Verumae

you legitimately just need to stop talking. is that what you really think destroys a democracy? hitler was democratically elected. did germany devolve into nazism because of sore losers? 
 
and you better believe I'm exercising my second amendment right. donald trump has open contempt for democracy and private firearm ownership is one of the most important democratic institutions. he's advocated for disarming suspected criminals before with no trial or investigation. 
do you really think this is what's happening? that there are offices just filled with democrats around the country where they say "okay, we've been doing great importing these immigrants but I think we should aim for 10% growth this year"
 
the only people who can vote in our elections are united states citizens. if you aren't getting the most votes from united states citizens, tough fucking luck. if people aren't keen on your shit economic policy and fascist immigration plans, that's not a fault of democracy.
 
I'd just like to go ahead and point out that the electoral college was literally designed to stop donald trump from happening. in its original iteration, it would have done so. it had nothing to do with the balance of power between states and urban or rural areas -- that's what the senate is for, and each state gets an elector for each senator. but the winner-take-all system is a recent development and has to do strictly with game theory involving the two dominant parties. the winner-take-all system assures that while neither of them can win every election, third parties and unaffiliated candidates will never gain the slightest bit of traction.
 
here are some facts about the electoral college:
1. under the original plan, states weren't supposed to hold elections for president. they simply selected their electors (by the means of their choosing) and the electors voted independently of each other and independently of the electorate
 
2. under the original plan, donald trump never would have happened, because in general, any federal public official is presumed to be more educated and more intelligent than the average voter. and while they may not necessarily be more fit to choose the president than every single voter, they're doubtlessly more fit to choose him than trump voters. because electors were not allowed to hold public office and because they were so few in number, they were considered to be largely above the pathetic tactics that are used to win the presidency today: demagoguery, corruption, pandering, ignorance, etc. alexander hamilton:


 
3. let's be very clear: the electoral college was designed to disenfranchise voters. because while universal suffrage may be important to a democracy, direct election of the president is not. under the original plan, the electors could never disobey the popular vote because there was no popular vote. but today, remnants of the original plan still exist, such as faithless electors. I just want trump supporters to remember that when the electoral college convenes, most electors there have the legal option to cast their ballots for clinton, johnson, stein, etc. regardless of who their state voted for, and I'd argue that they even have something of an obligation to do so.
 
4. under the original plan, it was considered to be improbable that any candidate would sweep the electoral college majority more than perhaps once every few elections. and if a candidate managed to do so, they were considered to be the clear choice for president. this was because the electoral college itself was intended to be a check on parties (again, the electors themselves did not have any affiliation, nor any supposed obligation to vote in a specific way -- this was before the two parties managed to consolidate power in just about every state in the union). thus, there would generally be five or so people in reasonable contention for the presidency. even a candidate markedly more popular than the rest would only get, say, 40%, and the election would be decided by the house of representatives. this was considered to be a desirable outcome, given that representatives are, like electors, generally more intelligent and educated than trump voters, and they are both directly elected and directly representative of the country's population distribution. 
 
again, there are no laws on a federal level that actually require states to cast their ballots on a winner-take-all basis. it's a completely inane idea that more or less accounts to gerrymandering (albeit from a bottom-up perspective rather than top-down) and it inarguably accomplishes the exact same effect. in this election, over half of all ballots cast literally did not matter -- that is to say, three million people in california could have stayed home and no matter what the other states decided, it could not have possibly changed the election. four million people in texas could have stayed home and no matter what the other states decided, it could not have possibly changed the election. that is not democracy. the electoral college in its current state is an abomination; it was neutered when it should have been killed. it can no longer achieve its original purpose and functions now to simply consolidate power into the hands of the two major parties. if you defend it, do so only knowing that it was designed to keep you from voting, and reasonably so. 

you legitimately just need to stop talking. is that what you really think destroys a democracy? hitler was democratically elected. did germany devolve into nazism because of sore losers? 
 
and you better believe I'm exercising my second amendment right. donald trump has open contempt for democracy and private firearm ownership is one of the most important democratic institutions. he's advocated for disarming suspected criminals before with no trial or investigation. 
do you really think this is what's happening? that there are offices just filled with democrats around the country where they say "okay, we've been doing great importing these immigrants but I think we should aim for 10% growth this year"
 
the only people who can vote in our elections are united states citizens. if you aren't getting the most votes from united states citizens, tough fucking luck. if people aren't keen on your shit economic policy and fascist immigration plans, that's not a fault of democracy.
 
I'd just like to go ahead and point out that the electoral college was literally designed to stop donald trump from happening. in its original iteration, it would have done so. it had nothing to do with the balance of power between states and urban or rural areas -- that's what the senate is for, and each state gets an elector for each senator. but the winner-take-all system is a recent development and has to do strictly with game theory involving the two dominant parties. the winner-take-all system assures that while neither of them can win every election, third parties and unaffiliated candidates will never gain the slightest bit of traction.
 
here are some facts about the electoral college:
1. under the original plan, states weren't supposed to hold elections for president. they simply selected their electors (by the means of their choosing) and the electors voted independently of each other and independently of the electorate
 
2. under the original plan, donald trump never would have happened, because in general, any federal public official is presumed to be more educated and more intelligent than the average voter. and while they may not necessarily be more fit to choose the president than every single voter, they're doubtlessly more fit to choose him than trump voters. because electors were not allowed to hold public office and because they were so few in number, they were considered to be largely above the pathetic tactics that are used to win the presidency today: demagoguery, corruption, pandering, ignorance, etc. alexander hamilton:


 
3. let's be very clear: the electoral college was designed to disenfranchise voters. because while universal suffrage may be important to a democracy, direct election of the president is not. under the original plan, the electors could never disobey the popular vote because there was no popular vote. but today, remnants of the original plan still exist, such as faithless electors. I just want trump supporters to remember that when the electoral college convenes, most electors there have the legal option to cast their ballots for clinton, johnson, stein, etc. regardless of who their state voted for, and I'd argue that they even have something of an obligation to do so.
 
4. under the original plan, it was considered to be improbable that any candidate would sweep the electoral college majority more than perhaps once every few elections. and if a candidate managed to do so, they were considered to be the clear choice for president. this was because the electoral college itself was intended to be a check on parties (again, the electors themselves did not have any affiliation, nor any supposed obligation to vote in a specific way -- this was before the two parties managed to consolidate power in just about every state in the union). thus, there would generally be five or so people in reasonable contention for the presidency. even a candidate markedly more popular than the rest would only get, say, 40%, and the election would be decided by the house of representatives. this was considered to be a desirable outcome, given that representatives are, like electors, generally more intelligent and educated than trump voters, and they are both directly elected and directly representative of the country's population distribution. 
 
again, there are no laws on a federal level that actually require states to cast their ballots on a winner-take-all basis. it's a completely inane idea that more or less accounts to gerrymandering (albeit from a bottom-up perspective rather than top-down) and it inarguably accomplishes the exact same effect. in this election, over half of all ballots cast literally did not matter -- that is to say, three million people in california could have stayed home and no matter what the other states decided, it could not have possibly changed the election. four million people in texas could have stayed home and no matter what the other states decided, it could not have possibly changed the election. that is not democracy. the electoral college in its current state is an abomination; it was neutered when it should have been killed. it can no longer achieve its original purpose and functions now to simply consolidate power into the hands of the two major parties. if you defend it, do so only knowing that it was designed to keep you from voting, and reasonably so. 

you legitimately just need to stop talking. is that what you really think destroys a democracy? hitler was democratically elected. did germany devolve into nazism because of sore losers? 
 
and you better believe I'm exercising my second amendment right. donald trump has open contempt for democracy and private firearm ownership is one of the most important democratic institutions. he's advocated for disarming suspected criminals before with no trial or investigation. 
do you really think this is what's happening? that there are offices just filled with democrats around the country where they say "okay, we've been doing great importing these immigrants but I think we should aim for 10% growth this year"
 
the only people who can vote in our elections are united states citizens. if you aren't getting the most votes from united states citizens, tough fucking luck. if people aren't keen on your shit economic policy and fascist immigration plans, that's not a fault of democracy.
 
I'd just like to go ahead and point out that the electoral college was literally designed to stop donald trump from happening. in its original iteration, it would have done so. it had nothing to do with the balance of power between states and urban or rural areas -- that's what the senate is for, and each state gets an elector for each senator. but the winner-take-all system is a recent development and has to do strictly with game theory involving the two dominant parties. the winner-take-all system assures that while neither of them can win every election, third parties and unaffiliated candidates will never gain the slightest bit of traction.
 
here are some facts about the electoral college:
1. under the original plan, states weren't supposed to hold elections for president. they simply selected their electors (by the means of their choosing) and the electors voted independently of each other and independently of the electorate
 
2. under the original plan, donald trump never would have happened, because in general, any federal public official is presumed to be more educated and more intelligent than the average voter. and while they may not necessarily be more fit to choose the president than every single voter, they're doubtlessly more fit to choose him than trump voters. because electors were not allowed to hold public office and because they were so few in number, they were considered to be largely above the pathetic tactics that are used to win the presidency today: demagoguery, corruption, pandering, ignorance, etc. alexander hamilton:


 
3. let's be very clear: the electoral college was designed to disenfranchise voters. because while universal suffrage may be important to a democracy, direct election of the president is not. under the original plan, the electors could never disobey the popular vote because there was no popular vote. but today, remnants of the original plan still exist, such as faithless electors. I just want trump supporters to remember that when the electoral college convenes, most electors there have the legal option to cast their ballots for clinton, johnson, stein, etc. regardless of who their state voted for, and I'd argue that they even have something of an obligation to do so.
 
4. under the original plan, it was considered to be improbable that any candidate would sweep the electoral college majority more than perhaps once every few elections. and if a candidate managed to do so, they were considered to be the clear choice for president. this was because the electoral college itself was intended to be a check on parties (again, the electors themselves did not have any affiliation, nor any supposed obligation to vote in a specific way -- this was before the two parties managed to consolidate power in just about every state in the union). thus, there would generally be five or so people in reasonable contention for the presidency. even a candidate markedly more popular than the rest would only get, say, 40%, and the election would be decided by the house of representatives. this was considered to be a desirable outcome, given that representatives are, like electors, generally more intelligent and educated than trump voters, and they are both directly elected and directly representative of the country's population distribution. 
 
again, there are no laws on a federal level that actually require states to cast their ballots on a winner-take-all basis. it's a completely inane idea that more or less accounts to gerrymandering (albeit from a bottom-up perspective rather than top-down) and it inarguably accomplishes the exact same effect. in this election, over half of all ballots cast literally did not matter -- that is to say, three million people in california could have stayed home and no matter what the other states decided, it could not have possibly changed the election. four million people in texas could have stayed home and no matter what the other states decided, it could not have possibly changed the election. that is not democracy. the electoral college in its current state is an abomination; it was neutered when it should have been killed. it can no longer achieve its original purpose and functions now to simply consolidate power into the hands of the two major parties. if you defend it, do so only knowing that it was designed to keep you from voting, and reasonably so. 

you legitimately just need to stop talking. is that what you really think destroys a democracy? hitler was democratically elected. did germany devolve into nazism because of sore losers? 
 
and you better believe I'm exercising my second amendment right. donald trump has open contempt for democracy and private firearm ownership is one of the most important democratic institutions. he's advocated for disarming suspected criminals before with no trial or investigation. 
do you really think this is what's happening? that there are offices just filled with democrats around the country where they say "okay, we've been doing great importing these immigrants but I think we should aim for 10% growth this year"
 
the only people who can vote in our elections are united states citizens. if you aren't getting the most votes from united states citizens, tough fucking luck. if people aren't keen on your shit economic policy and fascist immigration plans, that's not a fault of democracy.
 
I'd just like to go ahead and point out that the electoral college was literally designed to stop donald trump from happening. in its original iteration, it would have done so. it had nothing to do with the balance of power between states and urban or rural areas -- that's what the senate is for, and each state gets an elector for each senator. but the winner-take-all system is a recent development and has to do strictly with game theory involving the two dominant parties. the winner-take-all system assures that while neither of them can win every election, third parties and unaffiliated candidates will never gain the slightest bit of traction.
 
here are some facts about the electoral college:
1. under the original plan, states weren't supposed to hold elections for president. they simply selected their electors (by the means of their choosing) and the electors voted independently of each other and independently of the electorate
 
2. under the original plan, donald trump never would have happened, because in general, any federal public official is presumed to be more educated and more intelligent than the average voter. and while they may not necessarily be more fit to choose the president than every single voter, they're doubtlessly more fit to choose him than trump voters. because electors were not allowed to hold public office and because they were so few in number, they were considered to be largely above the pathetic tactics that are used to win the presidency today: demagoguery, corruption, pandering, ignorance, etc. alexander hamilton:


 
3. let's be very clear: the electoral college was designed to disenfranchise voters. because while universal suffrage may be important to a democracy, direct election of the president is not. under the original plan, the electors could never disobey the popular vote because there was no popular vote. but today, remnants of the original plan still exist, such as faithless electors. I just want trump supporters to remember that when the electoral college convenes, most electors there have the legal option to cast their ballots for clinton, johnson, stein, etc. regardless of who their state voted for, and I'd argue that they even have something of an obligation to do so.
 
4. under the original plan, it was considered to be improbable that any candidate would sweep the electoral college majority more than perhaps once every few elections. and if a candidate managed to do so, they were considered to be the clear choice for president. this was because the electoral college itself was intended to be a check on parties (again, the electors themselves did not have any affiliation, nor any supposed obligation to vote in a specific way -- this was before the two parties managed to consolidate power in just about every state in the union). thus, there would generally be five or so people in reasonable contention for the presidency. even a candidate markedly more popular than the rest would only get, say, 40%, and the election would be decided by the house of representatives. this was considered to be a desirable outcome, given that representatives are, like electors, generally more intelligent and educated than trump voters, and they are both directly elected and directly representative of the country's population distribution. 
 
again, there are no laws on a federal level that actually require states to cast their ballots on a winner-take-all basis. it's a completely inane idea that more or less accounts to gerrymandering (albeit from a bottom-up perspective rather than top-down) and it inarguably accomplishes the exact same effect. in this election, over half of all ballots cast literally did not matter -- that is to say, three million people in california could have stayed home and no matter what the other states decided, it could not have possibly changed the election. four million people in texas could have stayed home and no matter what the other states decided, it could not have possibly changed the election. that is not democracy. the electoral college in its current state is an abomination; it was neutered when it should have been killed. it can no longer achieve its original purpose and functions now to simply consolidate power into the hands of the two major parties. if you defend it, do so only knowing that it was designed to keep you from voting, and reasonably so. 

you legitimately just need to stop talking. is that what you really think destroys a democracy? hitler was democratically elected. did germany devolve into nazism because of sore losers? 
 
and you better believe I'm exercising my second amendment right. donald trump has open contempt for democracy and private firearm ownership is one of the most important democratic institutions. he's advocated for disarming suspected criminals before with no trial or investigation. 
do you really think this is what's happening? that there are offices just filled with democrats around the country where they say "okay, we've been doing great importing these immigrants but I think we should aim for 10% growth this year"
 
the only people who can vote in our elections are united states citizens. if you aren't getting the most votes from united states citizens, tough fucking luck. if people aren't keen on your shit economic policy and fascist immigration plans, that's not a fault of democracy.
 
I'd just like to go ahead and point out that the electoral college was literally designed to stop donald trump from happening. in its original iteration, it would have done so. it had nothing to do with the balance of power between states and urban or rural areas -- that's what the senate is for, and each state gets an elector for each senator. but the winner-take-all system is a recent development and has to do strictly with game theory involving the two dominant parties. the winner-take-all system assures that while neither of them can win every election, third parties and unaffiliated candidates will never gain the slightest bit of traction.
 
here are some facts about the electoral college:
1. under the original plan, states weren't supposed to hold elections for president. they simply selected their electors (by the means of their choosing) and the electors voted independently of each other and independently of the electorate
 
2. under the original plan, donald trump never would have happened, because in general, any federal public official is presumed to be more educated and more intelligent than the average voter. and while they may not necessarily be more fit to choose the president than every single voter, they're doubtlessly more fit to choose him than trump voters. because electors were not allowed to hold public office and because they were so few in number, they were considered to be largely above the pathetic tactics that are used to win the presidency today: demagoguery, corruption, pandering, ignorance, etc. alexander hamilton:


 
3. let's be very clear: the electoral college was designed to disenfranchise voters. because while universal suffrage may be important to a democracy, direct election of the president is not. under the original plan, the electors could never disobey the popular vote because there was no popular vote. but today, remnants of the original plan still exist, such as faithless electors. I just want trump supporters to remember that when the electoral college convenes, most electors there have the legal option to cast their ballots for clinton, johnson, stein, etc. regardless of who their state voted for, and I'd argue that they even have something of an obligation to do so.
 
4. under the original plan, it was considered to be improbable that any candidate would sweep the electoral college majority more than perhaps once every few elections. and if a candidate managed to do so, they were considered to be the clear choice for president. this was because the electoral college itself was intended to be a check on parties (again, the electors themselves did not have any affiliation, nor any supposed obligation to vote in a specific way -- this was before the two parties managed to consolidate power in just about every state in the union). thus, there would generally be five or so people in reasonable contention for the presidency. even a candidate markedly more popular than the rest would only get, say, 40%, and the election would be decided by the house of representatives. this was considered to be a desirable outcome, given that representatives are, like electors, generally more intelligent and educated than trump voters, and they are both directly elected and directly representative of the country's population distribution. 
 
again, there are no laws on a federal level that actually require states to cast their ballots on a winner-take-all basis. it's a completely inane idea that more or less accounts to gerrymandering (albeit from a bottom-up perspective rather than top-down) and it inarguably accomplishes the exact same effect. in this election, over half of all ballots cast literally did not matter -- that is to say, three million people in california could have stayed home and no matter what the other states decided, it could not have possibly changed the election. four million people in texas could have stayed home and no matter what the other states decided, it could not have possibly changed the election. that is not democracy. the electoral college in its current state is an abomination; it was neutered when it should have been killed. it can no longer achieve its original purpose and functions now to simply consolidate power into the hands of the two major parties. if you defend it, do so only knowing that it was designed to keep you from voting, and reasonably so. 

it wasn't subSPUF without me so we're already off to a good start
 
if you must argue about something else, then might I offer a gentle reminder that SPUFdark is by a massive margin still the best theme? SPUFblue comes in a distant second and SPUFlight is more or less the theme equivalent of voting for donald trump

Trump really is uniquely unqualified to be president. We've had bad presidents before but Trump is legitimately fucking terrifying. He's a loose cannon who more or less believes in using overwhelming force to crush his enemies (this is well-established in his shady business practices and his tendency to come after people with his team of crack lawyers), but this time, his enemies are the American people at large. We know this to be the case because the American people at large did not elect him, and he's been open about curtailing free speech and civil liberties for just about anyone he deems to be an enemy of the state (or, more accurately, a critic of his regime). The president really does have a fuckton of power, equal to at least 1/3 of Congress, which -- by the way -- is controlled by the people nearest to being his ideological allies. Let's not forget that the biggest threats to humanity today could potentially wipe us out within the century, none of them are ISIS or even tangentially related to Islam, and they've all been completely ignored or outright denied by Trump. He's going to choose at least one supreme court justice, the heads of several federal agencies, he's going to have authority over both the military and our nuclear arsenal and you can rest assured that he's not going to get any more intelligent within the next month. We already have extrajudicial killings going on daily both at home and abroad, despite crime rates being at an all time low and there not being a single credible threat to our national security, but Trump has advocated for the expansion of the military both overseas and within our borders. Unless by some turn of events he hits a very late puberty and grows the fuck up, we are more or less guaranteed to have the worst four years since the civil war but, owing to the increasing consolidation of power occurring both under the status quo and under the new authoritarian regime, these four years might very well be our last.
 
But hey, anyone who didn't vote for him is just a PC policeman hurt feelings liberal who wants to fill our country with Mexicans and institute Sharia law, am I right?

For those of you scared, rightfully or not, I suggest getting a gun and learning to use it for self-defense (if not for general enjoyment). You can buy a Hi-Point for a bit over $200 (state to state may vary.), a few boxes of FMJ for training shooting and a box of hollow points for use. Cheap shotguns will run you a similar amount, if you have a preference. Get a CCW if you can, carry especially if you don't feel safe.
 
If the racists/state-sanctioned right wing death squads/rioters/burglars are what you see as a severe problem, at least do what you can for yourself as the Constitution says. If they come for you, you'll have a response.
 
I'm not trying to be a meme here. There's a reason there's a Second Amendment, for when the citizens feel that they can not trust the government or those that would seek to harm them. This applies to MANY people right now.

it wasn't subSPUF without me so we're already off to a good start
 
if you must argue about something else, then might I offer a gentle reminder that SPUFdark is by a massive margin still the best theme? SPUFblue comes in a distant second and SPUFlight is more or less the theme equivalent of voting for donald trump

it wasn't subSPUF without me so we're already off to a good start
 
if you must argue about something else, then might I offer a gentle reminder that SPUFdark is by a massive margin still the best theme? SPUFblue comes in a distant second and SPUFlight is more or less the theme equivalent of voting for donald trump

Trump really is uniquely unqualified to be president. We've had bad presidents before but Trump is legitimately fucking terrifying. He's a loose cannon who more or less believes in using overwhelming force to crush his enemies (this is well-established in his shady business practices and his tendency to come after people with his team of crack lawyers), but this time, his enemies are the American people at large. We know this to be the case because the American people at large did not elect him, and he's been open about curtailing free speech and civil liberties for just about anyone he deems to be an enemy of the state (or, more accurately, a critic of his regime). The president really does have a fuckton of power, equal to at least 1/3 of Congress, which -- by the way -- is controlled by the people nearest to being his ideological allies. Let's not forget that the biggest threats to humanity today could potentially wipe us out within the century, none of them are ISIS or even tangentially related to Islam, and they've all been completely ignored or outright denied by Trump. He's going to choose at least one supreme court justice, the heads of several federal agencies, he's going to have authority over both the military and our nuclear arsenal and you can rest assured that he's not going to get any more intelligent within the next month. We already have extrajudicial killings going on daily both at home and abroad, despite crime rates being at an all time low and there not being a single credible threat to our national security, but Trump has advocated for the expansion of the military both overseas and within our borders. Unless by some turn of events he hits a very late puberty and grows the fuck up, we are more or less guaranteed to have the worst four years since the civil war but, owing to the increasing consolidation of power occurring both under the status quo and under the new authoritarian regime, these four years might very well be our last.
 
But hey, anyone who didn't vote for him is just a PC policeman hurt feelings liberal who wants to fill our country with Mexicans and institute Sharia law, am I right?

Trump really is uniquely unqualified to be president. We've had bad presidents before but Trump is legitimately fucking terrifying. He's a loose cannon who more or less believes in using overwhelming force to crush his enemies (this is well-established in his shady business practices and his tendency to come after people with his team of crack lawyers), but this time, his enemies are the American people at large. We know this to be the case because the American people at large did not elect him, and he's been open about curtailing free speech and civil liberties for just about anyone he deems to be an enemy of the state (or, more accurately, a critic of his regime). The president really does have a fuckton of power, equal to at least 1/3 of Congress, which -- by the way -- is controlled by the people nearest to being his ideological allies. Let's not forget that the biggest threats to humanity today could potentially wipe us out within the century, none of them are ISIS or even tangentially related to Islam, and they've all been completely ignored or outright denied by Trump. He's going to choose at least one supreme court justice, the heads of several federal agencies, he's going to have authority over both the military and our nuclear arsenal and you can rest assured that he's not going to get any more intelligent within the next month. We already have extrajudicial killings going on daily both at home and abroad, despite crime rates being at an all time low and there not being a single credible threat to our national security, but Trump has advocated for the expansion of the military both overseas and within our borders. Unless by some turn of events he hits a very late puberty and grows the fuck up, we are more or less guaranteed to have the worst four years since the civil war but, owing to the increasing consolidation of power occurring both under the status quo and under the new authoritarian regime, these four years might very well be our last.
 
But hey, anyone who didn't vote for him is just a PC policeman hurt feelings liberal who wants to fill our country with Mexicans and institute Sharia law, am I right?

Trump really is uniquely unqualified to be president. We've had bad presidents before but Trump is legitimately fucking terrifying. He's a loose cannon who more or less believes in using overwhelming force to crush his enemies (this is well-established in his shady business practices and his tendency to come after people with his team of crack lawyers), but this time, his enemies are the American people at large. We know this to be the case because the American people at large did not elect him, and he's been open about curtailing free speech and civil liberties for just about anyone he deems to be an enemy of the state (or, more accurately, a critic of his regime). The president really does have a fuckton of power, equal to at least 1/3 of Congress, which -- by the way -- is controlled by the people nearest to being his ideological allies. Let's not forget that the biggest threats to humanity today could potentially wipe us out within the century, none of them are ISIS or even tangentially related to Islam, and they've all been completely ignored or outright denied by Trump. He's going to choose at least one supreme court justice, the heads of several federal agencies, he's going to have authority over both the military and our nuclear arsenal and you can rest assured that he's not going to get any more intelligent within the next month. We already have extrajudicial killings going on daily both at home and abroad, despite crime rates being at an all time low and there not being a single credible threat to our national security, but Trump has advocated for the expansion of the military both overseas and within our borders. Unless by some turn of events he hits a very late puberty and grows the fuck up, we are more or less guaranteed to have the worst four years since the civil war but, owing to the increasing consolidation of power occurring both under the status quo and under the new authoritarian regime, these four years might very well be our last.
 
But hey, anyone who didn't vote for him is just a PC policeman hurt feelings liberal who wants to fill our country with Mexicans and institute Sharia law, am I right?

Trump really is uniquely unqualified to be president. We've had bad presidents before but Trump is legitimately fucking terrifying. He's a loose cannon who more or less believes in using overwhelming force to crush his enemies (this is well-established in his shady business practices and his tendency to come after people with his team of crack lawyers), but this time, his enemies are the American people at large. We know this to be the case because the American people at large did not elect him, and he's been open about curtailing free speech and civil liberties for just about anyone he deems to be an enemy of the state (or, more accurately, a critic of his regime). The president really does have a fuckton of power, equal to at least 1/3 of Congress, which -- by the way -- is controlled by the people nearest to being his ideological allies. Let's not forget that the biggest threats to humanity today could potentially wipe us out within the century, none of them are ISIS or even tangentially related to Islam, and they've all been completely ignored or outright denied by Trump. He's going to choose at least one supreme court justice, the heads of several federal agencies, he's going to have authority over both the military and our nuclear arsenal and you can rest assured that he's not going to get any more intelligent within the next month. We already have extrajudicial killings going on daily both at home and abroad, despite crime rates being at an all time low and there not being a single credible threat to our national security, but Trump has advocated for the expansion of the military both overseas and within our borders. Unless by some turn of events he hits a very late puberty and grows the fuck up, we are more or less guaranteed to have the worst four years since the civil war but, owing to the increasing consolidation of power occurring both under the status quo and under the new authoritarian regime, these four years might very well be our last.
 
But hey, anyone who didn't vote for him is just a PC policeman hurt feelings liberal who wants to fill our country with Mexicans and institute Sharia law, am I right?

Trump really is uniquely unqualified to be president. We've had bad presidents before but Trump is legitimately fucking terrifying. He's a loose cannon who more or less believes in using overwhelming force to crush his enemies (this is well-established in his shady business practices and his tendency to come after people with his team of crack lawyers), but this time, his enemies are the American people at large. We know this to be the case because the American people at large did not elect him, and he's been open about curtailing free speech and civil liberties for just about anyone he deems to be an enemy of the state (or, more accurately, a critic of his regime). The president really does have a fuckton of power, equal to at least 1/3 of Congress, which -- by the way -- is controlled by the people nearest to being his ideological allies. Let's not forget that the biggest threats to humanity today could potentially wipe us out within the century, none of them are ISIS or even tangentially related to Islam, and they've all been completely ignored or outright denied by Trump. He's going to choose at least one supreme court justice, the heads of several federal agencies, he's going to have authority over both the military and our nuclear arsenal and you can rest assured that he's not going to get any more intelligent within the next month. We already have extrajudicial killings going on daily both at home and abroad, despite crime rates being at an all time low and there not being a single credible threat to our national security, but Trump has advocated for the expansion of the military both overseas and within our borders. Unless by some turn of events he hits a very late puberty and grows the fuck up, we are more or less guaranteed to have the worst four years since the civil war but, owing to the increasing consolidation of power occurring both under the status quo and under the new authoritarian regime, these four years might very well be our last.
 
But hey, anyone who didn't vote for him is just a PC policeman hurt feelings liberal who wants to fill our country with Mexicans and institute Sharia law, am I right?

I think the most important thing to take away from this election is that the Democrats lost the white working class too early. If only they kept up the "Democrats are for the common man" meme for just one more cycle they would've won and then imported enough third-worlders into NC and FL and all the other battleground states to keep them blue for eternity, just like California. Can you believe it used to be a Republican stronghold?

But some of you guys look pretty shook up so I'll console you. There's always 2020. Chin up! By then enough white people will have died/minorities come of age so that you can have a permanent Democratic majority! Pretty cool, eh?
 
Unlike you, I don't have a second homeland to flee to. This is it for me.

He said come at him, I obliged. If he has a problem with it he can go ahead and respond himself. Given the video that he says "summarizes his thoughts" he's a hypocrite if he does, but he can feel free.
 
That is the only post I've made properly venting on the subject and of the people I even kind of know he's the best target. My dad and grandparents are fucking stupid too but they've at least always been honest about being racist redneck bastards, so they have the leg up in honesty.

Race related crime has already significantly increased. Even if it doesn't get worse (doubtful) do you really think Trump is going to work to make it any better? Or is he going to open his dumb ass mouth at every opportunity and fan the flames, intentionally or not?
 
His first presidential address is probably going to be a nightmare. Because he's already proven he's incapable of just reading a prepared speech off of cards.

The last thing I'll say is, well yeah. Maybe for you. But I guarantee you there are people who have already lost their lives indirectly just because of this guy becoming president. Hate crimes went up by 80% when Brexit happened. It'll be worse here.
 
Already read about 3 shootouts in the last 2 days, one half an hour from where I live. People are dying and will die as a result of a racist president emboldening the other racists in the country. They have their initiative and people will suffer. But it's okay, because life'll go on for you I guess. It's not the end of the world for you maybe, but a lot of LGBT people, and minorities in general are terrified out of their fucking minds.
 
The only reason I'm not afraid to leave my own god damn house is because I live in an extremely Hispanic dense area. If I were in any bible belt state I would not step out of my god damn house out of fear. So there you go. We'll keep moving forward, but at what cost. There is no world where people should have to fear for their lives because a presidential candidate has been elected.
 
Also I'm just gonna go ahead and also mention Mike Pence is a human being who probably shouldn't exist. That's all I got.

Btw if you voted trump just know that the rest of the world is looking at you and thinking that you're dumb
 
Don't go and defend Trump on every single thing he says, the same goes with any political candidate. They're not there to have you as part of their army, they're there to earn your support.

Hillary would have largely been a continuation of the status quo, some stuff might have changed, I don't think it'd be anything drastic.

Trump would pretty much upend many systems we have set here in the US, and then can very easily dick over international diplomatic relations.

other than john caveson, is anyone else here both dumb enough and old enough to vote for trump? I'm trying to put together a list of the people responsible for this bullshit

other than john caveson, is anyone else here both dumb enough and old enough to vote for trump? I'm trying to put together a list of the people responsible for this bullshit

other than john caveson, is anyone else here both dumb enough and old enough to vote for trump? I'm trying to put together a list of the people responsible for this bullshit

Why did the libertarian chicken cross the road?

None of your fucking business.