Support NeoGAF

[PowerTaxi]

Korean in the 70s, and Japan for the past 20+ years. Well, Japan has been basically build infrastructure and buildings we may not need to give people jobs to spend money, which didn't work because people were afraid of spending money due to the continued recession.

But the South Korean government in the 70s basically bank-rolled white goods and building material companies to kick-start their economy post Korean War.

(I did an undergrad essay on Korean economy, and took Post War Japan as a module during my degree. )



He hates abortion, so the Irish government will love him.

(Meant to be a joke, but fuck me it's not funny is it?)

Part of me is hoping the Irish government collapses every Paddy's day for the next 4 years. Seeing the Enda Kenny/Trump photos is gonna be painful.

I'm not actually serious but fuck...

 

[Zukkoyaki]

For the love of god get Kander involved in a DNC overhaul. Dude is a god damn gem.

 

[Barzul]

I'm think the big takeaways are

• -Find someone young-ish, attractive, who can orate and communicate well and hasn't taken too many contradictory positions in the past
• -They don't have to be an outsider but its better if they haven't been in bed with institutions that many voters have come to mistrust like Wall Street
• -Don't take any Blue state for granted (except the West Coast and DC/Tri-State areas)
• -DO NOT throw minorities under the bus. Keep saying BLM, just not if you're campaigning in the middle of Appalachia
• -I think the only issue that may be worth considering moderation on is the gun issue? Or at least appear more moderate - I think things like at least background checks et al are important.
• -Don't assume people will not vote for human garbage
• -Nail Trump to the wall for every promise he has failed to keep or how little of an outsider he will turn out to be
• -Overhaul the DNC, get some new blood, hit the ground running for the mid-terms.

Anything else?

People won't vote for Human garbage, a lot of them just happened to think Clinton met the criteria for that too. It Human garbage vs human garbage for two different electorates.

 

[sphagnum]

I didn't dig your American hole. I'm just an outsider looking in at your mess.

By you guys I mean liberals.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

I'm think the big takeaways are

• -Find someone young-ish, attractive, who can orate and communicate well and hasn't taken too many contradictory positions in the past
• -They don't have to be an outsider but its better if they haven't been in bed with institutions that many voters have come to mistrust like Wall Street
• -Don't take any Blue state for granted (except the West Coast and DC/Tri-State areas)
• -DO NOT throw minorities under the bus. Keep saying BLM, just not if you're campaigning in the middle of Appalachia
• -I think the only issue that may be worth considering moderation on is the gun issue? Or at least appear more moderate - I think things like at least background checks et al are important.
• -Don't assume people will not vote for human garbage
• -Nail Trump to the wall for every promise he has failed to keep or how little of an outsider he will turn out to be
• -Overhaul the DNC, get some new blood, hit the ground running for the mid-terms.

Anything else?

Nope, these are my thoughts as well.

Don't assume people will not vote for human garbage

Is super important. We thought we could win no matter how bad things got because who the heck would vote for Trump. Turns out normal GOP people do. But nobody votes for Hillary and we lose.

When people were saying "I don't vote AGAINST someone, I vote FOR them" we laughed and mocked them.

Kander

KANDER

Yea, I'm hopping on the Kander train.

Dude could be Obama 2.0 if he works at it.

 

[shinra-bansho]

By you guys I mean liberals.

Sorry we didn't kumbayah into the socialist paradise early enough.

 

[newshinycd]

Apparently McConnel isn't even going to allow Trump's infrastructure law to be put to vote.

I think these next four years are going to show some serious division in the GOP.

I think it was Erickson that said something along the lines of "with President Trump the GOP wasn't fracturing but instead the Democrats are."

Which couldn't be further from the truth. Democrats were just lazy/overconfident/pouting.
The onus is now on the GOP. Which is why I think they keep the filibuster. If they nuke it, they no longer have a scapegoat. Now America will really see who the GOP is.

 

[tuffy]

I'm think the big takeaways are

• -Find someone young-ish, attractive, who can orate and communicate well and hasn't taken too many contradictory positions in the past
• -They don't have to be an outsider but its better if they haven't been in bed with institutions that many voters have come to mistrust like Wall Street
• -Don't take any Blue state for granted (except the West Coast and DC/Tri-State areas)
• -DO NOT throw minorities under the bus. Keep saying BLM, just not if you're campaigning in the middle of Appalachia
• -I think the only issue that may be worth considering moderation on is the gun issue? Or at least appear more moderate - I think things like at least background checks et al are important.
• -Don't assume people will not vote for human garbage
• -Nail Trump to the wall for every promise he has failed to keep or how little of an outsider he will turn out to be
• -Overhaul the DNC, get some new blood, hit the ground running for the mid-terms.

Anything else?

I'd also add that a more intelligent candidate is preferable to a more experienced one. As we've discovered, Hillary's long experience in Washington came with a lot of inescapable baggage that we'd best avoid going forward. Contrast it with Obama who was smart enough to figure out what needed to be done without a lengthy political career behind him.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

I think it was Erickson that said something along the lines of "with President Trump the GOP wasn't fracturing but instead the Democrats are."

Which couldn't be further from the truth. Democrats were just lazy/overconfident/pouting.
The onus is now on the GOP. Which is why I think they keep the filibuster. If they nuke it, they no longer have a scapegoat. Now America will really see who the GOP is.

Yep, I'm still going to keep on believing the GOP is a dying party that time will not be kind to. Nothing about this election changed that for me. This was a failure by the Democrats, not a huge shift to the Republicans.

 

[Doc Holliday]

From a quick look trade adjustment assistance last year was voted down by both Republicans and Democrats together. Only 40 Democratic congresspeople voted for it. 86 Republicans voted for it.

There was more to that just a vote on the taa, Republicans combined combined that with something in order to kill it. I forget exactly how that went but it wasn't as black and white as you make it seem.

 

[Leninpest]

I'm think the big takeaways are

• -I think the only issue that may be worth considering moderation on is the gun issue? Or at least appear more moderate - I think things like at least background checks et al are important.

Anything else?

I think this one is interesting because there is broad appeal to some form of gun control, but I think the dems ultimately have sent the wrong message most of the time. Universal background checks are liked by almost everyone, but using phrases like "assault weapons" (which doesn't have a clear definition), banning pistol grips (which only change the form factor, not the actual use of the gun), and proposing a ban to people on the terror watch list (a list which has no oversight and includes a number of people not charged with terrorism) makes the appeal to rural voters so much harder. It reinforces the stereotype that east-coast liberals don't understand what they're trying to legislate and are just trying to hurt rural voters.

 

[sphagnum]

Sorry we didn't kumbayah into the socialist paradise early enough.

Apology accepted.

 

[shinra-bansho]

There was more to that just a vote on the taa, Republicans combined combined that with something in order to kill it. I forget exactly how that went but it wasn't as black and white as you make it seem.

Fast track authority.

The administration worked with Republican leaders in the House, where the liberal members are more liberal and the conservative members more conservative, to devise a different strategy of vote-splitting. TAA and TPA would be voted on separately, with passage of TPA contingent on successful passage of TAA. That way, theoretically, Democrats could supply most votes for TAA while voting against TPA, while Republicans could largely vote against TAA — which they consider welfare — and supply the votes for TPA. But House Democrats weren’t willing to play along. They voted in droves against TAA for the purpose of killing TPA.

 

[Hindl]

Apparently McConnell isn't even going to allow Trump's infrastructure law to be put to vote.

I think these next four years are going to show some serious division in the GOP. All three branches of the federal government think they have a blank check to do what they want. But all three also have their own internal politics and issues that the other branches do not want. What's going to happen when Ryan opposes the wall and never allows it on the floor? Or McConnell won't allow the Senate to vote for Trump's infrastructure. Or when they find out Obamacare can't be repealed as easily as they think. Or when they approve TPP in the lame duck.

On the one hand I'm hopeful this will happen, and they eat themselves. But he just delivered everything they wanted to them. And his base is clearly more loyal to him than them. So assuming they even want to go against him, will they have the courage to do it and face getting primaried by his supporters?

You people are dreadfully optimistic of a turn on Trump.
When he can just find another group to scapegoat.
They bought his lies before.

Worried about this too.

Kander

Maybe if he won the election this year

 

[benjipwns]

Yes, Whitewater. But I'm wondering if the President could just excuse himself from any criminal charges?

I suppose theoretically he could pardon himself.

 

[Pixieking]

Yep, I'm still going to keep on believing the GOP is a dying party that time will not be kind to. Nothing about this election changed that for me. This was a failure by the Democrats, not a huge shift to the Republicans.

Yeah, the GOP imploding is still a thing... If we're lucky, it'll happen sooner rather than later (like, the next few months). If Trump wants to run again in 2020, then the Dem base will be motivated to fuck, and the GOP will have to decide if they want to risk what should've happened now, happening then. People stressing about losing the WH for 8 years are... *ahem* bedwetting.

Kander

Maybe if he won the election this year

Nah, he's still good. Trump showed you don't need to be in politics already to get President, and losing the Senate race means Kander can keep his outsider status, or work the DNC.

 

[Crocodile]

I think this one is interesting because there is broad appeal to some form of gun control, but I think the dems ultimately have sent the wrong message most of the time. Universal background checks are liked by almost everyone, but using phrases like "assault weapons" (which doesn't have a clear definition), banning pistol grips (which only change the form factor, not the actual use of the gun), and proposing a ban to people on the terror watch list (a list which has no oversight and includes a number of people not charged with terrorism) makes the appeal to rural voters so much harder. It reinforces the stereotype that east-coast liberals don't understand what they're trying to legislate and are just trying to hurt rural voters.

I would think "terroists or those we think are terrorists for legit reasons shouldn't be able to buy guns" makes sense to everybody? You can argue how legit the terrorist watchlist is but do most people care if it kind of has a wonky basis?

 

[balladofwindfishes]

Yeah, the GOP imploding is still a thing... If we're lucky, it'll happen sooner rather than later (like, the next few months). If Trump wants to run again in 2020, then the Dem base will be motivated to fuck, and the GOP will have to decide if they want to risk what should've happened now, happening then. People stressing about losing the WH for 8 years are... *ahem* bedwetting.

We have to make absolutely sure we do not run someone like Kerry, though.

We need to put out our best and always assume, going in, that we are on the offense and never take a win for granted.

 

[Brawly Likes to Brawl]

You people are dreadfully optimistic of a turn on Trump.
When he can just find another group to scapegoat.
They bought his lies before.

Some people are going to cling to the pivot meme well into 2020

 

[Pixieking]

We have to make absolutely sure we do not run someone like Kerry, though.

We need to put out our best and always assume, going in, that we are on the offense and never take a win for granted.

Yeah. And communicate that to the Dem base!

 

[Hydrophobic]

Did McConnel say what he opposes about the infrastructure bill? Or does he just hate the idea of rebuilding our national infrastructure?

 

[Debirudog]

i don't see the GOP splitting apart anytime soon. Three branches covered in red.

We need a charismatic individual. If only de-aging was a thing so Biden could run.

 

[Grief.exe]

Did McConnel say what he opposes about the infrastructure bill? Or does he just hate the idea of rebuilding our national infrastructure?

Republicans have always opposed this kind of spending.

Doesn't put money in the pockets of their donors, they believe in supply side economics not demand side, don't care about these kind of jobs.

 

[neurosisxeno]

Republicans have always opposed this kind of spending.

Doesn't put money in the pockets of their donors, they believe in supply side economics not demand side, don't care about these kind of jobs.

That's mostly it. Infrastructure Plans are Keynesian-friendly and Republicans oppose them because they think only the Private Sector should create jobs.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

i don't see the GOP splitting apart anytime soon. Three branches covered in red.

We need a charismatic individual. If only de-aging was a thing so Biden could run.

The GOP was fracturing when they dominated two branches of government. They'll continue to fracture between the moderates and the tea party. Maybe even faster now as the tea power gained a ton of power via Trump. There were a ton of moderate Republican law makers who hated Trump and didn't want to see him be president and were hoping he lost.

Trump has a lot of weird proposals that even a GOP congress won't touch (having to remove two regulations to pass one? That's literally impossible to implement), and that's going to cause friction. And we know with friction, Trump escalates things. And what happens when Trump says "I want this passed. If you don't, I will veto everything" and the thing he wants passed is a catastrophic failure that will cost GOP seats?

When has Trump ever went along with something he didn't want to do or didn't agree with? When has he ever taken "no" as an answer?

 

[Leninpest]

I would think "terroists or those we think are terrorists for legit reasons shouldn't be able to buy guns" makes sense to everybody? You can argue how legit the terrorist watchlist is but do most people care if it kind of has a wonky basis?

This is the issue. It doesn't make sense to base it off of a list that has no oversight. I agree that terrorists shouldn't have guns, but I think we need to explain why we think certain people are dangerous. We've had the issue since the Bush years that "terrorist" means "Muslim" to a lot of people and that the FBI is no exception. I'll admit that this one is more of a criticism from the left as I imagine a lot of republicans wouldn't mind banning Muslims from owning guns. (but this also ties back to the Democrats being misaligned with the Left in certain ways)

 

[benjipwns]

Republicans have always opposed this kind of spending.

Doesn't put money in the pockets of their donors

Since when?

 

[A Human Becoming]

I hope Democrats don't give up in Arizona and Georgia: they've made a lot of progress.

 

[Doc Holliday]

Republicans have always opposed this kind of spending.

Doesn't put money in the pockets of their donors, they believe in supply side economics not demand side, don't care about these kind of jobs.

correction, they were against these bills because they would have helped obama. I have no doubt that would probably pass something like this because it would help the economy and their base and get all the credit.

Republicans only have qualms about spending when a democrat is in charge.

 

[neurosisxeno]

Since when?

Eisenhower was the last Republican I can think of that invest heavily in infrastructure, and he had to disguise it as a military investment.

 

[benjipwns]

I meant since when doesn't it put money in the pocket of their donors.

 

[Hindl]

The GOP was fracturing when they dominated two branches of government. They'll continue to fracture between the moderates and the tea party. Maybe even faster now as the tea power gained a ton of power via Trump. There were a ton of moderate Republican law makers who hated Trump and didn't want to see him be president and were hoping he lost.

Trump has a ton of weird proposals that even a GOP congress won't touch, and that's going to cause friction. And we know with friction, Trump escalates things. And what happens when Trump says "I want this passed. If you don't, I will veto everything" and the thing he wants passed is a catastrophic failure that will cost GOP seats?

When has Trump ever went along with something he didn't want to do or didn't agree with? When has he ever taken "no" as an answer?

I'm more concerned with when there's friction, Trump won't go "I'll veto everything". He'll make a bid to assume complete power. That's my worry, and I know there's checks and balances against it, but he's defied all odds so far.

I hope Democrats don't give up in Arizona and North Carolina: they've made a lot of progress.

And Texas. Florida was hopeful too, the rural vote was just too high. My hope is that if Trump doesn't improve things, the rural whites in the panhandle will be less enthused once they have a body of work to judge on. May be too hopeful though, but you can see how the new Democratic map will eventually flow through the Southwest and mid-atlantic. Just gotta stop the hemorrhaging in the Rust Belt, which, given was lost by 110K, isn't impossible.

 

[Blader]

I'm not getting on the Kander train, not yet anyway. I think the guy still has a sunny future in the Democratic party, but come on, he just lost his race! This isn't even Obama, who was green when he started running but could at least point to having been in the Senate for two years. And you can say, well his lack of experience fits in the anti-establishment mood perfectly, but: a) who's to say this anti-establishment mood is going to the tenor of the next campaign?; and b) I think it's too easy for someone like Trump to mock Kander as being a loser, because, well, he was!

Apparently McConnell isn't even going to allow Trump's infrastructure law to be put to vote.

Jesus Christ. An infrastructure bill is maybe the only good thing I can see coming out of the next four years.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

These aren't statements by a GOP that is confident Trump will do what they want and that they will do everything he wants

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) cautioned today that it would be a "mistake" for the Republican majority to "misread your mandate" and "think it's going to be forever."

"Nothing is forever in this country. We have an election every two years right on schedule. We have had since 1788. And so I don't think we should act as if we're going to be in the majority forever," McConnell told reporters in a news conference to discuss election results.

They also aren't from a party that will remove the filibuster (they outright admit they won't the majority for very long). He also dodged the question on if he'd put a wall up to vote (he likely won't).

There's going to be friction. Not on everything. But, by the looks of it, on key points of Trump's campaign. Things Trump wants to see passed as his accomplishments. When the Senate opposes those, he's not going to sit and take it.

 

[nature boy]

I hope the Democratic party has a strategy to win over state legislatures and races and not just the federal elections.

That's something that Bams completely fucked up.

 

[Grief.exe]

I wonder what's going to happen to NASA funding under a purely Republican Government.

They spend a good deal of time looking at the changing climate here, but these people are also short-sighted enough to not see the advantages of exploring the solar system.

 

[Pixieking]

I'm more concerned with when there's friction, Trump won't go "I'll veto everything". He'll make a bid to assume complete power. That's my worry, and I know there's checks and balances against it, but he's defied all odds so far.

And then what? He becomes a dictator. Every country (except Russia?) will freeze the US's assets. They'll do to the US what the US did to Iran. There will be no accepting a Dictator Trump from foreign powers, and the Second Amendment was practically written for this situation. If he uses Executive Power too much, there'll be mayhem. Which is... I would be interested in the outcome of that, that's for sure.

 

[Wallach]

These aren't statements by a GOP that is confident Trump will do what they want and that they will do everything he wants


They also aren't from a party that will remove the filibuster. He also dodged the question on if he'd put a wall up to vote (he likely won't).

There's going to be friction. Not on everything. But, by the looks of it, on key points of Trump's campaign. Things Trump wants to see passed as his accomplishments. When the Senate opposes those, he's not going to sit and take it.

This is now where a lot of my thoughts are wandering. Trump is definitely going to try and ram some shit down their throats with a quickness. Thing is, who among them is going to think that opposing him will improve their 2018 chances? After Trump was able to take this election that everyone - including the current Republicans - thought was never going to happen. He fucking flipped the entire rust belt. I don't think the damage of what he is going to try and ram through will be visible enough time-wise that they will risk opposing him until after midterms are over and they retain the Senate at the earliest. That's a whole lot of time for Trump to fuck shit up.

 

[Maxim726X]

Maybe I'm just oversimplifying the strategy moving forward here- Just pick a more likable candidate.

You don't need to appeal to racists, or whatever Boogeyman you're creating.

Again, she lost 20% of the Democratic vote from 2012 to 2016. Was part of that because she didn't reach out to working class whites? Yes. Is that all she lost? Clearly not.

Democrats didn't like her, or weren't enthusiastic about her. That's really what it comes down to.

 

[Doc Holliday]

These aren't statements by a GOP that is confident Trump will do what they want and that they will do everything he wants


They also aren't from a party that will remove the filibuster (they outright admit they won't the majority for very long). He also dodged the question on if he'd put a wall up to vote (he likely won't).

There's going to be friction. Not on everything. But, by the looks of it, on key points of Trump's campaign. Things Trump wants to see passed as his accomplishments. When the Senate opposes those, he's not going to sit and take it.

I hate Mcconnell, but that is one smart politician. He sees the demographics and the popular vote numbers. He knows the probability of this happening again as very low.

 

[whyamihere]

So my concern is really with PA. Hillary ran up the margins in places she should, but it really was these hidden white voters who came out of the woodwork. Without Florida or North Carolina, I don't know where you make up those numbers. I'm less concerned about WI and MI, because those were so close and that could've been the result of shitty GOTV and and data.

 

[benjipwns]

I wonder what's going to happen to NASA funding under a purely Republican Government.

They spend a good deal of time looking at the changing climate here, but these people are also short-sighted enough to not see the advantages of exploring the solar system.

You can be sure Newt will be pushing for that moon base!

 

[Bonen no Max'd]

If Kander does consider a serious run, is there a house seat he could pick up in 2018? I'd feel a bit easier voting for him if he even had a bit of experience beyond being SoS.

 

[Zackat]

That's because in between snippets of insight is some fear mongering sometimes, some off the rails theories others, some straight lies and half-truths, too.

I hesitate to call him a broken clock, but he IS pretty correct.

He nailed the presidential election. Michael Moore. Crazy. He really knows that area and those people.

 

[BiggNife]

So my concern is really with PA. Hillary ran up the margins in places she should, but it really was these hidden white voters who came out of the woodwork. Without Florida or North Carolina, I don't know where you make up those numbers. I'm less concerned about WI and MI, because those were so close and that could've been the result of shitty GOTV and and data.

PA was super close too. With Obama-level dem turnout it's highly likely she would've won it.

 

[metalslimer]

lol if there was anything I was hoping to see finally get passed even if it helped the republicans win reelection was a fucking infrastructure bill. Literally it seems like the only thing for sure right now is that they are all in agreement they want to dismantle Obamacare. Everything else is going to be a shitshow which is good. And when they don't pass his infrastructure bill I can see Trump going berserk on them.

 

[dramatis]

When people were saying "I don't vote AGAINST someone, I vote FOR them" we laughed and mocked them.

I didn't laugh or mock them. I just thought voters could be people who could vote for a better future, regardless of personalities or candidates.

Instead, there is a fixation on a person. Not just Hillary or Trump, but also Sanders. Biden. Obama. Michelle. Warren.

Maybe it was just my philosophy of voting. I cast votes not because I believe I should put the weight of the whole country on one pair of shoulders, but because I believe my vote represents the direction I want the country to proceed in. That government is not about a singular person but about the collective ability of people to steer a very large, very varied ship.

Candidates and individual presidents are fleeting. Yes, they make important decisions in office that change many lives. But the fact of US democracy is that we do not have dictatorships, we have two-terms-at-most presidents and life continues after an idol leaves the office. Legislation is written by Congress. Laws are weighed by the Supreme Court. You cannot rely on having the zeitgeist of the moment represented in human form every single presidential election. You cannot rely on that person to be the winner in a primary or a general election.

What happens when the 'chosen one' candidate loses the primary again next time? Or the time after that? Why is it so hard for liberals to unify behind a platform and a direction for America rather than behind a person that they burden with all their hopes and then abandon during the midterms?

It is incredibly troubling that people were ready to declare Bernie Sanders a 'martyr' after the election, as if he had been martyred for anything. If anything, the people who were martyred this election were Obama and Hillary. Obama, because all the progress he fought for in 8 years will be wiped out. Hillary, because she believed America was good.

It is laughable to chant economic anxiety and economic populism and then champion democratic socialism. Because in the end economic populism is also about greed and capitalism, over community and love and kindness. It's about the capitalistic wants of the white rural voters.

 

[hipsterpants]

I think the highlight of the next four years will be watching Trump supporters react to the GOP either not fixing shit for them or not passing (either due to Congress or Trump not bringing it up) the more racist proposals he made.

And I'm sure the smarter members of the GOP see how Trump just barely one. A rejuvenated and motivated Dem party (of which there will be one) is at the advantage in 2020 unless he actually turns out to be decent.

 

[Frank the Great]

So my concern is really with PA. Hillary ran up the margins in places she should, but it really was these hidden white voters who came out of the woodwork. Without Florida or North Carolina, I don't know where you make up those numbers. I'm less concerned about WI and MI, because those were so close and that could've been the result of shitty GOTV and and data.

Same problem in PA as MI/WI. Moderate white voters who supported Obama were fucking terrified of Hillary and jumped ship. She didn't win enough in the Philly suburbs because white people abandoned the party. IIRC Bucks County is a prime example.

Is it a cause for concern? Absolutely. Does it mean PA is a lost cause in 2020? Fuck no. Just get a candidate that people don't despise and that can appeal to moderate fair-weather voters.

 

[nature boy]

So my concern is really with PA. Hillary ran up the margins in places she should, but it really was these hidden white voters who came out of the woodwork. Without Florida or North Carolina, I don't know where you make up those numbers. I'm less concerned about WI and MI, because those were so close and that could've been the result of shitty GOTV and and data.

Uh she really didn't run up the numbers in counties surrounding Philly.