Schadenfruede Moment #PresidentElectTrump

You know what's really sad is though most people didn't like either candidate they can't articulate why this election was so troubling.

Simply put we had the choice between plutocracy or a permanent political class. Either way you end up with an oligarchy. This is hardly a schadenfruede moment but a threat to our democratic institutions as we ultimately we have not been offered a viable choice to protect those institutions. Sadly it's a point neither partisan supporters can see.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
You know what's really sad is though most people didn't like either candidate they can't articulate why this election was so troubling.
Click to expand...

what is so hard to articulate......this election was troubling because there were still people stupid enough to vote for Hillary after everything we knew about her........
 
Mott the Hoople said:
You know what's really sad is though most people didn't like either candidate they can't articulate why this election was so troubling.

Simply put we had the choice between plutocracy or a permanent political class. Either way you end up with an oligarchy. This is hardly a schadenfruede moment but a threat to our democratic institutions as we ultimately we have not been offered a viable choice to protect those institutions. Sadly it's a point neither partisan supporters can see.
Click to expand...
I see Trump doing far more harm to this country then Clinton would have ever accomplished, in fact, I believe he already has.
 
I am still looking for the whys of Hillary hatred. I realize this is a deep question, one which requires a deep soul search. Let me help just a bit, maybe - homophobia, racism, xenophobia, misogyny. Words but full of meaning too, so again why? Come on folks.
 
midcan5 said:
I am still looking for the whys of Hillary hatred. I realize this is a deep question, one which requires a deep soul search. Let me help just a bit, maybe - homophobia, racism, xenophobia, misogyny. Words but full of meaning too, so again why? Come on folks.
Click to expand...

a valid point.....but those are only a few of the things about Hillary that we find offensive.......
 
Mott the Hoople said:
You know what's really sad is though most people didn't like either candidate they can't articulate why this election was so troubling.

Simply put we had the choice between plutocracy or a permanent political class. Either way you end up with an oligarchy. This is hardly a schadenfruede moment but a threat to our democratic institutions as we ultimately we have not been offered a viable choice to protect those institutions. Sadly it's a point neither partisan supporters can see.
Click to expand...

There was nothing troubling about this election to me. I see real Americans taking back their country. I see people like you, GayRod, KKKhristiefan and Rancid Rack all in pain and that pleases me. Yes schadenfreude is the order of the day
 
No answers, more childish hate posts from the right and pessimism and throwing up your hands from some on the left. So I'll answer for you all. Presumptuous you say, read the hate filled nonsense that passes for thought in America today and get back to us on that. People can be made to hate, to see evil in another and excuse their own part in it. No one is born a racist or a white supremacist, they are made one and very few escape their creation. Twenty five years created in the minds of the partisan and the easily influenced a caricature rather than a person. Hillary became the dumping ground for the evils that group-think creates in its dungeon of wants. When someone's calls Hillary a liar you know no intelligence resides there as Trump lied a hundredfold more.

"The main hypothesis concerning group-think is this: the more amiability and espirt de corps among the members of an in-group of policymakers the greater the danger that independent critical thinking will be replaced by groupthink, which is likely to result in irrational and the dehumanizing actions directed at out-groups." Irving L. Janis in 'Sanctions for Evil'

Republicans helped make Trump now they must deal with their own creation. Had they not allowed the southern strategy to be their strategy, had they countered Trump's racist birtherism, had they not castigated government, the only institution in existence capable of establishing order and protecting the rights and freedoms of all citizens America would now not have an outsider, a buffoon, an insecure blowhard as their leader.

The below too is part of the hate machine.

"Republicans, of course, cloak themselves in the rhetoric of freedom and necessity and express concern about future generations. That the beast they would slay ultimately translates to the lives of American citizens, including some of the most vulnerable who depend on government social programs to which they enjoy legal, political, and moral entitlement, is irrelevant. Hatred of government is a disease with them. They loathe common purpose and project, especially when channeled through the state. Their hatred of government, it seems to me, is tantamount to hatred of country." Steven Johnston http://contemporarycondition.blogspot.com/2011/08/why-do-republicans-hate-america.html
 
Time to take the memberberries there midcan... the reality is I wouldn't vote for Hillary any more than I would have voted for Bernie and for the same reason, they proposed policies that are contrary to what I believe. It isn't about gay marriage, in fact I've always supported that, long before that was popular. Of course I supported getting the government out of our relationships entirely rather than having it "bless" certain relationships while rejecting others. There is no place for the government in those choices other than ensuring that children are not victimized into relationships they are unprepared for and before they are old enough to make such life changing decisions.

Just a few of the many reasons why I would never vote for Hillary, or pretty much anybody who is a Democrat:

1. She believes in a "living" constitution.

2. She believes in socializing large swathes of our economy, most obviously health care, I reject that on principle. Freedom is inconvenient and often scary, but it is worth every moment.

3. She believes the 2nd Amendment is something that can be ignored when it becomes inconvenient, I reject that and will for all of the Constitution. If you want to change how it applies there is an Amendment process, if you don't have the support to change it then the government continues to be limited. I also believe that her proposed legislation would harm mostly the poor and those who might need the protection most. The arrogance of the left...

4. She would never suggest a balanced budget amendment. Ever. In fact she would never speak of such a limitation on the government's power.

5. She would have nominated "living constitution" justices, I would never vote for anybody that would undermine the limitations that are supposed to guarantee my freedoms.

6. Her interventions as Secretary of State caused harm to the United States. Supporting Syria intervention one of the most obvious. One of the least obvious but one that I believe was clearly an attempt to undermine the 2nd Amendment was the "Fast and Furious" program. Few remember all the times she was telling us how many of the weapons found there were from the U.S.... ignoring that it was our government policy that put them there. She was going to use that program, until it was aired publicly, to attempt to limit gun sales. It was a regularly portrayed as pretty much the sole source of weapons in Mexico by the Administration early on after Obama's election and the beginning of her term as Secretary of State. Again, knowing now that our own government was running the guns it nearly makes me ill. I still believe it was planned and they were most upset that they were revealed to be the source than they were about the people who were brutally murdered because of this reckless policy. I believe that the Administration had full knowledge of the policy and planned to use the "crisis", but had carefully placed plausible deniability. In my opinion one of the most damaging Secretaries of State the United States has ever had foisted upon us.

7. Her absolute belief that people who believe in different policy are an "enemy" (she has quite literally stated so in the past). She is no stateswoman, in fact she is a prime example of what is "not" a statesman/woman.


Anyway, basically, midcan. There are way more reasons, but as I said before this is just a few reasons why I wouldn't vote for her, or anybody at all who propounded the same ideals. I simply vehemently disagree with the way she would govern. It is as simple as that.
 
IMG_1527.JPG
 
Damocles said:
Time to take the memberberries there midcan... the reality is I wouldn't vote for Hillary any more than I would have voted for Bernie and for the same reason, they proposed policies that are contrary to what I believe. It isn't about gay marriage, in fact I've always supported that, long before that was popular. Of course I supported getting the government out of our relationships entirely rather than having it "bless" certain relationships while rejecting others. There is no place for the government in those choices other than ensuring that children are not victimized into relationships they are unprepared for and before they are old enough to make such life changing decisions.

Just a few of the many reasons why I would never vote for Hillary, or pretty much anybody who is a Democrat:

1. She believes in a "living" constitution.

2. She believes in socializing large swathes of our economy, most obviously health care, I reject that on principle. Freedom is inconvenient and often scary, but it is worth every moment.

3. She believes the 2nd Amendment is something that can be ignored when it becomes inconvenient, I reject that and will for all of the Constitution. If you want to change how it applies there is an Amendment process, if you don't have the support to change it then the government continues to be limited. I also believe that her proposed legislation would harm mostly the poor and those who might need the protection most. The arrogance of the left...

4. She would never suggest a balanced budget amendment. Ever. In fact she would never speak of such a limitation on the government's power.

5. She would have nominated "living constitution" justices, I would never vote for anybody that would undermine the limitations that are supposed to guarantee my freedoms.

6. Her interventions as Secretary of State caused harm to the United States. Supporting Syria intervention one of the most obvious. One of the least obvious but one that I believe was clearly an attempt to undermine the 2nd Amendment was the "Fast and Furious" program. Few remember all the times she was telling us how many of the weapons found there were from the U.S.... ignoring that it was our government policy that put them there. She was going to use that program, until it was aired publicly, to attempt to limit gun sales. It was a regularly portrayed as pretty much the sole source of weapons in Mexico by the Administration early on after Obama's election and the beginning of her term as Secretary of State. Again, knowing now that our own government was running the guns it nearly makes me ill. I still believe it was planned and they were most upset that they were revealed to be the source than they were about the people who were brutally murdered because of this reckless policy. I believe that the Administration had full knowledge of the policy and planned to use the "crisis", but had carefully placed plausible deniability. In my opinion one of the most damaging Secretaries of State the United States has ever had foisted upon us.

7. Her absolute belief that people who believe in different policy are an "enemy" (she has quite literally stated so in the past). She is no stateswoman, in fact she is a prime example of what is "not" a statesman/woman.


Anyway, basically, midcan. There are way more reasons, but as I said before this is just a few reasons why I wouldn't vote for her, or anybody at all who propounded the same ideals. I simply vehemently disagree with the way she would govern. It is as simple as that.
Click to expand...

I agree with #1, somewhat with #2, I agree strongly with #3, am not so concerned about #4 but want better stewards overall and she wouldn't be, #5 is why I finally cast my vote for Trump instead of voting for the Green Party candidate in protest again, had already decided to vote for Trump by the time #6 got really big and much more came to light, and with #7, yea, she ain't no stateswoman but then Trump ain't no statesman either...but I still voted for him.

Edit: By the way, thanks to Damo for writing this. I have a hard time being serious on here nowadays...at least about politics.
 
Damocles said:
Time to take the memberberries there midcan... the reality is I wouldn't vote for Hillary any more than I would have voted for Bernie and for the same reason, they proposed policies that are contrary to what I believe. It isn't about gay marriage, in fact I've always supported that, long before that was popular. Of course I supported getting the government out of our relationships entirely rather than having it "bless" certain relationships while rejecting others. There is no place for the government in those choices other than ensuring that children are not victimized into relationships they are unprepared for and before they are old enough to make such life changing decisions....
Click to expand...

Damocles, missed this...

Thanks for your reply. But your reasons only address your own libertarian (?) ideology. And isn't it funny that too is taught and is widespread among a certain segment of America's youth today. It is even believed by econ professors, so called think tank experts, and other conservatives / free marketers in religion and politics. Those beliefs are widespread on the web too, Reason magazine and their site, Ayn Rand fans, Hayek followers, etc etc, it reminds me more of a cult - do this and we will achieve eternal bliss. But then is Trump any different from those you wouldn't vote for? Not at all, something else is a work here too.

On your rather vague reference to trans or children, someone-something must insure the rights of all citizens, you know that freedom stuff that often seems just the opposite. In society it is only law through government that can grant confirm and ensure these rights. Seems like this area may conflict with your libertaian like views? No need for a pill that's normal.

Your points:

1. She does? How do you know, and isn't this one of those word games. 'Living?' The Constitution is open enough to include in its history all of the above. 'Brown' is only one example.

2. Freedom only means something if something is possible. Another word game. Show me.

3. Again you have created her, or as I wrote twenty five years have created her. And your argument then travels into race and poverty and pretends guns matter there in a positive way. You seem to be hiding once more behind PC?

4. Not doable, I'm sure you buy everything with cash. When I read libertarians I get the sense reality is too complicated for them?

5. Again these meaningless words, context matters Dam, the odd thing is freedom comes to mean its opposite in the libertarian - freedom dreamers realm. (see links below)

6. Egads Hillary alone was responsible, you confirm my points.

7. So her freedom to call a spade a spade is non statesmanlike, too much. Funny that word bothers you as I hear it from the republicans constantly and isn't government the enemy of freedom for some? Crooks and criminals as an example.

Dam, you don't show the hatred that twenty five years created, but you repeat every single item of that hate machine, should you list more they'd be the same stuff over and over again. Nice try. So did you vote for Donald or Green or libertarian?


"To think of humans as freedom-loving, you must be ready to view nearly all of history as a mistake." John Gray


"The unity of Government, which constitutes you one people, is also now dear to you. It is justly so; for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquillity at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very Liberty, which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee, that, from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed, to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth; as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and insidiously) directed, it is of infinite moment, that you should properly estimate the immense value of your national Union to your collective and individual happiness; that you should cherish a cordial, habitual, and immovable attachment to it; accustoming yourselves to think and speak of it as of the Palladium of your political safety and prosperity; watching for its preservation with jealous anxiety; discountenancing whatever may suggest even a suspicion, that it can in any event be abandoned; and indignantly frowning upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the various parts." http://www.quotedb.com/speeches/washington-farewell-address


"For decades conservatives have been demonizing government and not enough has been done to defend it. Ever since Ronald Reagan declared in 1981 that "Government is not a solution to our problem, government is the problem," Republicans have been waging a political war against this institution. They have been joined in this anti-government crusade by libertarian thinkers, Tea Party activists, right-wing media pundits, and wealthy corporate lobbies. This powerful political coalition blithely ignores anything good about government and conducts a relentless smear campaign against this institution. They constantly play upon the fears and insecurities of average Americans and encourage them to blame all their problems on big bad government." http://www.governmentisgood.com/

Libratarians:

http://web.inter.nl.net/users/Paul.Treanor/libertarian.html
http://www.spectacle.org/897/trust.html
http://rustbeltphilosophy.blogspot.com/2015/02/okay-seriously-what-fuck-is-statist.html


PS what are memberberries?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top