Our Worst Fears for the 2016 Election Materialized: The Most Unqualified Candidate in 100 yrs is Elected President

Twelve years ago, I worked for the Kerry campaign in Cleveland, Ohio, and on the day after the election we were stunned, defeated, and despondent. But, this feels worse, much worse. The candidate, now president-elect, is worse than GWB, and the way he got to the finish line is irredeemably deplorable. 

I could understand why Americans chose GWB to remain as the commander-in-chief in 2004 at the height of two wars, but it hurts when half the country voted for Donald Trump who built his campaign on racism, xenophobia, hate, attacking people and the constitution, insults with no limits, threats, childish temper tantrums, and by bringing out the worst among us. I did not believe we could be so bad as a nation to elect and find someone like Trump acceptable. Even if you believe you have termites eating your house, you don't fight them by torch.  

I am for democracy, and support the institutions of this great country. Institutions that DJT does not respect. We accept the verdict of the voters, even if we disagree with it. The rules may be outdated--the EC, winner take all system, etc--but they apply to all competitors. Imagine what Trump and his cohorts would say had he, like JRC, won the popular vote but lost in the EC.... He refused to say whether he would accept the outcome of this election if he lost.... This child in man's clothes, who throws a fit, "it's not fair", when he thinks he might lose--a blatant disregard for our institutions and acceptable norms of civility, and citizenship.

What Now?

 It'll take a while for the shock to wear off, though I don't think I'll find the outcome any less palatable for years to come. We'll pour over data to try to understand what exactly happened and plot ahead. Much will depend on how Trump governs. One of the terrifying things about him is that his awful character flaws that make him unfit for the office may result in unpredictable consequences. With GWB we knew what to expect. Did it make it more acceptable? Not really, but he wasn't crazy unpredictable.

It took an non-traditional Republican to win the presidency for the Republicans. But they took a big gamble with Trump. He demolished traditional Republican policy values: free trade and no protectionism; no talk of redistribution of resources; no regulation of Wall Street; pro-NATO and strong presence all over the globe; no tariffs; etc.  There will be clashes within the GOP. Trump's feud with Speaker Ryan may escalate. Will Trump choose the tea party or the Republican party establishment?

Is Trump capable of changing his style? No, not his hair, but the way he's run his business and his TV show. You can't run the country like that, or like a country club or a casino. Nor can you fail to uphold the obligations the country has undertaken, from foreign treaties, to the national debt, to the social safety net.

Most Americans vote on a loose, simple narrative and feelings. They don't know or care to understand the workings of our complicated political system that's been in place for hundreds of years. However, while the majority of Americans wanted change--and Trump represented change--they'll expect change. They'll be aware that the Republicans will control the Executive and both chambers of Congress, so Trump and the GOP will have no good excuse for not delivering what the people want. Now, many of Trump's promises aren't realistic, from building the wall to bringing back factories and improving the lives of the middle class by trickle-down economics and weakening consumer protection.

I personally know people who did not vote for HR Clinton because she was very unappealing to them, and  while they found Trump abhorrent, they didn't reason out: not HRC = yes DJT. This group included 10% of 18-35 year-olds who voted for third parties or millions of them who didn't vote at all. Trump got the majority of women! Trump got more Hispanic/Latino votes than Romney. Likewise, millions of people who benefited from the social safety net, including Obamacare, didn't bother to vote. Elections have consequences and these groups will feel this. First thing on the agenda: repealing Obamacare, so 20 million Americans will soon find out how free they'll be from the government obliging them to have health insurance by not having no insurance.

One thing for sure, Trump will shake the foundations of this country. 

It's been an exhausting campaign and a draining couple of days... I'm afraid this is not going to get any easier for a long time. To all my liberal friends, this is not the end. The country is moving in a progressive direction; look what policies, often via referendum, states are adopting. Many important steps are laid in stone by now, and even though we got an anti-science president and a creationist VP, progress will prevail; it'll just take a detour in the next 4 years. It's up to us to reverse this setback as soon as possible, but we have to bring a sizeable chunk of those misguided people who voted for Trump to our side. Most of them are not part of the fascist core that propelled Trump's campaign, so we have to become even more vocal and active. It's probably the best therapy for us now.

False Equivalency and Laziness in our Politics

Bill Maher is spot on.

Several good points made here, like the amount of lies and the magnitude of those; not all are the same, and, yes, not all are evil.  Also, the lackadaisical attitude and citizenship failure of so many Americans who they hide behind cynicism so they don't have to invest time, energy, and precious brain cells into a process that has a direct effect on their lives! But they know about sports or the measurements of Kim Kardashian's ass.  Don't believe me? See how people talk about sports and the knowledge they exhibit.....

As for the latest FBI announcement that they found more emails... oyvey, I thought the FBI and the media (which are eating this latest "news") were in HR Clinton's corner.  Anyway, the bottom line is that this will not make any difference as most people already have decided that this scandal either enrages them or they don't care. It's beating a dead horse; it doesn't have legs anymore. I like the aggressive response by HRC to demand the FBI release all the details, and that this "revelation" is irresponsible at this stage. Those emails were not from her server but came from a separate investigation into a creep's (Anthony Weiner) sexting underage women.  I guess it was expected to move from the pussy-gate to weiner-gate.

Yes, It Does Reflect Who You Are, Donald! [just go away aready, you disgusting bully]

While the "deplorables" is a recent tag, and H.Clinton has gotten lots of criticism about this, it's appropriate. The only question is the size of this dirt bag. The GOP should have realized that Trump was riding a wave that had those deplorables as its core. The ones filled with hate, prejudice, and utter ignorance. And, he encouraged this. No party should have promoted anyone who gets on stage and denigrates possible future presidents of the US by calling them, "ugly," "little ..." . "lyin'.. etc, and brags about the size of his penis.

But, he is the product of the seeds and cultivation the GOP employed in the last 10 years. That unless Republicans are in charge everything else is suspect, treasonous, foreign, anti-American, anti-Xtian, illegitimate, and worthy of not only disrespect, but hate too. Everybody knows how the Congressional GOP and its leaders have behaved. Same with others down the line to local levels. Trump rode this wave the GOP created, so the GOP, Tea party, etc, all OWN him. As he said last week, "I reflect you"... 

This pussy-scandal shouldn't surprise anyone. If anyone didn't know of or cared about Don's personality before this latest revelation confirms that they've rightly have earned the label of deplorables!

A juvenile, braggart, vile, dangerous ignoramus, who wants to run the United States as a gambling hole, while encouraging and employing a basket of deplorables. He has lead them by example! What more do you want to reject this disgusting bully?

Paul Krugman is Correct About Trump and the Rest of the GOP Field. The Know-Nothings Have Made a Comeback

Update, Aug. 11th: Those who thought Trump would implode after bullying everyone at the GOP debate and blowing lots of noisy hot air out of his.. orifices, new polls indicate the opposite, because, heck, the conservative base likes what Trump represents. The GOP leadership want to hide this ugly reality from the rest of America.

In the first contest state, Iowa, according to the latest poll, Trump leads the field at 19%, followed by Ben (who?) Carson at 12%.  In the second state contest and first primary, in New Hampshire, Trump jumped up by 7% to 32% [New Hampshire poll] after the debate. The second choice, Jeb Bush, dropped to 11%.

I think it's time for this blog to endorse Donald Trump for the Republican Party's nomination in 2016. I think Sarah Palin would be a great VP on the ticket with him. What? She's not running? OK, let's keep our eyes & ears open on this.....

---------------
Another excellent editorial by Paul K; it's worth reading it in its entirety. (see below)

The GOP strategists and party leaders aren't happy with the Donald because he's damaging and already damaged party with the mainstream (centrists and independents) voters. But, what Trump represents is the basis of the activist part of the Republican party. He's expressing views that, although deeply-held in GOP's heart, are not usually expressed when Republicans are seeking mainstream votes.  Don't believe me? Just read the national and state Republican parties' platforms. There, you find many abhorrent views that fly well with the conservative base but are sunk in the waters of where the rest of the country lives!

I often wonder how it's possible two people to see something in front of their eyes and form totally different conclusions. If it's about factual findings, then, I had believed, it'd be a simple matter of using logic and evidence to ascertain the facts. But, in reality this rarely happens, especially when something is deemed important by the individual!  People are greatly influenced by culture (including religion), ideology, and a personal sense of a comfort zone. The ideological part can numb the mind and make someone lazy to chew up and digest information. Conformity was rewarded. Venturing outside the comfort zone--into the discomfort of realizing you've made a mistake--wasn't/isn't desired either.

But, I think it may be a personality trait on how to approach life. Being a conservative is natural, or at least it's how the vast majority of humans lived and experienced their lives. Captured by culture and in time. Very few ventured outside the norm. It can be argued that such approach made sense too. At the very least, blaze makers were not rewarded but they were rather persecuted, tortured, and killed. Group think was the norm. Of course there were divisions and big conflicts. Recently, I've been pouring over the religious conflicts after the Protestant Reformation. Yes, Martin Luther, Kalvin, and others brought about tremendous change, but much of it--and it took many generations to be evident--was unintended. The bloody religious wars pitted one religious faction against another, but in essence all sides hadn't been that radical--as they all held different versions of the same flawed illusion of a divine creator who insisted upon how we dress, what we eat, how we screw, how we kill our enemies, etc.

Now, how is it that most of us think Trump is someone who uses empty (though appealing) rhetoric. He said he didn't prepare for the first GOP debate last week. I believe him, because he doesn't have to be specific as long as he appears to know and uses generalities specifically addressing the concerns of the conservative base. Instead of responding to Megyn Kelly's question about his paleolithic views on women, he responds by personally attacking her and ..Rosie O'Donnell. That debate broke all viewership records for such debates other than presidential ones. Trump was tramp. The GOP leadership may not want him but if the activist base--those who show up during the Republican primary selection process--this is exciting.

The 2016 election, was supposed to be a showcase of the "new" Republican party. There's no incumbent running this time, so both parties have a chance to re-define themselves by showcasing their candidates. They're indeed doing so....

 Paul Krugman's editorial [link] in its entirety

This was, according to many commentators, going to be the election cycle Republicans got to show off their “deep bench.” The race for the nomination would include experienced governors like Jeb Bush and Scott Walker, fresh thinkers like Rand Paul, and attractive new players like Marco Rubio. Instead, however, Donald Trump leads the field by a wide margin. What happened?

The answer, according to many of those who didn’t see it coming, is gullibility: People can’t tell the difference between someone who sounds as if he knows what he’s talking about and someone who is actually serious about the issues. And for sure there’s a lot of gullibility out there. But if you ask me, the pundits have been at least as gullible as the public, and still are.

For while it’s true that Mr. Trump is, fundamentally, an absurd figure, so are his rivals. If you pay attention to what any one of them is actually saying, as opposed to how he says it, you discover incoherence and extremism every bit as bad as anything Mr. Trump has to offer. And that’s not an accident: Talking nonsense is what you have to do to get anywhere in today’s Republican Party.

For example, Mr. Trump’s economic views, a sort of mishmash of standard conservative talking points and protectionism, are definitely confused. But is that any worse than Jeb Bush’s deep voodoo, his claim that he could double the underlying growth rate of the American economy? And Mr. Bush’s credibility isn’t helped by his evidence for that claim: the relatively rapid growth Florida experienced during the immense housing bubble that coincided with his time as governor.

Mr. Trump, famously, is a “birther” — someone who has questioned whether President Obama was born in the United States. But is that any worse than Scott Walker’s declaration that he isn’t sure whether the president is a Christian?

Mr. Trump’s declared intention to deport all illegal immigrants is definitely extreme, and would require deep violations of civil liberties. But are there any defenders of civil liberties in the modern G.O.P.? Notice how eagerly Rand Paul, self-described libertarian, has joined in the witch hunt against Planned Parenthood.

And while Mr. Trump is definitely appealing to know-nothingism, Marco Rubio, climate change denier, has made “I’m not a scientist” his signature line. (Memo to Mr. Rubio: Presidents don’t have to be experts on everything, but they do need to listen to experts, and decide which ones to believe.)

The point is that while media puff pieces have portrayed Mr. Trump’s rivals as serious men — Jeb the moderate, Rand the original thinker, Marco the face of a new generation — their supposed seriousness is all surface. Judge them by positions as opposed to image, and what you have is a lineup of cranks. And as I said, this is no accident.

It has long been obvious that the conventions of political reporting and political commentary make it almost impossible to say the obvious — namely, that one of our two major parties has gone off the deep end. Or as the political analysts Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein put it in their book “It’s Even Worse Than It Looks,” the G.O.P. has become an “insurgent outlier … un-persuaded by conventional understanding of facts, evidence, and science.” It’s a party that has no room for rational positions on many major issues.

Or to put it another way, modern Republican politicians can’t be serious — not if they want to win primaries and have any future within the party. Crank economics, crank science, crank foreign policy are all necessary parts of a candidate’s resume.

Until now, however, leading Republicans have generally tried to preserve a façade of respectability, helping the news media to maintain the pretense that it was dealing with a normal political party. What distinguishes Mr. Trump is not so much his positions as it is his lack of interest in maintaining appearances. And it turns out that the party’s base, which demands extremist positions, also prefers those positions delivered straight. Why is anyone surprised?

Remember how Mr. Trump was supposed to implode after his attack on John McCain? Mr. McCain epitomizes the strategy of sounding moderate while taking extreme positions, and is much loved by the press corps, which puts him on TV all the time. But Republican voters, it turns out, couldn’t care less about him.

Can Mr. Trump actually win the nomination? I have no idea. But even if he is eventually pushed aside, pay no attention to all the analyses you will read declaring a return to normal politics. That’s not going to happen; normal politics left the G.O.P. a long time ago. At most, we’ll see a return to normal hypocrisy, the kind that cloaks radical policies and contempt for evidence in conventional-sounding rhetoric. And that won’t be an improvement.

Ignorance Usually is not a Good Defense, Unless You're a Conservative Running for Office and Appealing to Idiocy

"I'm not a scientist," it's the excuse many politicians use to avoid answering controversial questions, like climate change, evolution, age of earth, etc. Of course, most of us aren't scientists, but use the products of science every day. And, most of us are alive, because of science. We doubled human life expectancy in the last 100 years, cured diseases, reduced infant mortality (and mothers' mortality at childbirth), went to the moon, understand a lot more about the universe, and we made our lives more comfortable because of science. So, science works.

What works actually it's the method of discovery, acquisition of knowledge, forming and amending scientific theories, and seeking the facts and the truth. Unfortunately, many Americans don't really understand what the scientific method is. There are several reasons for this. One is the strong influence of religion, which is much higher here than in other advanced countries. In addition religion has been meddling in education. Another reason is the failure of schools to teach what science and the scientific method is.

Education has to be knowledge, but what kind of knowledge? Memorization & repetition without understanding isn't the goal. Education, like science, should be a tool for knowledge. In this sense, it's more important how you thing than what you think about.

We may not be scientists but we must understand what science is and what it does. Democracy depends on the people's understanding of issues, engagement, and prudence. It's obvious that the quality of a system depends on the quality of the people involved. Ignorance doesn't serve the good political life--nor life in general.

"I'm not a scientist"

It's tiresome, to say the least, that leaders use this lame line. They are either ignorant or lying or both. If they're ignorant, they should recuse themselves from making public policy on issues they don't understand. They should stop promoting idiocy like, there's got to be two sides to the story, or teach the controversy, or there's no unanimity... Please, stop this nonsense. As leaders they should try to elevate public discourse by speaking carefully about science, the facts, and reality than by appealing the lowest common denominator.

Here's an ignorant person, a former governor of Florida and a member of the Bush clan, who is seriously exploring running for president of the U.S.

 

 Let the circus of the Republican/conservatives/tea partiers begin. It'd be hilarious if it didn't have serious implications on our public discourse.