Voting List: The US is now so tilted, reality is sideways


I am infuriated beyond words at the ignorance and incompetence of US voters more than I am towards the fact that Trump, like Shrub, got less than 50% of the vote.  This was preventable, and the DNC actively did things that caused it to happen.

What could have been, and now will never be.  Sorry, Bernie.

A few months ago, PZ Myers asked everyone to hold their nose and support Clinton because not doing so or criticizing her helped Trump.  While I agreed with that assessment, I chose silence.  (I’m Canadian, so I’m not a voter.)  But now that the election is over, it’s time and important to talk about how things came to be and what needs to be done.

The democratic party “leadership” needs to be held accountable, and probably removed.  Bernie Sanders’s candidacy was a protest against the establishment, against Clinton who was the choice of the 1%ers and Wall Street.  The DNC “leaders” actively acted against him in favour of Clinton, perhaps engaging in actual sabotage of his campaign (financing, publicity, support, etc.).

How many millions of protest votes went to Trump because Clinton was forced upon the populace?  How many might have voted for Clinton if she had won legitimately over Sanders and the DNC had not shown deliberate bias?  We will never know, but we do know that the DNC’s decision to foist Clinton on US voters and prevent any other candidates from winning is likely what killed any chance for her to win, not her scandals.  As some republicans openly stated early this year, the democrats had an open door to the White House and threw it away by choosing Clinton, the least viable candidate.

One of my biggest fears is that Trump will quickly realize how overwhelmed and incompetent he is for the job and quit, handing the presidency to Pence.  That would mean three or seven years of extremism that makes Shrub look like a moderate.  Or worse, if Trump quits after two years, Pence could be elected twice, meaning as much as ten years of his “leadership” if the US swings that far right.

In the 1990s, common rightwing rhetoric said, “Communism was the 20th century experiment that failed”.  One could now say that the US is the two century experiment that failed.  Like the Soviet Union, the US may soon be wiped from the page of time and have to start over again.

Comments

  1. says

    I think this quote may be crucial to liberals if we want to win another election. For me, this dovetails with your assessment, at least to some degree.

    “The truth is, most of Trump’s voters voted for him despite the fact that he said/believes awful things, not because of it. That in no way excuses it, but I have to admit I’ve spent eight years quietly tuning out news stories about drone strikes blowing up weddings in Afghanistan. I still couldn’t point to Yemen on a map. We form blind spots for our side, because there’s something larger at stake. In their case, it’s a belief that the system is fundamentally broken and that Hillary Clinton would have been more of the same. Trump rode a wave of support from people who’ve spent the last eight years watching terrifying nightly news reports about ISIS and mass shootings and riots. They look out their front door and see painkiller addicts and closed factories. They believe that nobody in Washington gives a ____ about them, mainly because that’s 100-percent correct.” – http://www.cracked.com/blog/dont-panic/

  2. secondtofirstworld says

    @intransitive:

    PZ’s idea isn’t nothing new, the French voted Chirac in gloves, as better him in the presidential palace, than Jean Marie Le Pen. They were proven right, the Front Nationale went through a re-branding aka diverted the direction of its hate and mellowed its tone, but it’s still no party to lead France.

    “We hold these truths to be self-evident,” is how the Declaration of Independence begins. Corporations have too much lobby power? They believe it always have been like that, except it wasn’t until Eisenhower’s time, who protested it, heck Bust that trust isn’t even much older than a century. They believe to be self evident, that Obamacare can go, because community outreach had always existed… save for starving millions religious charities couldn’t handle anymore. I could go into further amendments, the point is, the great American experiment failed with the onset of the 24/7 news networks, as politicians could start to peddle the misinformation on how recent institutions always were part of the American fabric. The problem with blaming all of the loss on the DNC (they have a hefty share) is obvious, and she is called Jill Stein. She wasn’t in the pockets of big money, neither was she a major party candidate, and the latter is key. Some of the people voting Obama instead of McCain did so because Sarah Palin is not a man. It would be misleading to think or to claim that’s not an issue, since many Trump supporters, including women, post Pussygate that they don’t want a woman there, and honestly voted that way.

    I will say this, Sanders and Warren are progressives, and that’s also why in the current climate, and who knows how long they’re doomed to fail even if they clinch the nomination. Many conservative voters did not vote on getting someone into the White House out of spite for Clinton, they truly believe to be individual and exceptional enough that no such programs are needed. A program from a right centrist Democrat, who compromised with the parties affected by the law so they still make profit. At this point it has to be said, although almost all under 30 voter sided with Clinton, they refused to signup for Obamacare. I would have to look into the Canadian system, but I heavily surprised, that Medicare works by younger people paying the dividends of older people. I grew up with universal healthcare, you pay for your own bills. So, on the surface it seems, they’re 2 parallel systems, on one end young people pay both, on the other end, over 65 people (who voted Trump) get both benefits. The whole idea sure is exceptional, but inadequate.

    Which brings me to where Americans and French are alike, it’s pride. It’s honorable to think, that there’s no upper limit to your individuality, except that’s not how civilization and group hierarchy works. So, introducing a system where you have to rely on others without being poor is a no-go in America. What the Clinton campaign had to do with Sanders was exactly nothing. What he offered is very, very good, but it’s also a political suicide in America. Heck, Trudeau’s cabinet would be a suicide in America, gays, feminists, refugees? The apocalypse is here…

    Most Americans are liberals, not progressives, if it were the other way around, social problems wouldn’t reach riot levels, ever. As you may recall, one of your former leaders sent orphans to the Catholic church, where they were mistreated. After it came out to light, procedures were held, but no riots. That’s not to say Canada is paradise, just that it has a more stronger social fabric. To quote Bertolt Brecht’s satirical poem, if the people chose to distrust its leaders and revolt, the party should elect a new society. Replacing the DNC doesn’t change a thing until the limitations of human individuality don’t become part of the American psyche.

  3. RationalismRules says

    One of my biggest fears is that Trump will quickly realize how overwhelmed and incompetent he is for the job and quit, handing the presidency to Pence.

    Trump is a rampant narcissist – he will never understand that he is incompetent and overwhelmed. He will simply blame his failures on others.
    I believe the only way he will leave the oval office is if he is impeached.

  4. says

    I was a Bernie supporter and, while I do believe Bernie would have fared better, I also came around to recognizing that Hillary is not as bad as she’s been portrayed. I’ve come to recognize that she has had a lot of baggage and so-called “scandals” thrust upon her for daring to be a strong, outspoken woman. And that’s a shame. We need to hold the sexists in this country accountable, too. Really, I’m on board with those who point out that, even with Clinton not being well liked (again, largely for daring to be a strong woman), Trump still should not have one.

    I would also say this really should cause us to question who these anti-establishment voters really are. They would really risk LGBT rights, gay rights, and other minority rights just to stick it to the establishment? Are you kidding me?

    No, I’m afraid this is no joke. I got involved with the Occupy Wall Street movement back when that was a thing. That involvement was short lived as I discovered there were a number of Libertarians in the group. These are horrible people who’s big issue with the bail outs was not that it didn’t help out the victims of the gambling habits of the banks, but because it went against their political ideology that government shouldn’t get involved in the “free market.” Well…I hear there is a policy of no expletives in the comments, but this is where I would place one if I could.

    The point is these protest voters aren’t exactly all that great of people and I really don’t like the idea of saying, “This is your fault, Democrats, for not appealing more to these deplorable anti-establishment types!”

    Although, I will say there really isn’t any need for so many Democrats to be so Wall Street friendly. They would probably gain more votes than they would lose. But, I think we realize what they are afraid of losing is the financial support. But money doesn’t vote. If anything, that’s the lesson Democrats really need to learn. Oh, and they need to learn that it’s the ideas that are more important and not the particular people running for office.

    The last thing I’ll say is we also don’t really know if Bernie would have won had the DNC not meddled as much as they did. Also, other than the poor debate schedule, what did they do, really, to hurt Bernie’s chances? As you yourself say, they “perhaps engaged in actual sabotage.” So you don’t even know if they actually did or not!

    Unless…are you thinking that had Hillary won the primary fair and square that fewer people would have voted a protest vote? I am highly skeptical of that. As a Bernie supporter, I interacted with some of these people. No, I’m afraid many of them are so anti-establishment that they’d still put in a protest vote even if Hillary had won fairly.

  5. brucegee1962 says

    Trump is a rampant narcissist – he will never understand that he is incompetent and overwhelmed. He will simply blame his failures on others.

    Truth. Also, he’s a delegator — he will appoint a cabinet of horrors, give them some vague instructions, and then head out to indulge in hobbies like golf, bullying, and mistresses. And as you say, when things start going down the tubes, he will blame all the catastrophes on Democrats, women, minorities, and foreigners. And his followers will believe him.

  6. says

    Here’s where the whole criticism of the DNC when it comes to Bernie Sanders fails for me – how were they supposed to react when someone who wasn’t a Democrat (and still sits in the Senate as an independent) joins the party just to run for president?

    I might be one of the few who sees their loyalty to a Democrat since 1968 as a good thing.

    • secondtofirstworld says

      My birth country had a prime minister, who was a finance minister shortly before the end of the Cold War, was a finance minister in a socialist government, and he ran as independent 5 years later, and won, as people wanted a person outside politics as usual, and thus led socialists to victory (and resigned 2 years later, amidst allegations that he served as a communist spy hunter, and because he couldn’t handle the financial crisis brought on by 9/11).

      The point is, as it turns out, the ones being disillusioned by the establishment and supporting Trump this time around come from areas of economic devastation, where seemingly no one listened to to them, or bothered to poll them. It’s something I get as my birth country was also an agrarian one which was forcefully industrialized, then came a 10-year period of companies and factories coming in, but by ascending to the EU, that appeal was lost. Had Bernie won the nomination, people would have supported his economic policies, but people benefiting from lobbying had different ideas.

      Hilary did adopt Bernie’s ideas to an extent, but not his aim who to talk to. It’s only human no one thinking of election or reelection would come out and say companies leave to remain competitive, and the mechanism started to keep up the wealth enjoyed by many after the WWII reconstructions don’t and can’t come back. Donald did promise they would, but, and unless I’m uninformed, he hasn’t talked about suggesting a move to a different, the jobs their parents and grandparents worked in won’t come back, because machines do them now. Pretty much everyone inside and outside the US knows the day will come most of our jobs will be done by machines, and local, state and federal government did not give much effort to offer new set of job skills and jobs coming along with them.

      It isn’t intrinsically their fault either, it was the compromise known as the New Deal that propagates the idea, how insurance, pension, and the American dream only come by hard work and a decent employer. For a second, I could pretend I’m one such person from a rural area (I did grew up in a town like Boise after all). I hear people complain, how social mobility is not equally distributed between races, but here I am living in a state that people mock as a flyover one. I can’t leave my state, let alone my country. I’m not racist toward non-white people, but I don’t like how they only talk about them not getting jobs. Factories moved away, farm subsidies vary, and police presence is also sparse in such areas. I don’t have a connection to gun restrictions, as this how I protect myself and the family. Would we mount up in tractors in the far away D.C. that would make the news, not what we say. It could have been Rand, or Sanders or Huckabee (not much common with those Texan folks). It could be revenge and anger, but just once, the voice had to be heard.

      Certainly, there are differences between histories and ethnic makeup, so I can’t and won’t claim this is an accurate representation, but I do know what it means, when people say, the capitol and the rest. Hillary won the popular vote, where people live more diverse, and have easier access to higher education. If it were me (but it isn’t) I would analyze the economic reasons behind the personal grievances before other ones. Not because it changes the discourse, rather because the division doesn’t seem to be along racial and gender lines, but lack of representation. Both major candidates are guilty of ignoring places that did not favor them, as that screamed elitism.

      Had Bernie had been the nominee, he would have secured the presidency with a Midwestern candidate. Continuing to blame elitism itself is, I agree, misguided. The ones voting for Trump outside his voter base voted for Obama.

Leave a Reply