everywhere at once.

Since last post: 10 days
Last activity: 2 days

Posted on 11-10-16 10:15:19 PM (last edited by Cuber456 at 11-10-16 10:15:39 PM) Link | Quote
Popular vote doesn't mean much.

The only thing I regret is not placing money on Trump winning.
brian151
Banned
The administration (as well as a few users) have decided that you're creepy/weird enough that it's time to activate the sploded clause.
Laters.


Level: NaN


Posts: 17/-249
EXP: NaN
For next: 0

Since: 08-09-16
From: USA

Since last post: 75 days
Last activity: 48 days

Posted on 11-10-16 10:33:14 PM Link | Quote
The democrats have pushed or prolonged some authoritarian agendas, too...
I don't think the outcome would've been much different with the primarily candidates that we had this time... I for one am tired of this party politics crap. The simple truth is that
A: bad system, George Washington said that, himself (no one listened)
B: when either party has full control too long, bad stuff happens
C: when both have control, NOTHING gets done (in-fighting/gridlock)
D: no longer is the goal for the "common good" it's "for the 'right' party"

Well, whatever...
Guess we'll see what happens

I can say I foresaw these riots and protests happening, but I had hoped they wouldn't... those are not helping anyone, either...

And yeah, popular vote actually doesn't matter because of the electoral college (and probably vote-rigging, also)

I'm also sure many people didn't vote (and maybe never will) after this particular election. Pretty bad that things got so intense BOTH parties split right down the middle. Even those trying to choose the best candidate were literally stuck with the lesser of two evils, asking themselves "who will bring this country down the quickest/slowest?" yep...great options.
divingkataetheweirdo

Lantern Ghost
TCRF Super Editor
Level: 51


Posts: 656/763
EXP: 1009099
For next: 4839

Since: 07-09-11


Since last post: 15 days
Last activity: 3 days

Posted on 11-10-16 10:46:45 PM Link | Quote
I agree that the bipartisan political system is shit for the reasons you said, ihadtnowegtum, as is the Electoral College to some degree. From my POV, loads of people voted for Trump due to A) Wikileaks, B) Backlash against the overwhelming media support for Clinton, C) rural and suburban voters feeling left behind/backstabbed, and D) perceptions of rampant cronyism under the Obama administration and/or the Clinton Foundation.
Drag
2630
Level: 94


Posts: 2618/2635
EXP: 8293222
For next: 63435

Since: 07-03-07


Since last post: 73 days
Last activity: 2 hours

Posted on 11-10-16 11:26:31 PM Link | Quote
I'm not a Trump supporter, and I'm not a Clinton supporter, but I AM a supporter of science and education.

First of all, be critical when watching the news or reading an article. Everyone's afraid of Trump and are fearing the worst, so it's possible that you'll be hearing and reading a lot of things that are being taken out of context or are being blown out of proportion, or otherwise things that are just not the full story. If something seems too perfect or too shocking, chances are, it's not the whole story. Things shared on social media are not reliable to trust.

Anyone who's afraid of laws being overturned and supreme court rulings being reversed, go ask someone who actually studies law, is a real lawyer, or is in law school. Don't turn to reddit or any blogs or whatnot, go find someone who's the real deal, and they'll be able to answer your questions and put things into a more realistic perspective. That's what I did, and everything boiled down to this: the likelihood of laws being overturned is a lot less than you're afraid of, and even in case it happens, the consequences aren't as bad as you're afraid of. For example, it takes a lot to get the SCOTUS to review one of their past rulings, and even when they do, they don't pull full 180s and rule the exact opposite.

Finally, consider this viewpoint for a moment: Everyone who runs for president or gets elected into office is either funded by a PAC, was in office before in some other form, had family who was in office before, etc. This would seem like a machine, and people born into this machine to keep feeding it. Trump was someone who was completely external to this machine, had his own funding, and therefore was free to say anything he wanted, something no other candidate could do. This would've been a refreshing change to lots, and the specific kind of change that some voters were looking for. Trump played a game and he won.

To be clear, that's not my personal viewpoint, but that's what I arrived at when thinking about why he'd get so much support.

Agree or disagree, but he is the next president, and nothing can change it. Presidents are elected every 4 years, and the transfer of power is always peaceful. The fact that you cannot protest Trump getting sworn in is a hidden blessing because it means nobody can protest him getting sworn out in 4 or 8 years.



tl;dr: Stop reading random stuff you find on reddit and social media because it's not the full story. If you're afraid, ask someone in the field who can provide definite and realistic, media-hype-free answers. Although not a great situation, it's not the doomsday scenario everyone's making it out to be. Trump won because he was different from everyone else, and there are voters who saw that as a refreshing change. Nobody can stop him from being sworn in, but be thankful because that means nobody can stop him from being sworn out next election.
Xkeeper






Posted on 11-11-16 02:04:05 PM Link | Quote

Anyone who's afraid of laws being overturned and supreme court rulings being reversed, go ask someone who actually studies law, is a real lawyer, or is in law school. Don't turn to reddit or any blogs or whatnot, go find someone who's the real deal, and they'll be able to answer your questions and put things into a more realistic perspective. That's what I did, and everything boiled down to this: the likelihood of laws being overturned is a lot less than you're afraid of, and even in case it happens, the consequences aren't as bad as you're afraid of. For example, it takes a lot to get the SCOTUS to review one of their past rulings, and even when they do, they don't pull full 180s and rule the exact opposite.


That only works when the court is staffed in a balanced way. Currently, it is 4 conservative, 4 liberal justices. Scalia was the tie-breaker, who usually leaned conservative but rarely would lean across the aisle (see: same-sex marriage).

While it may be "difficult" to have things overturned, the GOP/Republicans control every section of government, including most state governments. This is is in stark contrast to the last years — rather than the constant obstructionism (and very slow progress that came of it), the GOP is now free to rush anything they want through with little resistance.



Everyone who runs for president or gets elected into office is either funded by a PAC, was in office before in some other form, had family who was in office before, etc. This would seem like a machine, and people born into this machine to keep feeding it. Trump was someone who was completely external to this machine, had his own funding, and therefore was free to say anything he wanted, something no other candidate could do. This would've been a refreshing change to lots, and the specific kind of change that some voters were looking for. Trump played a game and he won.


Trump didn't win because he energized anyone. He didn't win because he self-funded. He won because the media let him run loose. They gave him immense free air time, didn't call him out on most of his worst, and treated Clinton as if she had already won. All of his campaign was bullshit, just like his own financing. It was racist, it was sexist, it was pie-in-the-sky promises about how manufacturing jobs were comin' home when none of that is going to happen.

This is before you consider the absolute travesty that was voter suppression this year, with the Voting Rights Act ashed. Tons of people were turned away from being able to vote, skewing the lines even further.

Case in point:


(There is also a lot of argument to be made about Clinton being an absolutely abysmal corporatist candidate, but that doesn't really compare to someone who was literally a sexual abuser.)



Presidents are elected every 4 years, and the transfer of power is always peaceful. The fact that you cannot protest Trump getting sworn in is a hidden blessing because it means nobody can protest him getting sworn out in 4 or 8 years.


Actually, uh, there have been a lot of protests. Turn on the news.

There have been a lot of really bad things happening, too; Trump's open racism and sexism has effectively opened the door for tons of awful people to finally come out of their hiding and start treating people like garbage, justified and emboldened by his being elected.

That's before we get into the faithless elector issue that has been making the rounds. The chances of it happening are basically nil, but with the sheer injustice people are facing w/r/t Trump getting elected, all bets are off.



This also doesn't cover the people that Trump is considering staffing his cabinet with. While Trump himself may be "relatively harmless", the people he's considering absolutely are not, just like his VP. The whole executive branch is going to be incredibly toxic to anybody not a rich straight white male, and the further you deviate from that the more toxic it will be.
Xkeeper






Posted on 11-11-16 02:04:46 PM Link | Quote
It's probably also worth mentioning that Trump actually lost the popular vote, so once again we can blame the electoral college as being a failure of true democracy.
Cuber456

Melon Bug
Don't mind me. Just passing through.
Level: 50


Posts: 697/747
EXP: 928280
For next: 19037

Since: 02-19-12
From: Everywhere at once.

Since last post: 10 days
Last activity: 2 days

Posted on 11-11-16 02:29:10 PM Link | Quote
It's funny how it all worked out into a weird reversal. Democrats are going to hate Trump like Republicans hated Obama.
Xkeeper






Posted on 11-11-16 02:34:28 PM Link | Quote
The (somewhat major) difference is that Obama could not do anything effective or lasting due to a Republican-controlled Congress.

Well, that and Obama didn't literally call an entire race of people rapists and drug dealers.
divingkataetheweirdo

Lantern Ghost
TCRF Super Editor
Level: 51


Posts: 657/763
EXP: 1009099
For next: 4839

Since: 07-09-11


Since last post: 15 days
Last activity: 3 days

Posted on 11-11-16 05:06:23 PM (last edited by divingkataetheweirdo at 11-11-16 05:16:38 PM) Link | Quote
CGP Grey made an update to his electoral college video. Yeah, I still think the electoral college is nonsense.

(EDIT: The reason I did a link to that video instead of a direct embed is that the iframe code doesn't work here and YT has deprecated its Flash embed code completely.)

(EDIT 2: People unironically wishing the US was still part of the British Empire, or least the Commonwealth)
Kles

Level: 82


Posts: 1910/1916
EXP: 5128408
For next: 80819

Since: 07-23-07


Since last post: 73 days
Last activity: 14 hours

Posted on 11-11-16 05:08:05 PM Link | Quote
Aside from the obvious problem that it doesn't do a good job of actually selecting winners, it has the added problem of making 80% of the electorate redundant. It's really unacceptable that it's still in use.
Drag
2630
Level: 94


Posts: 2619/2635
EXP: 8293222
For next: 63435

Since: 07-03-07


Since last post: 73 days
Last activity: 2 hours

Posted on 11-11-16 09:05:27 PM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Xkeeper
That only works when the court is staffed in a balanced way. Currently, it is 4 conservative, 4 liberal justices. Scalia was the tie-breaker, who usually leaned conservative but rarely would lean across the aisle (see: same-sex marriage).

This is true, and there doesn't seem to be evidence that something will upset this. That could change, but remember that everyone has to like the new judge before they're in for good.

While it may be "difficult" to have things overturned, the GOP/Republicans control every section of government, including most state governments. This is is in stark contrast to the last years — rather than the constant obstructionism (and very slow progress that came of it), the GOP is now free to rush anything they want through with little resistance.

This is only if all republicans want the same thing. [This] is a map of states which, prior to the 2015 SCOTUS ruling, allowed or prehibited gay marriage. [This page] contains a breakdown of party control for each state after the 2014 midterm election. There were 31 republican-controlled states, and only 13 states prohibiting gay marriage. Assuming all 13 states were republican, that's still less than half.

Trump didn't win because he energized anyone. He didn't win because he self-funded. He won because the media let him run loose. They gave him immense free air time, didn't call him out on most of his worst, and treated Clinton as if she had already won. All of his campaign was bullshit, just like his own financing. It was racist, it was sexist, it was pie-in-the-sky promises about how manufacturing jobs were comin' home when none of that is going to happen.

His whole campaign centered around how government is broken, and so far, the way events have played out, he's proven it. The electoral college didn't match the popular vote, everyone assumed Trump would lose, nobody took him seriously, and despite all of the extreme hateful things he said, he still got elected.

This is before you consider the absolute travesty that was voter suppression this year, with the Voting Rights Act ashed. Tons of people were turned away from being able to vote, skewing the lines even further.

Case in point:
[turnout in voting]

[Here's the same data of interest], and [here's the page it came from], which has more detail and breakdowns.
There is an overall upward trend, and don't forget, ballots aren't done being counted, and won't be until mid-December. Finally, don't trust things you see on Imgur, because Imgur isn't any more reliable a source than Facebook or Twitter.

(There is also a lot of argument to be made about Clinton being an absolutely abysmal corporatist candidate, but that doesn't really compare to someone who was literally a sexual abuser.)

I agree with this, Trump basically got a free pass in terms of scrutiny, probably because he was almost certainly going to lose.

Actually, uh, there have been a lot of protests. Turn on the news.

Sorry, let me reword what I said; You can protest but you can't prevent Trump's transfer into office, which is good because that means you can't prevent Trump's transfer out of office later.

There have been a lot of really bad things happening, too; Trump's open racism and sexism has effectively opened the door for tons of awful people to finally come out of their hiding and start treating people like garbage, justified and emboldened by his being elected.

That's a legitimate problem that he needs to address. He did kinda make this mess after all...

That's before we get into the faithless elector issue that has been making the rounds. The chances of it happening are basically nil, but with the sheer injustice people are facing w/r/t Trump getting elected, all bets are off.

I don't know anything about this, so I can't comment, this is just here so you know I didn't just skip over it.

This also doesn't cover the people that Trump is considering staffing his cabinet with. While Trump himself may be "relatively harmless", the people he's considering absolutely are not, just like his VP. The whole executive branch is going to be incredibly toxic to anybody not a rich straight white male, and the further you deviate from that the more toxic it will be.

Again, I haven't done any research on this, so I can't comment. The only thing I can think of is to just wait until we see some candidates before stepping into the bunker.
skyu

Level: 16


Posts: 83/83
EXP: 16783
For next: 3473

Since: 06-11-16
From: a grave

Since last post: 339 days
Last activity: 355 days

Posted on 11-11-16 09:24:56 PM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Xkeeper
(There is also a lot of argument to be made about Clinton being an absolutely abysmal corporatist candidate, but that doesn't really compare to someone who was literally a sexual abuser.)

bill clinton still lied about his affairs with white house interns under oath, it really goes both ways
Gabu

Star Mario
Placeholder Ikachan until :effort: is found
Level: 160


Posts: 9577/9695
EXP: 52201191
For next: 751808

Since: 08-10-09
From: Santa Cruisin' USA

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 12 hours

Posted on 11-11-16 10:21:22 PM (last edited by Gabu at 11-11-16 10:23:32 PM) Link | Quote
Originally posted by skyu
Originally posted by Xkeeper
(There is also a lot of argument to be made about Clinton being an absolutely abysmal corporatist candidate, but that doesn't really compare to someone who was literally a sexual abuser.)

bill clinton still lied about his affairs with white house interns under oath, it really goes both ways


Still. Big difference. Also why the hell should Bill's tomfoolery have any sway with how effective of a leader her wife could have been?
Peardian

  
Magikoopa

July 3: KvSG #479 is up!

Level: 146


Posts: 7332/7337
EXP: 38376983
For next: 136311

Since: 08-02-07
From: Isle Delfino

Since last post: 195 days
Last activity: 3 days

Posted on 11-11-16 10:29:48 PM Link | Quote
I was surprised when it happened, but I should have seen it coming. If his blatant and absurd messages weren't enough to deter people from partisanship, I should have known that nothing would. From what I've heard, Trump has already started to back down from the immense promises he's made. In fact, I would be surprised if he gets anything accomplished at all, with or without obstruction.



I never really thought about how broken the system was until I watched this series of videos from Extra Credits, titled Incentive Systems and Politics: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3


It's a look at the US government from the perspective of a game designer, studying the system as if it was the rules for a game. They talk about how the design gives incentives for politicians to polarize the nation. They don't claim to have a perfect answer to fix it, and they even state as much, but it's still very interesting.
Octangula

Level: 7


Posts: 13/14
EXP: 1126
For next: 322

Since: 07-12-16


Since last post: 295 days
Last activity: 8 days

Posted on 11-11-16 11:43:09 PM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Xkeeper
That's before we get into the faithless elector issue that has been making the rounds. The chances of it happening are basically nil, but with the sheer injustice people are facing w/r/t Trump getting elected, all bets are off.

My understanding, based on the way that people are selected to be a part of the Electoral College, is that it's pretty much impossible for this to happen. The people selected are some of the highest ranking lackeys in the parties that they represent... the most trusted to tow the party line.

It's basically a million-to-one shot... except that... unfortunately, honey, we're not in Discworld any more...
brian151
Banned
The administration (as well as a few users) have decided that you're creepy/weird enough that it's time to activate the sploded clause.
Laters.


Level: NaN


Posts: 18/-249
EXP: NaN
For next: 0

Since: 08-09-16
From: USA

Since last post: 75 days
Last activity: 48 days

Posted on 11-12-16 04:30:23 AM Link | Quote
How NOT to get to sleep: read threads like this.

That's a LOT of links and statistics, and I'm not sure I will actually check them all out. In General, I hate this topic because of the stress levels it creates, and how EXCELLENT it is at starting huge arguments, even to which point families are torn-apart. (but, avoiding it is completely impossible)

With all that's happened, I'm not entirely sure who/what I am more absolutely pissed at/about with this whole mess...

1. PEACEFUL Protests? well, I can understand... but there's literally NOTHING that can be done about it. But RIOTS? VANDALISM? BEATING PEOPLE IN THE STREETS? Are we trying to show the Middle East we're just as much terrorists as we say they are? (well, some are... but...yeah)
2. Yep, gov't is broken, has been for decades/centuries
3. "ok, so if the winning candidate turns-out to be pure evil, would I rather live in Soviet Russia or Nazi Germany with ties to the KKK?"
4. As far as politics, media is, and has been out of control for quite some time. Once before they WERE accused of being used to influence that kind of stuff, and I'm pretty sure they still do.
5. "my party is better!" "no, mine is!" "you're is racists!" "well, yours just likes forgiving/paying those who are unworthy!" "yeah, well... yours is plain GREEDY!" "Fuck you!" "you too!" RLY? RLY?!!! such a waste of time and money, when the OBVIOUS solution is to SIT DOWN, TALK, WORK SHIT OUT (like the "mature" adults you all claim to be... )
6. Things were definitely taken out of context, and some simply were not even CLOSE to all of what's going on. This is why HONEST people don't run for office, because someone finds this one mistake, that maybe you don't remember, and that's your un-doing
7. Not only watching party politics split the whole country (GG guys!) , but watching it split the parties, themselves... SICK
8. Every ounce of all the common sense and responsibility that (although my parents don't necessarily believe i have always) just beating me around saying "WHY? this is the EXACT opposite of everything you were taught to believe in and to strive for. how can even a shred of your IQ survive after this?"

As for who/what to trust or not to trust, hard to say... What is important is to do your own research, from reliable sources, etc... (IDK where to begin finding any...) Ironically, I stumbled upon a youtube video saying this exact thing, (iirc, a bdouble0 minecraft video) , and he, himself said that people should listen to the media, and the actors, and the youtubers, nor should THEY be talking about this stuff as if they know everything. He is totally right... IDK how many people heeded is message, there were WONDERFUL little heated debates going on (and people asking who he voted for, which he said HE WOULD NOT SAY for multiple reasons (all of which were justified)) I obviously don't trust the media, and I don't trust any source I could have besides them, since they are influenced by the media. And this is one topic that I'm terrified of trying to do my own research, lest I find-out something I shouldn't, or what I discover is STILL lies...

I do hope some things improve, but I have concerns if at this point, USA can ever recover. There are so many laws that no longer work, or are overly complicated. There are so many politicians that the ONLY way they ever leave office is by death, SERIOUS scandal, or finally retiring cuz they're too damn old. Too much money is tied-up in politics. It is clear the FBI,NSA, and CIA are not to be trusted... Deep-rooted corruption has taken hold, and will be extremely hard to remove, if it's even possible at this point. There's a LOT of shit to clean-up...

As I said, we'll just see what happens. I didn't have much faith in either candidate or the information that could be obtained about them. I will say, those voter statistics are alarming. I can't say I'm surprised, though. People have lost faith in the whole system. (and not even looking at the choice of candidates, the CONFIRMED vote-rigging that's taken place, and the propaganda to brainwash people into voting for one candidate or the other, etc...) When it boils-down to "who is the least likely to have a direct phone-line to Satan?" , why cast any ballet at all? I couldn't justify with myself choosing either. This whole time my brain was constantly questioning if either is trustworthy, and my final "vote" is simply "whoever gets in has my faith and respect if they actually IMPROVE the nation". I could've have lived with myself for choosing some absolutely HORRID person to run the country. Let's just hope SOMETHING productive gets done, but IDK if that will improve voter morale, much. Too many people vote either on the party or false promises, and those that wanted to make the right decision got hit with a SERIOUS blow to the chest in this election.

I think I should go sleep, now...
This is one exhausting topic, as has been an exhausting ordeal. (Oh, and because THIS will help the country... apparently someone is going some fundraiser thing to assassinate Trump... SERIOUSLY?! That won't really help matters, do people WANT civil war? we're already dangerously close if SOMETHING productive doesn't happen in the government... (besides which, collecting funds for and/or planning that is HIGHLY illegal... hope they get caught) My mother apparently stumbled upon that, regrettably...just the thing she wanted to see, she's just as sick of this senseless violence as everyone else left with at least some fraction of a brain) I will be greatly relieved when these protests/riots and shit subside. This is madness... "Welcome to America, don't go out on the streets, and/or endorse/meet/associate with the future president, you will be beaten/shot, or have your stuff vandalized, cuz... people are unable to accept that their candidate lost" yep, what a wonderful thing have to tell people. I'm now utterly terrified for just about everyone I know, and/or myself, because of this nightmare. This is just depressing...

Sorry for the textwalls, I'm not too happy about all the crap that's happened or is going on, and my brain is completely scrambled trying to process how this country would allow it to happen... I can just imagine our founding fathers looking down and crying rivers (literally) ,and probably being EXTREMELY upset that the "great nation" they created has been completely torn-apart over an election...
Triplefox

Level: 5


Posts: 5/5
EXP: 485
For next: 44

Since: 08-16-12
From: inner sunset whut

Since last post: 339 days
Last activity: 4.0 years

Posted on 11-12-16 06:54:48 AM Link | Quote
On protest politics, there is a thriving discourse on the proper form of protest and how to perceive protest, which ultimately depends a bit on how revolutionary your views are and how much you think the protest is being tampered with(usually quite a bit more than you would think at first glace). I am not an expert, but I started observing them with OWS and have absorbed a lot of the main points.

If you are "left moderate or right moderate" (i.e. most liberals, most conservatives) the government is assumed legitimate, therefore the only valid protest is peaceful and law-abiding, and protestors who get beat up got what they deserved. If you are "right authoritarian" you additionally feel it is legitimate to act violently on behalf of established leaders(saddle up and "go get em"). In either case, your response to violence outside the justified zone is to shame it as scary and ineffectual.

Police themselves have a history of being employed primarily for crowd control, and like the military, have developed tactics to push the imagery of protest in their favor whenever they see fit. They are paid, in part, to sit around dreaming up plans for how to pull this off. Hence we should discuss agents provocateur. Police planted in the crowd are a major tool, employed continuously since the 19th century, to de-legitimize protests by nudging them outside authoritarian models, allowing reporting to go in the direction of "they are just smashing stuff for no reason", and draining the crowd's energy with misdirection. A great innovation on just having the cops beat everyone up and having to P.R. their way out of the resulting injury and ill will.

Likewise, the police can make the decision to disengage and allow a situation to develop without their intervention, rather than move in, send warnings, or set up lines of defense. They can justify this at any moment by saying "engaging would have escalated and caused more problems", because sometimes it really would - and so when you combine that with provocateur actions, you have a solid playbook for wearing down any protest group simply by being confusing: alternately pressuring and backing off, instigating "random" violence that serves no purpose, then beating the hardcore stragglers near the end of the night when few people are observing.

Now, let's discuss the actual tactics outside of the authoritarian sphere. Here is where justifications become more self-interested and less in the line of normalizing relations between the people and institutions. Above I never mentioned "left authoritarians", because the goal there is to pressure in a new status quo top down, an outlook which arises frequently in left causes - and one way of creating such pressure is to use violence and cause a revolution. "Black bloc" anarchists are often interested in direct action against specific targets, and will go in for smashing e.g. bank branch windows. Looters are more opportunistic and see a chance to equalize wealth in their favor. There's great leftist theoretical justification made for both of these as some kind of glorious action, which you don't really need to know. The main fact is that it's very destabilizing to business-as-usual, and when you have a big riot, it does, in fact, send a serious message to the government and to businesses to get their shit together and make a concession.

But, of course, most people, most of the time, don't really want a revolution. Revolutions are messy and they only promise a future for people who didn't already have one. And, as such, most violent tactics are likely to be the wrong thing at the wrong time - from the police standpoint, all the more reason to instigate violence. And because the left is never unified on anything, protests tend to have a multitude of tactics.

So, what a healthy protest tends to need most is large turnout from the moderate masses. So many elements of it are about the P.R. game, and streamers often get discouraged from turning their camera on the "wrong thing" - both by the police, and by protestors. Both seeking their goals via authoritarian means, by controlling the message and squashing truth in the process. When the crowd is huge and eager to observe laws, the protest ultimately becomes more truthful all around because such control is impossible.

And, perhaps needless to say, the anti-Trump protests we have right now are big and largely healthy because liberals are shocked and fear the worst. They've been engineered to fear the worst, though, because of how the media operates today. That's part II - on "how I react". I went from moderate dislike towards real worry in the past days, mostly based on what I hear from friends, but in a way that I blame mainly on media.

What media does now is systemically identical to current marketing practice. A demographic - age range, gender, location - is selected, and a model for what stories they will respond to most is drawn up. All news is subsequently pushed through the lens of the story framing in order to maximize engagement. Hence, before his election, Trump is completely demonized by liberal commentators. A day afterwards, embraced and normalized by the exact same commentators, to set the stage for a different framing more akin to the Bush-bashing style of the 2000's, accepting the authority while still taking a derogatory tone. It is spineless, done without respect for facts or actual political leanings. "You find this story scary and shared it with your friends, so here are 50 more like it." Social media simply exaggerates this practice into generating the clickbaitiest story, more intense and shocku than ever. It's really, really bad for civic discourse, and doubly so when you have a candidate like Trump who is eager to play along and maximize the room's energy at the expense of everything else.

I have not even mentioned overt propaganda here, because in a way, I think that's the least of the concerns. The fake news and trolling comments just add a further little nudge on top, but the base of our media system, as it is, wants to be unstable.

Since normalization has already begun, my expectation is that protests will start dropping off quickly - unless the news strongly rekindles liberal fears. We're still untangling the "what kind of president are we actually getting, what kind of Congress are we actually getting" question, and the main thing that is definitely scary in the immediate future is, in essence, ourselves and how the campaign has primed us according to our respective values. Resistance is needed right now because actual fascists, KKK members, etc. are feeling emboldened, and so in that sense the media did a good deed by cranking up the Trump fear so high that the moderates are currently on the lookout.

In any case, these events are still all low-level violence - stuff minorities experienced already, but are seeing a crescendo in now. The thing to watch out for next is the actual policy plans, and what's perhaps most worrisome there is that we can't agree on what is the worst. It would be really straightforward if it were "round them up for the camps", because everyone would at least agree on calling that out - the movement would form itself at the drop of a hat. But it's probably going to be something more complicated, and harder to bring moderates in on.

If there's anything I've learned from anarchists, though, it's to always expect and prepare for a struggle. At any time, no matter who is in power. There is always something worth organizing or protesting over. The media may or may not care about it. They're off doing their own thing. The most honest sources will remain the business section, government press releases, and the streets.
brian151
Banned
The administration (as well as a few users) have decided that you're creepy/weird enough that it's time to activate the sploded clause.
Laters.


Level: NaN


Posts: 19/-249
EXP: NaN
For next: 0

Since: 08-09-16
From: USA

Since last post: 75 days
Last activity: 48 days

Posted on 11-12-16 07:11:43 PM Link | Quote
Can't say I don't question police tactics at times, they are definitely trained to coerce people into saying/doing . (The extent to which probably should be ruled unconstitutional) But, there's no point arguing with anybody over it. One side only sees "cops are evil" , and the other only sees "race/minority card" ... Honestly, that's a very touchy situation.

The thing my mother mentioned, though, THAT is intolerable... My father and I were just as shocked as her to know the site hadn't been taken-down yet... Assassinating Trump also would spark riots. (or worse).

The 'racism' thing, I have overall mixed feelings about. I certainly don't endorse/support the KKK or Neo-Nazi's, but at the most basic level, the GOP does have a point as far as immigration, it's costing the country a LOT of money. At the extreme side, then, yeah, they can be compared to Hitler...

But the extreme liberals aren't any better. They want to spend money we just don't have, and apologize to those who maybe don't deserve it (or that it's a moot point to do so) And they aren't any less capable of creating some authoritarian or fascist regime.

Let's break off from the parties and study some cold, hard, facts, one in particular:
$$$

We elect these people, all of whom (excluding the president) can have an unlimited amount of terms, and who are being paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to make laws. (which tend to be in their favor) They honestly seem to do a lot more of sitting on their ass, or kissing someone's ass, than serving the country. They all are career politicians, and most of them own or are affiliated with a large, or at least, very successful business (which can be either seriously hurt or largely benefited from the laws that are in place at a given time) They're all lawyers (a majority of which cannot be trusted, they are taught to interpret the law in the way that benefits them and/or their clients most) Sure, they write/approve laws that supposedly benefit their party, but they tend to write a whole bunch of extra shit in that benefit them and their buddies, first. Or, they don't even READ the bills, in the case of the Unaffordable Care Act. Their party doesn't matter nearly as much as how much money they can acquire, despite not deserving one cent of it.

If police are used in nefarious ways, then the FBI,NSA,and CIA sure as hell are. Unlike the police, these agencies are nearly immune to the constitution (shouldn't be, but are), are LARGELY secretive, not revealing stuff till 40-50+ YEARS after something happened, excluding when bell-whistlers expose them. They make-up an unbelievable amount of cover stories, and anyone not a part of the brainwashed herd of zombie-sheep knows they're lying through their teeth when they make their "official statement". They have some very dangerous ties to only God knows how many people/organizations, and they (supposedly) answer directly to Congress, the Senate, or the President (not always truthfully).

Supreme Court, it's hard to say. A truly non-partisan individual simply cannot exist. We can only have faith/hope that those people responsible for appointing new justices are accurately evaluating those people, and that furthermore, they aren't able to fool everyone around them. I have yet to meet any form (not just legal types...) of judge with absolutely no bias.

That's about all I can say, my brain is starting to fail me. I question if riots are necessarily healthy when people are being beaten or possibly, killed over an election.

Also, there's a good reason people fear Hillary, too, just saying. This is why the liberals have also split in two... as I said before "Communist Russia or Nazi Germany?" was a very valid question for those who did vote, if truly they cared about the fate of the country.


FieryIce

Baby Mario
不知道该写什么
Level: 111


Posts: 4015/4085
EXP: 14828115
For next: 40245

Since: 12-17-08


Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 12 min.

Posted on 11-12-16 10:34:11 PM Link | Quote
Originally posted by Xkeeper

Anyone who's afraid of laws being overturned and supreme court rulings being reversed, go ask someone who actually studies law, is a real lawyer, or is in law school. Don't turn to reddit or any blogs or whatnot, go find someone who's the real deal, and they'll be able to answer your questions and put things into a more realistic perspective. That's what I did, and everything boiled down to this: the likelihood of laws being overturned is a lot less than you're afraid of, and even in case it happens, the consequences aren't as bad as you're afraid of. For example, it takes a lot to get the SCOTUS to review one of their past rulings, and even when they do, they don't pull full 180s and rule the exact opposite.


That only works when the court is staffed in a balanced way. Currently, it is 4 conservative, 4 liberal justices. Scalia was the tie-breaker, who usually leaned conservative but rarely would lean across the aisle (see: same-sex marriage).


I need to make a quick correction here. Scalia was almost never the tie breaker. He was perhaps the most conservative member of the court. Right now we have 3 conservative justices, 4 liberal justices, and a moderate (Kennedy). Kennedy was the tie breaker most of the time and he tended to vote liberal on social issues and conservative on fiscal issues.

Same-sex marriage won in a 5-4 vote with Kennedy being the tie breaker in favor of gay marriage. If the case had been held today it would have won in a 5-3 vote because Scalia would be out. Trump is highly unlikely to nominate a justice more right-wing than Scalia (I mean, Scalia was crazy right-wing so there's almost no topping that) but if he does, he would only be setting us back to what the court was like just a year ago.

The democrats made a lot of noise about SCOTUS and yes, having another liberal in the court would have been incredible. But Scalia being replaced by another conservative would just be more status quo.

The real danger is another liberal justice retiring within the next 4 years. Ginsburg and Breyer are both really old but they might make it through another 4 years.
Pages: 1 2Next newer thread | Next older thread
Jul - News - Trump won the election. New poll - New thread - New reply




Rusted Logic

Acmlmboard - commit 2f1bc75 [2017-08-27]
©2000-2017 Acmlm, Xkeeper, Inuyasha, et al.

31 database queries, 3 query cache hits.
Query execution time: 0.154118 seconds
Script execution time: 0.021888 seconds
Total render time: 0.176006 seconds