Pence booed at a performance of Hamilton. The real question is why was he there? Did he think it was about George Hamilton? 

 

http://www.vox.com/culture/2016/11/19/13683864/mike-pence-hamilton-booed-clip

3 hours ago, DRW50 said:

It's less about a change election than about campaigns and reading the pulse of the country. I think Hillary had the right message in many ways but was the wrong candidate in the wrong year. Dukakis was running as a change candidate after 8 years of the same and he lost. W was doing the same and would have lost if not for SCOTUS rigging. 

 

I am not really sure what Hillary's message was.   She said Trump didn't have the temperament,  but she didn't really address anything that was on the voters minds, clearly,    Where was she on Obamacare or the economy.   It has been consistent for years that a good half of the country didn't like Obamacare, and some with good reason.   She ignored that.  She wasn't interested in discussing that subject and that seems to have been the one of the key issues.   The sad irony for Hillary was of all people it was a Clinton who forgot "the economy, stupid".   Miss Universe, the Gold Star family....they seemed like such great topics at the time but it was just smoke and mirrors for the real issue, which because of her ties to Obama was an issue she really couldn't address.    And maybe she should have since jobs have been picking up and wall street is booming and made her pitch.    We know what she will do for gay rights, abortion rights, civil rights, muslim refugees seeking asylum, latinos here illegally looking to come out of hiding, all very nice, but what was her plan for the guy making $50,000 a year struggling to pay his premiums?

 

 

22 minutes ago, quartermainefan said:

 

I am not really sure what Hillary's message was.   She said Trump didn't have the temperament,  but she didn't really address anything that was on the voters minds, clearly,    Where was she on Obamacare or the economy.   It has been consistent for years that a good half of the country didn't like Obamacare, and some with good reason.   She ignored that.  She wasn't interested in discussing that subject and that seems to have been the one of the key issues.   The sad irony for Hillary was of all people it was a Clinton who forgot "the economy, stupid".   Miss Universe, the Gold Star family....they seemed like such great topics at the time but it was just smoke and mirrors for the real issue, which because of her ties to Obama was an issue she really couldn't address.    And maybe she should have since jobs have been picking up and wall street is booming and made her pitch.    We know what she will do for gay rights, abortion rights, civil rights, muslim refugees seeking asylum, latinos here illegally looking to come out of hiding, all very nice, but what was her plan for the guy making $50,000 a year struggling to pay his premiums?

 

 

I get what you're saying. I think part of the problem is hard truths. Manufacturing jobs and coal jobs aren't coming back. I'm sure Trump believes he can do anything so he probably does think he can stop it (as he seems to think he stopped Ford from moving part of their plant to Mexico), but I don't know if anyone would have believed Hillary if she tried that. I think she didn't want to be honest about these things or about Obamacare (that it's always had problems, problems made worse by the Republicans, and it will likely be phased out or made into a whisper of a nothing). She probably should have been, and tried to talk about actual plans, but many just don't want to hear it. It's like Jimmy Carter. He was honest and he was pilloried for it. 

With all the talk about how to appeal to working class voters I've found this essay really interesting.

 

http://forsetti.tumblr.com/post/153181757500/on-rural-america-understanding-isnt-the-problem

 

"The real problem isn’t east coast elites don’t understand or care about rural America.  The real problem is rural America doesn’t understand the causes of their own situations and fears and they have shown no interest in finding out.  They don’t want to know why they feel the way they do or why they are struggling because the don’t want to admit it is in large part because of choices they’ve made and horrible things they’ve allowed themselves to believe."

I agree with some of the idea but it goes too far into projection. Some of the worst racists out there live in big cities and on the coasts.

 

You can't reach most of the rural voters - there's no denying that. And there's no denying that many of them are prejudiced in myriad ways, and thanks to the echo chamber of today, feel no compulsion to ever question anything they believe. Democrats shouldn't chase after these voters. They also shouldn't pat them on the head and go on about understanding and a big tent. Yet just blithely dismissing millions of voters for a fantasy world of liberal superiority doesn't work either. The support behind Bernie Sanders shows just how much bigotry and thinly veiled contempt and the power of groupthink can influence many who are supposedly more educated and in more diverse areas. The truth is that many women in rural areas have no way out but marriage. Many men in rural areas can't afford college, and I'd imagine that if they did get the chance, they might think of the men (or women) they know who did go to college and probably aren't any better off than they are. This isn't 1996, or even 2006. The question I'd ask this guy is how he explains those who have gone to college, have made their own choices, live in places full of diversity, and are still bigots, still smug and sure in their iron-gate minds. What do we say to them? Because I really do think these people are a huge reason why Hillary lost. The "both are bad" and the need to be morally superior above all else. The Bernie types, and the types who voted for that idiot Jill Stein. 

 

I saw some gushy New Yorker article about a Bernie Bros podcast, Chapo something, full of guys who brag about how white they are and talk about "retard" and how "gay" something is and about the horrors of Hillary, and they were so smug, so sure of themselves, getting big attention and credibility because they were going to be there as a big liberaler-than-thou check on President Hillary. And she lost, and they were blindsided. Did they really question themselves? No. They just went on to talk sh!t about how  terrible she and the Democrats are. It's easy for them, because they always get to be right. And being rich white men, they never have to worry about the times that they're wrong. 

I generally think he's a bit of a pompous bore who is also clearly caught up in his own image, but I agreed with some of what Jon Stewart said. 

 

 

Edited November 19, 20169 yr by DRW50

2 hours ago, DRW50 said:

Pence booed at a performance of Hamilton. The real question is why was he there? Did he think it was about George Hamilton? 

 

http://www.vox.com/culture/2016/11/19/13683864/mike-pence-hamilton-booed-clip

 

He also got lectured delivered by the actor who played Aaron Burr, sir.

 

Attending a musical where one of the most popular songs features the lyric "Immigrants, we get the job done" when your running mate wants to deport millions and build a wall.

Also, being known as a homophobic man and governor of a state that had a huge HIV outbreak due to what can be desribed as negligence (among other things) attending a musical where the main character is played by a gay, HIV+ actor.

 

That Pence is that clueless should worry folks.

6 hours ago, DRW50 said:

It's less about a change election than about campaigns and reading the pulse of the country. I think Hillary had the right message in many ways but was the wrong candidate in the wrong year. Dukakis was running as a change candidate after 8 years of the same and he lost. W was doing the same and would have lost if not for SCOTUS rigging. 

 

I'm not too hopeful about the attention span of some of the populace.

 

I was just reading about the $25 million settlement that Trump paid for the Trump University fraud case after Donald Trump vehemently vowed to fight it and not settle (out of principle) and after insulting a federal judge, Judge Curiel. There are people posting messages claiming not to have known about this case and blaming the media for not getting the message out. I know the media has been derelict in many areas but I've read about this case for months!

 

Are these fools serious??!

 

 

2 minutes ago, DramatistDreamer said:

 

I'm not too hopeful about the attention span of some of the populace.

 

I was just reading about the $25 million settlement that Trump paid for the Trump University fraud case after Donald Trump vehemently vowed to fight it and not settle (out of principle) and after insulting a federal judge, Judge Curiel. There are people posting messages claiming not to have known about this case and blaming the media for not getting the message out. I know the media has been derelict in many areas but I've read about this case for months!

 

Are these fools serious??!

 

 

Were these Trump voters? I doubt most of his voters would care either way. 

 

I do think that the media never really devoted enough time to how serious these scandals were and instead just went for easier and in their minds likely more juicy stories (like WILL HILLARY BE INDICTED), but they did cover this, I agree. 

 

One of the biggest problems with basing so much of the campaign on Trump the way Democrats did was that it all became numbing. I already mentioned this but a week before the election I saw an ad that was just a minute or a minute and a half of him saying terrible things. It just ended up canceling each other out. And I was someone who was voting against him, with no hesitation. I can't imagine how a swing voter or reluctant Trump voter may have reacted.

30 minutes ago, DRW50 said:

 

Were these Trump voters? I doubt most of his voters would care either way. 

 

I do think that the media never really devoted enough time to how serious these scandals were and instead just went for easier and in their minds likely more juicy stories (like WILL HILLARY BE INDICTED), but they did cover this, I agree. 

 

One of the biggest problems with basing so much of the campaign on Trump the way Democrats did was that it all became numbing. I already mentioned this but a week before the election I saw an ad that was just a minute or a minute and a half of him saying terrible things. It just ended up canceling each other out. And I was someone who was voting against him, with no hesitation. I can't imagine how a swing voter or reluctant Trump voter may have reacted.

 

Between Russian trolls posing as Yankee doodle Americans, conservatives claiming to have voted for Obama last time around and Bernie bros, who knows who posts these things??  

Anyway, it doesn't matter at this point. Clearly, facts and where they came from, didn't matter in this particular election.

 

Wow.

A Jewish rights leader says he will register as a Muslim if Trump sets up his Muslim registry.https://t.co/xPsUhhRmby pic.twitter.com/05ZkgFsqvt

— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) November 19, 2016

The biggest problem with democrats & liberals has ALWAYS been NOT listening to people of color.

2 minutes ago, DeeeDee said:

The biggest problem with democrats & liberals has ALWAYS been NOT listening to people of color.

Until they need something and it's too late. HRC didn't seem to do this until columns started to come out about it during the primaries. 

4 hours ago, quartermainefan said:

 

I am not really sure what Hillary's message was.   She said Trump didn't have the temperament,  but she didn't really address anything that was on the voters minds, clearly,    Where was she on Obamacare or the economy.   It has been consistent for years that a good half of the country didn't like Obamacare, and some with good reason.   She ignored that.  She wasn't interested in discussing that subject and that seems to have been the one of the key issues.   The sad irony for Hillary was of all people it was a Clinton who forgot "the economy, stupid".   Miss Universe, the Gold Star family....they seemed like such great topics at the time but it was just smoke and mirrors for the real issue, which because of her ties to Obama was an issue she really couldn't address.    And maybe she should have since jobs have been picking up and wall street is booming and made her pitch.    We know what she will do for gay rights, abortion rights, civil rights, muslim refugees seeking asylum, latinos here illegally looking to come out of hiding, all very nice, but what was her plan for the guy making $50,000 a year struggling to pay his premiums?

 

 

I thought her message was about coming together. I don't recall her talking about Obamacare too much, other than saying they were going to fix it, and I agree she should have addressed that.

 

But the rallies I watched online from the summer were focused on the economy and she explained what she was going to do. I didn't understand it though. I had assumed people with background knowledge would. But maybe she was "too smart" sounding, and so people checked out. Or maybe people didn't even know she was discussing it because her rallies were rarely covered.

 

At one point during the primaries, she talked about coal mining jobs not coming back and got a lot of heat for that, so that may be one reason she didn't get into that again. She talked about offering solutions to that, but the "coal miners going out of business" is what got the attention, so I could see why she stayed focused on the economy in general and not these kind of jobs that were never coming back. 

 

I read an interesting tweet storm of people who were polled in PA, WI, and MI. According to the data, those who voted Trump saw immigration and terrorism as most important issues. Those who voted Hillary saw foreign policy and economy as most important. You'd think Trump would have been associated with the economy based on election results...

 

1 hour ago, DRW50 said:

 

Were these Trump voters? I doubt most of his voters would care either way. 

 

I do think that the media never really devoted enough time to how serious these scandals were and instead just went for easier and in their minds likely more juicy stories (like WILL HILLARY BE INDICTED), but they did cover this, I agree. 

 

One of the biggest problems with basing so much of the campaign on Trump the way Democrats did was that it all became numbing. I already mentioned this but a week before the election I saw an ad that was just a minute or a minute and a half of him saying terrible things. It just ended up canceling each other out. And I was someone who was voting against him, with no hesitation. I can't imagine how a swing voter or reluctant Trump voter may have reacted.

 

Did TV networks cover Trump U/fraud? I read about it online but only from pro Hillary or anti Trump Twitter/Tumblr accounts.

 

I also know that Hillary campaign had online ads about it. I always thought she had too many Trump ads and should have aired the ads from pre and during primaries. They were very positive.

 

But then someone from another site who lives in a swing state said they actually saw an equal amount of positive and negative ads. 

 

What do you mean "it" canceled each other out?

 

Edited November 19, 20169 yr by Ms. Quartermaine

4 hours ago, DRW50 said:

Pence booed at a performance of Hamilton. The real question is why was he there? Did he think it was about George Hamilton? 

 

http://www.vox.com/culture/2016/11/19/13683864/mike-pence-hamilton-booed-clip

 

Do I really have to dismiss my Mike Pence-is-in-the-closet theory?  Can't I keep it on the back burner for a little while longer?  Pretty please?

4 hours ago, quartermainefan said:

The sad irony for Hillary was of all people it was a Clinton who forgot "the economy, stupid".

 

She didn't forget.  The people she listened to (over even Bill's objections) did.  The same people who refused to neutralize the "damn e-mails" by dealing with it head-on.  I mean, Richard Nixon's "Checkers speech" was total b.s., and yet, it still came across to the American people as an otherwise dishonest politician attempting some candor.  Hillary needed a "Checkers speech."

4 hours ago, marceline said:

With all the talk about how to appeal to working class voters I've found this essay really interesting.

 

http://forsetti.tumblr.com/post/153181757500/on-rural-america-understanding-isnt-the-problem

 

"The real problem isn’t east coast elites don’t understand or care about rural America.  The real problem is rural America doesn’t understand the causes of their own situations and fears and they have shown no interest in finding out.  They don’t want to know why they feel the way they do or why they are struggling because the don’t want to admit it is in large part because of choices they’ve made and horrible things they’ve allowed themselves to believe."

That hits the nail RIGHT on the head. I told a former co-worker on facebook when she mentioned voting for Trump that she was voting against her own best interest, she had JUST retired, and I told her that her vote for Regan 35 years ago is the reason she is  paying taxes on her social security TODAY. There was silence.

 

3 hours ago, DRW50 said:

I agree with some of the idea but it goes too far into projection. Some of the worst racists out there live in big cities and on the coasts.

 

You can't reach most of the rural voters - there's no denying that. And there's no denying that many of them are prejudiced in myriad ways, and thanks to the echo chamber of today, feel no compulsion to ever question anything they believe. Democrats shouldn't chase after these voters. They also shouldn't pat them on the head and go on about understanding and a big tent. Yet just blithely dismissing millions of voters for a fantasy world of liberal superiority doesn't work either. The support behind Bernie Sanders shows just how much bigotry and thinly veiled contempt and the power of groupthink can influence many who are supposedly more educated and in more diverse areas. The truth is that many women in rural areas have no way out but marriage. Many men in rural areas can't afford college, and I'd imagine that if they did get the chance, they might think of the men (or women) they know who did go to college and probably aren't any better off than they are. This isn't 1996, or even 2006. The question I'd ask this guy is how he explains those who have gone to college, have made their own choices, live in places full of diversity, and are still bigots, still smug and sure in their iron-gate minds. What do we say to them? Because I really do think these people are a huge reason why Hillary lost. The "both are bad" and the need to be morally superior above all else. The Bernie types, and the types who voted for that idiot Jill Stein. 

 

I saw some gushy New Yorker article about a Bernie Bros podcast, Chapo something, full of guys who brag about how white they are and talk about "retard" and how "gay" something is and about the horrors of Hillary, and they were so smug, so sure of themselves, getting big attention and credibility because they were going to be there as a big liberaler-than-thou check on President Hillary. And she lost, and they were blindsided. Did they really question themselves? No. They just went on to talk sh!t about how  terrible she and the Democrats are. It's easy for them, because they always get to be right. And being rich white men, they never have to worry about the times that they're wrong. 

I generally think he's a bit of a pompous bore who is also clearly caught up in his own image, but I agreed with some of what Jon Stewart said. 

 

 

Carl, I disagree with you about democrats not chasing rural voters. Bill Clinton won these voters quite handily in 1996, it's not hard to do, all you do is don't position yourself as an elitist (Bill Clinton had this "Bubba" persona) and leave their guns alone, and you'll get them. I want you to consider this: In my county, Hillary only got 27% of the vote, and in 2012 Obama got 42%. Much of these people are stupid as hell, and easily manipulated, Democrats need to use that to their advantage. These low information voters brought EVERYTHING they had and still were only able to win the electoral college, and only by a razor thin margin. The demographics are against them, it won't take much to bury them.... but that means black voters have to turn out (although the closing of polling places has made that much more difficult) and millenials need to stop using their vote as a statement, and be pragmatic for once in their lives.

Edited November 19, 20169 yr by alphanguy74

How beautiful is it that Mike Pence getting his ass handed to him at "Hamilton" is the biggest news story in America right now?