Support NeoGAF

[Azzanadra]

I mean he helped win him an election.

Fuck Trump would win some of those idiotic anti-west lefties with it.

Might even get kudos from Micheal Moore assuming he hasn't actually smartened up about that motherfucker since 2010.

Ah yes, it was all his fault, Queen Empress Hillary of house Clinton can never be at fault. Even now, do you think that the majority of the blame on her losing the election was anyone's fault other than her own?

And I extend this question to everyone here, because I am genuinely curious about what the Hillary supporters think going forward: Was Hillary Clinton a bad candidate?

 

[Sibylus]

I'm just being pessimistic that Trump won't find a way to free his ally.

Then it'd be to find a way to quietly pass him to Russia, not bring him to the US.

 

[hipsterpants]

Kander shouldn't force McCaskill out lol. As if Dems need to try harder to keep her seat anyway in 2018 (well, depending on how things go...).

With Greitens likely causing a lot of damage to this state + a wave in 2020 him being Governor is definitely possible.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Oh, I agree with your assessment here. The perception leading up to and during the DNC was very icy though, and a lot of people were already in "Fuck Clinton" mode as a result.

Because a lot of people were gonna be in a fuck Clinton mode mostly because Sanders literally canpaigned on Clinton is rigging the system against me...

His campaign was fucking toxic in that regard.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Ah yes, it was all his fault, Queen Empress Hillary of house Clinton can never be at fault. Even now, do you think that the majority of the blame on her losing the election was anyone's fault other than her own?

And I extend this question to everyone here, because I am genuinely curious about what the Hillary supporters think going forward: Was Hillary Clinton a bad candidate?

What?

How the fuck did I blame everyone but Clinton...


Oh the he helped him win an election?

Yeah hacking the DNC and Podesta emails helped him win are you seriously denying that?

 

[metalslimer]

I'm actually reminded of the Frontline documentary of the vitriol Clinton got during her Healthcare tour across the country where she apparently told her aide that she thought white men hated her. It seems like that has still slightly colored her view of where the Democratic party needed to focus. I mean as a minority it did feel great to have someone focus in so heavily on us, but in the end all the scars of past battle culminated in this.

 

[Debirudog]

Ah yes, it was all his fault, Queen Empress Hillary of house Clinton can never be at fault. Even now, do you think that the majority of the blame on her losing the election was anyone's fault other than her own?

And I extend this question to everyone here, because I am genuinely curious about what the Hillary supporters think going forward: Was Hillary Clinton a bad candidate?

If you were paying any attention to the thread instead of being petty, you would realize many have considered to be her a bad/flawed candidate in retrospect.

I personally find her amazing though but she's bad in the sense that the American people just don't want her because of bad optics even if they were not true. And she wasn't perfect but i still think she's a good person who fought long and hard.

 

[Totakeke]

Mark Zuckerberg addressed growing criticism of Facebook's ascendant power to sway public opinion, saying the "small amount" of fake news that spread on the social network during the election did not influence the outcome.

"To think it influenced the election in any way is a pretty crazy idea," Zuckerberg said Thursday evening during the Techonomy conference in Half Moon Bay, Calif.

Zuckerberg said people underestimated support for president-elect Donald Trump. "I do think there is a certain profound lack of empathy in asserting that the only reason someone could have voted the way they did is they saw some fake news," Zuckerberg said. "If you believe that, then I don’t think you have internalized the message the Trump supporters are trying to send in this election."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/...ebook-fake-news-didnt-sway-election/93622620/

As expected from Zuckerberg.

 

[Suikoguy]

Kander shouldn't force McCaskill out lol. As if Dems need to try harder to keep her seat anyway in 2018 (well, depending on how things go...).

With Greitens likely causing a lot of damage to this state + a wave in 2020 him being Governor is definitely possible.

I agree, but if the data backs up Kander's campaign, at the very minimum we need to learn from him.

 

[Poodlestrike]

Ah yes, it was all his fault, Queen Empress Hillary of house Clinton can never be at fault. Even now, do you think that the majority of the blame on her losing the election was anyone's fault other than her own?

And I extend this question to everyone here, because I am genuinely curious about what the Hillary supporters think going forward: Was Hillary Clinton a bad candidate?

Hillary Clinton would have been a fantastic president. She was, in nearly every way, the most qualified and overall fantastic candidate we have ever fielded. In a fair and just world we'd still be toasting her landslide victory.

It is not a fair and just world. It is the real world. And in the real world, her exact set of faults and circumstances led to Donald Trump winning. So by that definition, I suppose I'd have to call her a bad candidate.

 

[Bronx-Man]

When someone says on the Internet that Kanye could run and be successful in 2020, my immediate response is ARE YOU FUCKING INSANE

America would never elect a game-show host with no experience as president. That's ridiculous.

 

[Cyanity]

Because a lot of people were gonna be in a fuck Clinton mode mostly because Sanders literally canpaigned on Clinton is rigging the system against me...

His campaign was fucking toxic in that regard.

And it turns out a lot of the DNC was actually doing that. Sanders the candidate ran the cleanest campaign I've ever seen. He never once condoned the negative actions of his supporters. He's been a class act from the start, and I'm excited to have him playing a more active role going forward.

 

[ThLunarian]

Not sure if posted already, but the message is worth repeating.

A letter to America from Leslie Knope.

http://www.vox.com/first-person/2016/11/10/13580582/leslie-knope-donald-trump

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

Can't dismantle them unless they die, and a big enough chunk of that voting block is strong and kicking. What good is the popular vote without the EC majority. It's useless and it did not stop Bush and it will not stop Trump. Unless Democrats turn out en masse in midterms and general elections then it's moot. Those guys will fight us all the fucking way. And my reason for posting that article wasn't necessarily out empathy for them (a significant amount of them hate people that look like me) but that were doomed once Hillary made that deplorables comment. She gave them all the meat they needed. The next candidate cannot be so careless with that voting block. We should be looking to fracture it. Basically I kinda believe it's possible to steal enough votes from this group of voters to win elections for democrats at the state and consequently the national level to the point that GOP hits a ceiling of only 40% of the electorate or thereabouts.

Dismantle, divide, depress, divert, whatever.

 

[Azzanadra]

If you were paying any attention to the thread instead of being petty, you would realize many have considered to be her a bad/flawed candidate in retrospect.

I personally find her amazing though but she's bad in the sense that the American people just don't want her because of bad optics even if they were not true. And she wasn't perfect but i still think she's a good person who fought long and hard.

Sorry, didn't want to go through all the pages- because it seems the rest of OT is out for blood, but I don't see as much Hillary supporters there. Like it or not, we are going to have to come together next time so its important, in my opinion at least, to gauge were the mood is at.

 

[Grexeno]

America would never elect a game-show host with no experience as president. That's ridiculous.

And yet somehow the idea of a successful Kanye West presidential run is even more insane.

 

[Suikoguy]

And it turns out a lot of the DNC was actually doing that. Sanders the candidate ran the cleanest campaign I've ever seen. He never once condoned the negative actions of his supporters. He's been a class act from the start, and I'm excited to have him playing a more active role going forward.

When he went ultra negative after his odds of winning were < 1%, he lost most respect from me. I would not call him a class act. I would call him a purist, with his heart in the right place, but still a purist with no place in an executive position.

 

[shinra-bansho]

This is true, but why? I think bc there is more intersectionality with middle America social ideologies and GOP than with liberals especially those that never have to see this stuff in their day to day. Basically they are wary and mistrustful of us. What do you think the reason is?

What do you think?

Because we look different. Or speak differently in languages they don't understand. Or love differently. Or pray differently.
Or we've allied ourselves to these less than people.

I'm at the point where I have to ask. Are you white, are you straight, are you male? To those who are really confounded by why the rural white voter is "wary".
And are saying that we've got to accept those that view us as subhuman and/or would actively seek to harm us.

 

[Barzul]

My reply was to your conclusion, I'm not debunking the article. Her making the deplorables comment would not have mattered in my opinion. Compare that to the amount of people Trump insulted personally and never apologized to. You're saying we need to coddle them because they're holding america hostage. I say fuck that. That's like being in an abusive relationship, that's not the path forward.

I disagree that the deplorables comments didn't matter. It made a lot of these guys become part of a team. The deplorables. It was basically ride or die at that point. Trump campaigned on that till the end of his election. Add in the FBI stuff, EC landslide I didn't believe the GOP was capable of.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Ah yes, it was all his fault, Queen Empress Hillary of house Clinton can never be at fault. Even now, do you think that the majority of the blame on her losing the election was anyone's fault other than her own?

And I extend this question to everyone here, because I am genuinely curious about what the Hillary supporters think going forward: Was Hillary Clinton a bad candidate?

If you honestly think damn Clinton is the only reason Dems lost.... you're gonna be in a world of hurt come 2020...

Clinton fucked up. She and her staff have responsibility.... but if anything folks like you act as if only she has responsibility

 

[Ziltoidia 9]

Listening to right wing talk radio now in Dallas is so horrible now. Before I could just laugh at the bullshit, but now they are so damn smug. Going to have to go back to just listening to music during lunch.

 

[Debirudog]

Sorry, didn't want to go through all the pages- because it seems the rest of OT is out for blood, but I don't see as much Hillary supporters there. Like it or not, we are going to have to come together next time so its important, in my opinion at least, to gauge were the mood is at.

I'll agree with you on that one and I do think we have to look into the rural white population and the hurting white middle class...As much as I don't want to.

 

[Poodlestrike]

Sorry, didn't want to go through all the pages- because it seems the rest of OT is out for blood, but I don't see as much Hillary supporters there. Like it or not, we are going to have to come together next time so its important, in my opinion at least, to gauge were the mood is at.

You don't seriously expect anybody to believe this after the way you started your first post, do you?

C'mon, son.

 

[Totakeke]

I disagree that the deplorables comments didn't matter. It made a lot of these guys become part of a team. The deplorables. It was basically ride or die at that point. Trump campaigned on that till the end of his election. Add in the FBI stuff, EC landslide I didn't believe the GOP was capable of.

They were a team, you think they suddenly joined Trump because they were called deplorables? I'll just have to disagree.

 

[PInk Tape]

Texas 2016
Texas 2012
http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/results/states/texas

We're inching closer and closer now. This is at least one positive thing to take out of this negative situation.

If you were paying any attention to the thread instead of being petty, you would realize many have considered to be her a bad/flawed candidate in retrospect.

I personally find her amazing though but she's bad in the sense that the American people just don't want her because of bad optics even if they were not true. And she wasn't perfect but i still think she's a good person who fought long and hard.

Preach.

 

[Poodlestrike]

They were a team, you think they suddenly joined Trump because they were called deplorables? I'll just have to disagree.

I think that there's something to be said for the impetus behind being labeled by the enemy. I don't think it caused a seismic shift, but it definitely didn't help.

We, as in people of NeoGAF, definitely don't have to extend the loving hand of friendship or respect or any of that bullshit, but hugely visible political figures should probably try and avoid giving them that kind of ammo.

The Republicans can win by calling their enemies sub-human, but apparently Democrats don't have the luxury of telling it like it is... or at least, Clinton didn't.

 

[Barzul]

What do you think?

Because we look different. Or speak differently in languages they don't understand. Or love differently. Or pray differently.
Or we've allied ourselves to these less than people.

I'm at the point where I have to ask. Are you white, are you straight, are you male? To those who are really confounded by why the rural white voter is "wary".

I'm black, straight and male and live in the south but a chunk of these guys voted for Obama twice and knew exactly where his social positions stood. Not sure your conclusion is straight forward, they fear the other for sure, but I think there's something else to it. I may be wrong though and it might've just been the candidate we had ultimately but her positions aren't dissimilar from Obama's and polling (I know) results said he'd have won a third term vs Trump if he could run.

 

[Crocodile]

And it turns out a lot of the DNC was actually doing that. Sanders the candidate ran the cleanest campaign I've ever seen. He never once condoned the negative actions of his supporters. He's been a class act from the start, and I'm excited to have him playing a more active role going forward.

I mean I dunno if I could call his campaign pristine with "EVERYTHING IS RIGGED", "SUPERDELEGATES", those ads saying Clinton took money for her speeches while she was still a public servant (which would be illegal) around the New York primary that even Chris Matthews called out the Sanders campaign on, etc.

Primaries have a way of getting dirty and I know when a candidate starts losing they get more aggressive and as many times as Sanders has bothered me or annoyed me I know at his core he's a man who wants to do good. I still can't say he ran a pristine campaign though.

 

[sazzy]

Democrats, ACLU, Priorities USA, etc need to embrace Voter ID.

Without the Presidency, the Senate, the House, majority of governerships and state legislatures, opposing Voter ID right now is not an option.

What they need to do instead is: HELP PEOPLE GET THEIR VOTER ID'S ACROSS THE 50 STATES.

This can be done by:
-working to subsidize costs for a Voter ID
-holding Voter ID campaigns 2-3 times a year, encouraging people to get their IDs
-going door to door, hand out forms, help people get the required documents to verify their ID, etc.
-other steps that people smarter than me can think of.

 

[Vestal]

If you were paying any attention to the thread instead of being petty, you would realize many have considered to be her a bad/flawed candidate in retrospect.

I personally find her amazing though but she's bad in the sense that the American people just don't want her because of bad optics even if they were not true. And she wasn't perfect but i still think she's a good person who fought long and hard.

This..

Hillary would have been a good President. 30 years of throwing shit at her, eventually she will start to stink even if it was all lies or innuendo.

 

[Poodlestrike]

Democrats, ACLU, Priorities USA, etc need to embrace Voter ID.

Without the Presidency, the Senate, the House, majority of governerships and state legislatures, opposing Voter ID right now is not an option.

What they need to do instead is: HELP PEOPLE GET THEIR VOTER ID'S ACROSS THE 50 STATES.

This can be done by:
-working to subsidize costs for a Voter ID
-holding Voter ID campaigns 2-3 times a year, encouraging people to get their IDs
-going door to door, hand out forms, help people get the required documents to verify their ID, etc.
-other steps that people smarter than me can think of.

This is an excellent suggestion. Voter ID is not going away now, it's important to mobilize to minimize its impact.

 

[excelsiorlef]

And it turns out a lot of the DNC was actually doing that. Sanders the candidate ran the cleanest campaign I've ever seen. He never once condoned the negative actions of his supporters. He's been a class act from the start, and I'm excited to have him playing a more active role going forward.

He lost the primary effectively in February when he got his ass destoyed in Soutg Carolina

He ran a campaign based on demonizing just about any organization that supported Clinton as the ESTABLISHMENT up to and including Planned fucking Parenthood.

And Roberta Lange would love to have a word with you on his support of her in Nevada...

I'm cool with you supporting Sanders but I will not abide with this saintifaction process that seeks to erase the tactics he used in the primary nor will I abide with the suggestion that he lost because of a rigged system and not because he didn't put in the effort to get the support of Dems in all States especially minorities....

 

[The Technomancer]

I think this most accurately reflects where I'm at right now

 

[ampere]

I had a mini-breakdown today, started screaming at my dad. He's not a Trump voter, but I'm having trouble holding it together and kinda lashing out sometimes

The ONLY time I feel OK is when I'm distracted by work or a videogame. Otherwise it starts to build up again and I either get blisteringly mad or emotionally devastated and cry.

Guess I need to get a new therapist or therapy group. No idea how to pull myself together

 

[Totakeke]

I think that there's something to be said for the impetus behind being labeled by the enemy. I don't think it caused a seismic shift, but it definitely didn't help.

We, as in people of NeoGAF, definitely don't have to extend the loving hand of friendship or respect or any of that bullshit, but hugely visible political figures should probably try and avoid giving them that kind of ammo.

The Republicans can win by calling their enemies sub-human, but apparently Democrats don't have the luxury of telling it like it is... or at least, Clinton didn't.

In the end it's the same argument. Clinton calls Trump supporters deplorables. Everything is her fault. Trump calls Clinton a nasty woman, makes fun of disabled people, calls Mexian rapists..Trump gains even more supporters than before.

I don't care to win that fight.

 

[Barzul]

Democrats, ACLU, Priorities USA, etc need to embrace Voter ID.

Without the Presidency, the Senate, the House, majority of governerships and state legislatures, opposing Voter ID right now is not an option.

What they need to do instead is: HELP PEOPLE GET THEIR VOTER ID'S ACROSS THE 50 STATES.

This can be done by:
-working to subsidize costs for a Voter ID
-holding Voter ID campaigns 2-3 times a year, encouraging people to get their IDs
-going door to door, hand out forms, help people get the required documents to verify their ID, etc.
-other steps that people smarter than me can think of.

I wish there was a national ID with a fixed cost it'd help with planning a drive like this.

 

[Poodlestrike]

I think this most accurately reflects where I'm at right now

100% accurate imo.

In the end it's the same argument. Clinton calls Trump supporters deplorables. Everything is her fault. Trump calls Clinton a nasty woman, makes fun of disabled people, calls Mexian rapists..Trump gains even more supporters than before.

I don't care to win that fight.

It's about facing the simple reality that Democrats are held to a higher standard by their base than Republicans are by theirs. We need to cut absolutely any weakness in the face of that disparity. Trump gets to do all that stuff because, at the end of the day, Republicans fall in line, and Democrats fall in love. We need to be better, not because of any moral imperative (tho there is that), but because otherwise, WE DON'T WIN SHIT.

 

[Vestal]

Democrats, ACLU, Priorities USA, etc need to embrace Voter ID.

Without the Presidency, the Senate, the House, majority of governerships and state legislatures, opposing Voter ID right now is not an option.

What they need to do instead is: HELP PEOPLE GET THEIR VOTER ID'S ACROSS THE 50 STATES.

This can be done by:
-working to subsidize costs for a Voter ID
-holding Voter ID campaigns 2-3 times a year, encouraging people to get their IDs
-going door to door, hand out forms, help people get the required documents to verify their ID, etc.
-other steps that people smarter than me can think of.

If you want to embrace it then adopt the model in Puerto Rico.

1. Voter ID is free
2. Government bends over backwards to provide the ID. ID availability every square mile.
3. Sign up high school student as they become eligible to vote. (If you are 16 right now then you should be able to get an ID for 2018)
4. Election day is a National Holiday.

The above 4 equates to 88%+ Voter participation in Puerto Rico. Even when the polls are only open between 7am and 4pm...

 

[ampere]

Democrats, ACLU, Priorities USA, etc need to embrace Voter ID.

Without the Presidency, the Senate, the House, majority of governerships and state legislatures, opposing Voter ID right now is not an option.

What they need to do instead is: HELP PEOPLE GET THEIR VOTER ID'S ACROSS THE 50 STATES.

This can be done by:
-working to subsidize costs for a Voter ID
-holding Voter ID campaigns 2-3 times a year, encouraging people to get their IDs
-going door to door, hand out forms, help people get the required documents to verify their ID, etc.
-other steps that people smarter than me can think of.

This is a really good idea. I've thought about how we need to campaign against voter ID, but you're right that right now the best option is to help people get the IDs. We need turnout, turnout, turnout, turnout and we can win in 2018

 

[royalan]

Democrats, ACLU, Priorities USA, etc need to embrace Voter ID.

Without the Presidency, the Senate, the House, majority of governerships and state legislatures, opposing Voter ID right now is not an option.

What they need to do instead is: HELP PEOPLE GET THEIR VOTER ID'S ACROSS THE 50 STATES.

This can be done by:
-working to subsidize costs for a Voter ID
-holding Voter ID campaigns 2-3 times a year, encouraging people to get their IDs
-going door to door, hand out forms, help people get the required documents to verify their ID, etc.
-other steps that people smarter than me can think of.

I'm not saying this is a bad idea, because it's not. But it seems based on the assumption that there was noble reasoning behind voter ID laws, and not "keep those coloreds from voting."

The second Democrats start moving to play within that system, Republicans will just move the goal posts and make it even harder.

 

[hipsterpants]

I agree, but if the data backs up Kander's campaign, at the very minimum we need to learn from him.

I think he's proof that WWC voters are malleable in terms of which party they vote for. Part of the reason he'd be so dangerous in 2020 if Trump/the GOP doesn't live up to their "promises." Real shame he didn't win.

I've mocked it before but being "anti-establishment" is a real, powerful force. Democrats need to harness it heading into 2018 and 2020.

 

[BreezyLimbo]

In the end it's the same argument. Clinton calls Trump supporters deplorables. Everything is her fault. Trump calls Clinton a nasty woman, makes fun of disabled people, calls Mexian rapists..Trump gains even more supporters than before.

I don't care to win that fight.

Take out your anger at a video game. That is, go play Dynasty Warriors or something and pretend you're taking down Trump Supporters. Or something. Something cathartic.

The other option is to wait until you're alone, and just scream at something until your voice is hoarse. You gotta let it all out.

 

[ampere]

If you want to embrace it then adopt the model in Puerto Rico.

1. Voter ID is free
2. Government bends over backwards to provide the ID. ID availability every square mile.
3. Sign up high school student as they become eligible to vote. (If you are 16 right now then you should be able to get an ID for 2018)
4. Election day is a National Holiday.

The above 4 equates to 88%+ Voter participation in Puerto Rico. Even when the polls are only open between 7am and 4pm...

Those are great things in PR, but we're talking about what we can do without policy change since that seems so hard with no control of government. For the time being we probably have to bite our tongues and just pay for everyone's voter ID

 

[ampere]

I'm not saying this is a bad idea, because it's not. But it seems based on the assumption that there was noble reasoning behind voter ID laws, and not "keep those coloreds from voting."

The second Democrats start moving to play within that system, Republicans will just move the goal posts and make it even harder.

How else do we solve the disenfranchised voter problem without control over policy-making?

You're definitely right we should oppose it on principle, but what options do we have between now and 2018?

 

[excelsiorlef]

I had a mini-breakdown today, started screaming at my dad. He's not a Trump voter, but I'm having trouble holding it together and kinda lashing out sometimes

The ONLY time I feel OK is when I'm distracted by work or a videogame. Otherwise it starts to build up again and I either get blisteringly mad or emotionally devastated and cry.

Guess I need to get a new therapist or therapy group. No idea how to pull myself together

I lost it today talking about my fear of the Democratic party going forward with a we got the minority vote by default so we don't need to appeal them way.

I'm also in Canada surrounded by people who think Sanders was the answer to everything...

 

[mackaveli]

I just have a couple of thoughts about people voting third party, staying home, or not even voting for the election. I'm in Canada again so I couldn't vote but would have for Clinton. And I am really fond of Clinton. This may not apply to a lot of members on the board as maybe they decided even though they didn't like her they voted for her. But I'm trying to figure out the mentality of the people who decided to vote third party because they didn't like her or Trump or for whatever reasons. I just want to understand better people's thought processes on the following:

I am just trying to understand anyone who supports social / economic issues of all the different movements (Black Lives Matter, LBGTQ, Muslims rights, Syrian refugees, minimum wage, immigration, environment, women's rights, healthcare etc.,) could not vote for Clinton because she was flawed.

If you supported any of the above or other movements I did not mention that would at least be protected or expanded upon with a Clinton win why sit out or protest vote?

Like I'm not saying you have to like Clinton and that yes Clinton should have done more to wow you or convince you to get their vote or coddle (seems like rural americans wanted her to visit and not be ignored) but for this one day you get every 2 (midterms) / 4 years you can show your support to all these movements loud and clearly by voting for whoever has the best chance to win and protect these rights.

Maybe you cannot directly protest with the BLM movement because you are in a different city or area but are for it, or you already have a $15 minimum wage in a couple of years so you aren't fighting as hard for everyone to get it but believe in it, or you have good health care protection and believe it should be expanded upon, or the state has better minority protections etc., so you can't join in the movement directly. Wouldn't this vote be the most powerful way to show all the people involved in these movements that you directly stand with them and support the cause even if you had to check Clinton.

Obviously the election is over, but I'm just trying to understand the mentality of people who couldn't force themselves to vote for Clinton because she was not charismatic or perfect in their eyes. Maybe cause I'm in Canada and we have it pretty good but isn't voting for Stein or Johnson or staying home not a vote against all the movements above. I'm not saying you oppose any of the movements I mentioned above as probably more likely you actually do support them more so then a lot of the voters who voted for Clinton. And I'm not saying your vote is a vote for Trump like how others on the campaign trail or even other posters were framing or even Obama I think mentioned it in his speeches. I know people didn't like the way that was communicated how not voting for Clinton was a vote for Trump and that could have upset voters.

But isn't a vote for anyone but Clinton indirectly a vote of opposition to all the movements I mentioned because of who would be then elected Trump? I think if it was framed this way it would have gotten more people to rethink their ballot and potentially persuade more people to maybe come out and vote for Clinton or not vote third party. Reluctant voters could have used the scapegoat of I don't support Clinton but I support all these movements and not voting for Clinton would have given a Trump presidency a way to oppress these movements or remove them completely and therefore I reluctantly have to vote for Clinton and just know that I am displeased with how this turned out. So even if voting for Clinton left a sour taste in your mouth you would know you are voting to support all these movements which could be argued is even more important then the person who is president? I know the election is over so it's too late but maybe something to consider in the future.

I'm not trying to place blame on anyone but trying to figure out a better message to perhaps get more people to come out and vote in the future. Instead of telling people if you don't vote for this candidate then you are for the opponent. I think that message is too aggressive cause it puts a gun to their head. But by asking the voter if they support these movements and that the only way to protect these rights and movements is to vote for this candidate because if you don't then the alternative will strip these rights and movements. I know it's similar to having a gun to their head analogy I just mentioned but this way it's asking the voter do you care about these issues then you cannot stay home or vote third party as this is more important then a candidates likability. I just think people didn't like being told to vote for Clinton and that annoyed them especially Bernie or Bust people but if you perhaps framed it the way I did it would click / resonate them better as you aren't directly asking them to vote for a candidate but on social issues that they might really care about.

I don't know I just thought I would write it down as it was bugging me. I could be totally wrong what I just mentioned is dumb. I would just like to see if there's anyway to get the 46%+ people who didn't vote who probably cares a lot about these issues but stayed home or voted third party we would need them come 2018 / 2020.

 

[Revolver]

I'm actually reminded of the Frontline documentary of the vitriol Clinton got during her Healthcare tour across the country where she apparently told her aide that she thought white men hated her. It seems like that has still slightly colored her view of where the Democratic party needed to focus. I mean as a minority it did feel great to have someone focus in so heavily on us, but in the end all the scars of past battle culminated in this.

I remember that quote about white men hating her and she went on "“it’s not me they hate, it’s what I represent. It’s the changes I represent. I’m the wife who went back to college and got a better education and got a better job than my husband.”

I think there's a lot of truth to that too. To a down and out slob they saw her as the nagging wife, the teacher they hated, the uppity ex that went on to better things. Not just the men either. A lot of women projected their insecurities onto her too.

 

[Poodlestrike]

Those are great things in PR, but we're talking about what we can do without policy change since that seems so hard with no control of government. For the time being we probably have to bite our tongues and just pay for everyone's voter ID

I would donate to a "Vote for America" charity. Pays for people's Voter ID, maybe even pays for an Uber or something to get them to the DMV.

 

[Vestal]

Those are great things in PR, but we're talking about what we can do without policy change since that seems so hard with no control of government. For the time being we probably have to bite our tongues and just pay for everyone's voter ID

Well what I put above is reasonable. Its something you can fight for. Its a compromise..... You want voter ID? Ok cool, but we need these things. If not we will fight you every step of the way.

 

[metalslimer]

How the hell are we going to get free voter id passed when the whole purpose is to depress minority vote? And Republicans control the states where we need it. I mean I guess this would be good for far down the road but it won't work in the near future.