In other words, she's not a proven criminal?

Sure, Trumps a giant asshole. But I think he's coming from a good place with this and actually want's to make a difference.

At worst it's good that he's not some tired political elite just holding the position to benefit the special interests. Trumps his own man I don't think he's gonna be a puppet for anyone.

Semantics buzz. OJ Simpson isn't a murderer either right?

It's proven that Hillary was guilty of things that would have been criminal for any mere mortal, so yes, it is proven

I don't know if O.J. Simpson is a murderer, fuzzy, but it would appear that nobody has been able to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he is. As such, you could hardly claim that he's a "proven murderer."

In your view, is O.J. Simpson a proven murderer?

In other words "fuck you, got mine"


yay 3k posts, should I start a thread or what?

What's wrong with the electoral system? If anything it shows that the electoral system truly gives anyone in the country a systemic path to becoming president, good or bad. That part doesn't need fixing, there was no mass voter disenfranchising going on.

And no one better start with their stupid fucking conspiracy theories either.

Having it be an indirect system that has to go through the electoral college which in turn gives different states different weight in the election and ensure every voter's vote doesn't have the same importance.

Changing that would get rid of the absurd distortion that is the candidate with the majority of votes losing the election.

sincere greetings. you can try a thread, but unfortunately, it seems like all 6 people who currently embody 'board traffic' are only looking at, and replying to, this thread.

Right, but if you understand the concept that this is the united "states"of America, as opposed to the peoples republic of America, then it makes sense. We are a nation of states bound by a set of laws, rather than a group of people within one nation.

Theres nothing wrong with how we elect presidents. It worked fine all throughout the 1800s and 1900s without any wankers bitching about how the process works. Every 4 years, every candidate knows the rules of the game going in. There are no surprises.

Except the system is inherently flawed and unfair. But you're right, why change this old age tradition in exchange for fairness?

Giving power to the people? in the land of the free?!?! BOLLOCKS!!!

a heart that's full up like a landfill, indeed.

Ok well, if you think the process is truly rigged, then there is another process that allows you to change the rigged process. Start a petition, get the attention of your local US Rep, get them to introduce an amendment to the Constitution, lobby 2/3 of the House and Senate to pass it, then lobby 3/4 of states to pass it.

You could be the next person to start a revolution.

so did scotty sell in the morning like he said? just before it went back up?

Hence why I don't attach the term Communist to him lightly.

O'care premiums are skyrocketing on the working class and you can't subsidize your way out of the problem because that money comes from taxes and what's left of the middle class america is just about taxed out of existence.


Technically we'd had universal health care, but it would be paramount to the old soviet eastern bloc ones, where they'd just let old people die in the streets. What's most amazing is the lack of education towards these collectivist centralized authoritarian methods and their utter failure over the last century.

But hey, Hillary was gonna double down on it all and liberals ate it up just like the tens of millions of old soviet style communist who were also too ignorant to understand the demagogic tactics of their rulers.

you're really quite obsessed with communists

I'm a liberal communist fascist libertarian establishment centrist.

That's why I advocated for Clinton.

Don't worry DK, In time you're going to learn how to respect, honor and look up to President Trump.

All the stuff I've seen has Trump winning without Michigan - what am I missing, here.

This lady assigns you to assemble a crack team of progressives to fix the fragmented American Left and save the country. Who do you choose?



Also I'd put Zizek on it so that he would be the guy who ends up dying.

I guess Bernie because Warren has more years left to live.

We need loudmouth obnoxious fatass religious liberals like Michael Moore

The Bill Maher types fuck us

Noam Chomsky might as well be speaking another language

Warren is a woman

I mean MM is Noam Chomsky books translated into something average people understand

I'm saying you should hope so. ;)

Won't happen because Republicans gain the most from the EC. Why would they vote it out when it's helped them gain two presidents in 20 years?

Lol

He said almost everything about everything leading up to this point.

“It’s always good to do things nice and complicated so that nobody can figure it out.” (The New Yorker, May 19, 1997)

“The simplest approach is often the most effective.” (Trump: The Art of the Deal, 1987)

“My attention span is short.” (Trump: Surviving at the Top, 1990)

“I have an attention span that’s as long as it has to be.” (Time, August 18, 2015)

“I’m totally pro-choice.” (Fox News, October 31, 1999)

“I’m pro-life.” (CPAC, February 10, 2011)

“Look, I’m very pro-choice. I hate the concept of abortion. I hate it. I hate everything it stands for. I cringe when I listen to people debating the subject, but you still—I just believe in choice. … I am strongly for choice, and yet I hate the concept of abortion. … I am pro-choice in every respect … but I just hate it.” (NBC News, October 24, 1999)

“I am very, very proud to say that I’m pro-life.” (Cleveland, Ohio, August 6, 2015)

“People are too trusting. I’m a very untrusting guy.” (Playboy, March 1990)

“Expect the best from people.” (Trump: Think Big, 2007)

“If you can avoid an altercation, do so.” (Trump: Think Like a Billionaire, 2004)

“If someone attacks you, do not hesitate. Go for the jugular.” (Trump: Think Big, 2007)

There are a lot of reasons why Trump as president is disturbing

But up against Clinton...I have to say, for me - foreign policy isn't one of them.

Just wanted to put that out there.

Well I did try to tell him that. Twice.

And everyone knows if something is hard to change, it's obviously right.

Yeah, I think one of the reasons the Democratic messaging was bad was because they weren't offering an alternative to Trump's appeal to uneducated white workers left behind by globalisation. They weren't saying, "look, these are the corporations that are fucking you over, and this is how we are going to help you fight back and improve your lot." Instead, it was, "Trump is insane and dumb and bigoted, only dumb people would like him." That was the DNC approach, and the Bill Maher-esque approach. I mean, that stuff is all true, but it offers no reason for these people to join your camp and fight for the cause that will actually benefit them instead. I can't say I'm chastising the Dems for this, because I've essentially been doing the exact same thing until the election results provided a wake-up call.

Cenk Uygar is one of the few leftists who was saying, "look, when you point out how Trump is bigoted and a loudmouth, you're just reinforcing the support of his supporters." Cenk instead tried to go for something that would actually make Trump's supporters abandon him, deflating the illusion Trump is some sort of successful, ambitious strongman who "gets things done." Pointing out his failures, like how all his businesses go belly-up, all the scams he's been involved in, all the times he's defaulted, how he's just a guy who got millions from his daddy and couldn't even manage them right. And his frail ego that causes him to lash out whenever it's slightly bruised.

Michael Moore, too, was another guy who called that this was going to happen, and was warning leftists not to overlook exactly why Trump is winning these people over, telling the Dems that they can't just be an establishment party.


I don't think Chomsky is too academic for regular folks. When you read his stuff, he's actually very anti-elitist and, though he cites facts and evidence impeccably, he does so in very plain language without a lot of jargon. He's very against what he sees as posturing in the academy. He's another guy who saw this coming six years ago. Of course, I don't expect his books to fly off the shelves and for average Americans to read them (most don't even read a book a year, and if they do, it's probably Harry Potter or The Hunger Games or something), but the guy, though being one of the most respected intellectuals of all time, has pretty much been blacklisted by the corporate media.

Chris Hedges a guy who I think has a tendency to "speak another language." I like him, but every time I listen to him, he peppers his speech with some theoretical jargon from Marxism or structuralism or some shit and name drops whatever professor coined the term. "It's post-hegemonic inverted totalitarian industrialism, like Dr. Sheldon Wolin spoke about. It's so obvious that it's occurring now." I dunno, I think a lot of what passes as "theory" in the humanities isn't actually "theory" in any sense I recognize, because there isn't a lot of verifiability, predictive power, or rigour. That's why I've never had much use for "theories" in this area. I prefer the Chomsky-esque approach of just telling it like it is and pointing out what governments and corporations are doing and revealing their lies, rather than having some sort of pseudo-scientific theory that's supposed to explain the world.

Micahel Moore, I've seen maybe a couple of his films, but lost interest, because even though I agree with his positions, he seems to use dishonesty in order to promote them. In both the films of his that I watched, he played around with the facts a little bit in order to support his points. In terms of messaging, though, he knows what he's doing. He's not like Bill Maher, standing on some stage telling everybody they're stupid. That rallies the people already on your side (like, I love watching that sort of shit), but does nothing for the people who aren't. Moore goes and talks to regular Americans, even those who may disagree with him, and tries to start a dialogue. That's what we need.