Delegate decision day: does Dudley Dudley derail Donald's dystopia?
December 16, 2016 10:00 AM   Subscribe

In yet another week of "surely this...", Russia is accused of helping him win the US election to a Senator's dismay and possible retaliation, Mitt loses out to Tillerson, Rick Perry is nominated for can't remember oops, other people are nominated, and librarians and science come under attack, with net neutrality possibly next. The Electoral College is but a few days away, with lobbying, labels, opinions and angry celebrities. However, the chances of a shock are low. Elsewhere, the public vote gives Hillary a large lead with comparisons to previous elections, Louisiana voted, the 2018 midterms are underway, Barack is interviewed, contemporary capitalism, Putin's revenge, un-democracy in North Carolina, latest odds, and piñata.

Housekeeping. Please...
- Don't go after each other, don't poke known sore points, do debate in context.
- Take it to Chat for context-free, exclamations and other existential reactions.
- Check before submitting a link whether it's already been done in this thread.
- Don't paste huge swathes of text from somewhere you're linking to anyway.
- If needed there are self-care recommendations from the mods, or try writing or commenting on a non-political post on MetaFilter, good nutrition, sleep or company, or walk away from screens and look at nature for a while.

For legacy content see the many posts tagged with election2016. Despite the election fast receeding, the reference wiki explains some of the terminology used in comments on these threads.

MetaFilter
* Indivisible: A Practical Guide for Resisting the Trump Agenda.
* Thank (insert suitable gif) we are here.
* From Russia, with love.
* Donald Trump is Time's 2016 Person of the Year.
* What your social-media news feed could look like if things go wrong.

Elsewhere, the New EPA Chief Proposes 30% Cut In All Carbon-Based Organisms, Tillerson is relieved, Biden donates, intelligence briefings news and food news, and will MeFites do a Flavortown on this Grill?

AskMeFi
* Should I respond when I see postings like this?
* He likes money, right?
* Books about morals & civics to give to civic-minded moral Trump voters.
* How do I call my super-far-right congressperson?
* Poetry for the Apocalypse.

Post title because political activist and politician Dudley Dudley is an Electoral College delegate and one of those demanding an intelligence briefing on foreign interference in the presidential election.
posted by Wordshore (2682 comments total) 91 users marked this as a favorite
 
Clinton breaks her silence:
Hillary Clinton on Thursday night attributed her defeat to a convergence of two “unprecedented” events: the release of a letter by James B. Comey, the F.B.I. director, shortly before the election, and what she called an “attack against our country” by the Russian president, Vladimir V. Putin.
posted by RedOrGreen at 10:04 AM on December 16, 2016 [14 favorites]


will MeFites do a Flavortown on this Grill?

I've eaten there. Got very sick afterwards. Learn from my experience and try eating food from someplace less likely to poison you, such as sucking clean stray McDonald's wrappers that have fallen onto the subway tracks.
posted by zarq at 10:06 AM on December 16, 2016 [11 favorites]


Here's a link for watching Obama's presser, about an hour from now. Very curious about what he will say, how it will be spun by the media, and how His Tweetness will respond. Could be a fairly benign sort of "I'm out for the holidays, see you next year" event, but I kind of doubt it. The buzz is that he's going to talk about Russia in a direct and probably quotable fashion.
posted by Well I Was In The Neighbourhood at 10:09 AM on December 16, 2016


Despite my lack of optimism, I'm still going to go and watch the Texan Electoral College cast their votes on Monday. I want them to look me in the face before they cast their ballot, and I want them to acknowledge the weight of their actions as they go. I want to bear witness and be present.

I'm still thinking about the sign I'll be making this weekend. I've done "NOT HOW I EXPECTED TO LOSE THE COLD WAR" and "QUEER SCIENTIST ASKING WHY MY COUNTRY ABANDONED ME," and if need be I can grab that sign again--but I'd like to try a new one this time. "Please. Please. Please." is about the level of eloquence I can muster right now, though. I wrote a public letter because although I expect it to be unread I needed to say things, and you never know when words might strike a chord somewhere.

I don't know yet. Either way... well. I will bear witness.
posted by sciatrix at 10:10 AM on December 16, 2016 [89 favorites]


Well this really cuts through it quite simply: Why do Republicans want to repeal Obamacare so much? Because it would be a big tax cut for the rich.

Forget everything else for a second, forget about health care and the New Deal and big government programs; it's about a tax break for the top 1%. Look at it that way and it's super simple.
posted by zachlipton at 10:11 AM on December 16, 2016 [42 favorites]


CBC radio - maybe it was this morning - pointed out the irony of the CIA complaining about outside meddling in an election.

It's bad whether the CIA or anybody else does it, but it is ironic that they're the ones bringing it up.
posted by clawsoon at 10:12 AM on December 16, 2016 [8 favorites]


My fantasy: Obama declares the election an existential crisis for America and a fundamental assault on our democratic institutions, declares a state of emergency, and appoints himself interim president and commander and chief (because the election hack was an act of war) until we can pull together a do over on the election.

That won't happen, but man wouldn't it be a shocker and a brave thing to do, if potentially anti-democratic if mishandled.
posted by saulgoodman at 10:14 AM on December 16, 2016 [18 favorites]


I hate to say this, but even if the electoral college goes into a deadlock and this is thrown to the house, Trump will win. He's the most popular Republican in the country right now. The Freedom Caucus would never allow anyone but Trump to become president. It would take Trump admitting to being to the left of Bernie to cause him to lose in the House. He could even walk in, shoot Paul Ryan and still be elected by the House. The Republicans don't need to do any horse trading if the college deadlocks. He's going to give them all what they want - huge tax breaks for the rich, privatization of as much of the federal government as they can get away with and gutting as many regulations as they can find. This is their chance, especially since if these measures cause as much misery and destruction as intended, he won't be reelected.
posted by Hactar at 10:15 AM on December 16, 2016 [13 favorites]


[laughs ruefully at the memory of Nov 7th, when I thought I only had one more day of obsessively following election threads]
posted by rabbitrabbit at 10:16 AM on December 16, 2016 [121 favorites]


It's bad whether the CIA or anybody else does it, but it is ironic that they're the ones bringing it up.

Jesus H. Christ, once again, for posterity, it isn't just the CIA. It's all 17 domestic intelligence agencies.
posted by diogenes at 10:17 AM on December 16, 2016 [93 favorites]


The key to understanding the Trumpian response to anything that comes out of Obama's presser today is to realize that they have gone hard hard hard again on Birtherism, with ousted neo-fascist no-longer-sheriff Joe Arpaio coming out with "proof" that Obama's birth certificate is a forgery and is being eaten up as the nectar of pure truth by /r/the_donald (which has also taken to declaring everything it disagrees with as fake news, while gobbling up actual fake news, transforming itself into a complete inversion of reality, some kind of Lewis-Carrollean nightmare made flesh).
posted by dis_integration at 10:18 AM on December 16, 2016 [10 favorites]


Sure. But to my mind, anything that shakes his legitimacy as the nation's ruler is better than nothing. These are dangerous times. I'm not letting pessimism stop me from doing anything I can to draw lines in the sand. Even if I am driven back, well, at least we can see the opposition.

I have lost patience with "it probably won't do anything." I won't know that until I try. And I'm so much more afraid of the results of not doing anything than I am trying and failing.
posted by sciatrix at 10:20 AM on December 16, 2016 [18 favorites]


Monday, CNN reported about a "lack of agreement between intelligence agencies and the FBI about the conclusiveness of the evidence" regarding Russian involvement. Also Reuters.
posted by Radiophonic Oddity at 10:21 AM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


(Light Relief) Was Trump born in Germany? Russia? I don't know.
posted by adamvasco at 10:21 AM on December 16, 2016


What could Obama possibly have to announce? That charges are being filed against Donald for something?
posted by Pope Guilty at 10:21 AM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


Never concede his legitimacy. Every time he is mentioned for the next four years, remind people that he was not chosen by the American people, Clinton was.
posted by praemunire at 10:21 AM on December 16, 2016 [21 favorites]


eaten up as the nectar of pure truth by /r/the_donald (which has also taken to declaring everything it disagrees with as fake news, while gobbling up actual fake news, transforming itself into a complete inversion of reality, some kind of Lewis-Carrollea nightmare made flesh).

ya know, if i've learned anything during this last 18 months, it's that cognitive dissonance implies the presence of cognition. i now see the fallacy of my thinking.
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 10:22 AM on December 16, 2016 [29 favorites]


Jesus H. Christ, once again, for posterity, it isn't just the CIA. It's all 17 domestic intelligence agencies

but it's still ironic that the CIA is one of them, and to my mind, one of the reasons I'm taking it seriously. Because they're as much as admitting that they got beaten at their own game.

And as somebody else said recently, history is full of ironies. Doesn't mean they didn't happen.
posted by philip-random at 10:22 AM on December 16, 2016 [5 favorites]


I hate to say this, but even if the electoral college goes into a deadlock and this is thrown to the house, Trump will win.

And every single house member who votes for him will have to answer for that vote in 2018. I don't think the EC deadlocking is at all likely - or even anything but fantastical - but it would be very politically useful for the Democrats.
posted by incessant at 10:22 AM on December 16, 2016 [17 favorites]


Yeah, there is no way the House wants to be held responsible. I imagine they're putting great pressure on the College to just choose Trump for that reason -- that way the "blame" is on non-politicians for the most part, who are not in the public eye or up for reelection.
posted by rokusan at 10:24 AM on December 16, 2016 [6 favorites]


And every single house member who votes for him will have to answer for that vote in 2018.

The House is horrifically gerrymandered for the GOP. It would be much, much worse for House Republicans' reelection prospects to vote against Trump.
posted by Pope Guilty at 10:24 AM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


"lack of agreement between intelligence agencies and the FBI about the conclusiveness of the evidence" regarding Russian involvement.

That makes it sound like there's a debate about Russian involvement. There isn't. The debate is about proof of motive and whether or not Putin personally orchestrated the release of information.
posted by diogenes at 10:25 AM on December 16, 2016 [27 favorites]


Yes. Make him and all his supporters fight for and justify every single piece of ground granted to him for his stolen victory.

We gotta make an all-out stand.
posted by sciatrix at 10:26 AM on December 16, 2016 [12 favorites]


This Jeet Heer article on the CIA, its history, and the lack of trust for it among some conservatives is an interesting read. I'm not up enough on it all to judge the veracity of some of its claims, so take it as you will.
posted by gusottertrout at 10:26 AM on December 16, 2016


See, I have zero qualms about protesting Russian interference in the election, because I cut my teeth on opposition to US interference in other countries. I don't like it in Guatemala, I don't like it in Honduras, I don't like it in Russia (and whoo-boy, did that ever come back to bite us) and I have to admit, I particularly don't like it here, because here is where I keep my stuff.

I doubt that any of this will keep Trump from becoming president but I think it will have a substantially de-normalizing effect, and that's important. It really will shadow his presidency. There's a huge pull for the middle/upper middle class to just let everything go as close to "normal" as possible and hope that it all comes out in the wash, and they can do that because for the most part they are not at immediate risk (their financial security, their children's security, etc - those are all at risk, but they can pretend that Trump is normal at least until the cuts bite them, which will take longer than for working class people).

Showing that Trump really has unsavory ties to Putin and that Putin is dangerous - that's important because it will keep the political classes from going back to sleep.
posted by Frowner at 10:27 AM on December 16, 2016 [57 favorites]


Monday, CNN reported about a "lack of agreement between intelligence agencies and the FBI about the conclusiveness of the evidence" regarding Russian involvement. Also Reuters.

The disagreement isn't on if Russia hacked, but if their intent was specifically to elect Trump or just to disrupt our democracy. Electing Trump is probably the best disruption of our democracy possible and given that every bit of released hacked information was against Democrats and Clinton, the difference in effect is so negligible as to be meaningless. Again, while we get pedantic about semantics, Trump is dismantling democracy.
posted by chris24 at 10:28 AM on December 16, 2016 [11 favorites]


[laughs ruefully at the memory of Nov 7th, when I thought I only had one more day of obsessively following election threads

Actually I think my math is way off, we're looking at more like 140-150 more of these, instead of 70ish

I am not, like, a numbers person
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 10:28 AM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


but it's still ironic that the CIA is one of them

Fine, it's ironic. But framing this as a story of of the CIA versus Trump is negligent.
posted by diogenes at 10:29 AM on December 16, 2016 [7 favorites]


I am having a hard time imagining that Obama will say anything that might throw the markets into turmoil, as he's been very measured and careful to avoid doing that for his whole time in office.

But the popcorn-munching side of me has... is it hope? Can we call it hope?
posted by rokusan at 10:29 AM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


And every single house member who votes for him will have to answer for that vote in 2018

Answer to whom? Their constituents? The number of unsafe (i.e. competitive) GOP House seats is 8 percent. Swinging those would not be enough to bring the House back to Democratic control.
posted by blucevalo at 10:30 AM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


The House is horrifically gerrymandered for the GOP. It would be much, much worse for House Republicans' reelection prospects to vote against Trump.

Now, maybe. Two years from now?

The number of unsafe (i.e. competitive) GOP House seats is 8 percent. Swinging those would not be enough to bring the House back to Democratic control.

Primaries, though.
posted by Etrigan at 10:32 AM on December 16, 2016 [6 favorites]


laughs ruefully at the memory of Nov 7th, when I thought I only had one more day of obsessively following election threads

Yup, I'm right back to being completely unable to concentrate on anything else.
posted by diogenes at 10:32 AM on December 16, 2016 [6 favorites]


Hillary Clinton on Thursday night attributed her defeat to a convergence of two “unprecedented” events: the release of a letter by James B. Comey, the F.B.I. director, shortly before the election, and what she called an “attack against our country” by the Russian president, Vladimir V. Putin.

See...I kind of wish she hadn't said anything about this. It makes it too easy for the Republicans to dismiss it all as some kind of "sour grapes" operation on her part. I mean, they blame her for everything that they don't blame Obama for, anyway.

I think she should have taken the high road and simply responded as this being an issue for the government to sort out. Blaming this for her loss just serves to draw the spotlight back to her.
posted by Thorzdad at 10:33 AM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


Conway: Obama could shut down Trump feud if he loved 'the country enough'
"If you want to shut this down and you actually love the country enough to have the peaceful transition in our great democracy between the Obama administration and the Trump administration, there are a couple people in pretty prominent positions, one is named Obama, one is named Hillary Clinton, since his people are trying to fight over her election still, they could shut this down," Conway told Fox News.
She's the worst. Her argument is basically ignore the hacking, do it for the good of the country.
posted by zachlipton at 10:33 AM on December 16, 2016 [35 favorites]


Jesus H. Christ, once again, for posterity, it isn't just the CIA. It's all 17 domestic intelligence agencies

That's just some hyperbole though, just counting all the formally defined intelligence agencies because the report came from the umbrella office. Like, were these hackers nautical that Coast Guard Intelligence was involved? Were they really high that the DEA needed to have some input on the case?

I frankly prefer "Trump" over "CIA Coup".
posted by save alive nothing that breatheth at 10:33 AM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


hopeyness
posted by murphy slaw at 10:33 AM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


I am having a hard time imagining that Obama will say anything that might throw the markets into turmoil, as he's been very measured and careful to avoid doing that for his whole time in office.

"Thanks to an executive order and the cooperation of our friends at the IRS, president-elect Trump's tax returns from the last 30 years are now posted on whitehouse.gov as a public service."
posted by zarq at 10:34 AM on December 16, 2016 [19 favorites]


"ODNI is not arguing that the agency (CIA) is wrong, only that they can't prove intent," said one of the three U.S. officials. "Of course they can't, absent agents in on the decision-making in Moscow."

Maybe Putin is their agent!
posted by dng at 10:34 AM on December 16, 2016


See...I kind of wish she hadn't said anything about this. It makes it too easy for the Republicans to dismiss it all as some kind of "sour grapes" operation on her part.

We don't need to worry about giving them ammunition. They're quite capable of making it all the fuck up already. Might as well get something out there.
posted by Etrigan at 10:34 AM on December 16, 2016 [36 favorites]


Maybe Putin is their agent!

The long con is very long.
posted by lydhre at 10:36 AM on December 16, 2016


That's just some hyperbole though, just counting all the formally defined intelligence agencies because the report came from the umbrella office.

So your theory is that all of the agencies are in on the conspiracy?
posted by diogenes at 10:36 AM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


There's a difference between "soft on Russia" and "collaborating".
posted by Rainbo Vagrant at 10:38 AM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


The Democratic Party and its allied media outlets have rooted their opposition to Trump not on the basis of his losing the popular vote by nearly three million ballots, or that he is appointing a cabinet dominated by right-wing, reactionary billionaires, bankers, business executives and generals, but on the charge that he is “soft” on Russia.

Oh, come the fuck on. Both of those things have been all over "The Democratic Party and its allied media outlets" and the roots of their opposition.
posted by Etrigan at 10:38 AM on December 16, 2016 [24 favorites]


Look, man, until last June I had a GOP House rep*, and I still have two GOP senators. I'm fully prepared to tell everyone I know that those men are traitors who hate democracy and American freedom; that they ought to support the League of American Voters and ask what they have to say; that if they don't vote, they have only themselves to blame for electing people supported by literal Nazis; that the Republican Party is the party of unprincipaled evil and corruption.

I will show up to my senators' rallies with signs and ask at their town halls why John Cornyn didn't help me when I begged for help with my partner's immigration case. (Cruz did, god help him; Mike McCaul fucked me over nearly as badly, and I've never forgotten either Cornyn's or McCaul's responses when I asked.) I will wail and shout and tell my extended family that if they love me, if they love my country, they will vote for representatives who will protect me and my family.

I will call those goddamn reps and leave their voicemails overflowing; I have made calls since the election, and now that someone told me about VoteSpotter, well, I've already left one enraged voicemail on John Cornyn's line about my wife and the way he treats immigrants and I will damn well do more. I will talk to strangers about gerrymandering, what it is, and how it strangles democracy; and I will remind them that the only thing they can do about it is to get out there and support candidates who advocate for reform, and hey! they ain't Republicans.

50% of Americans voted? Fine. Let's see what we can get it to if we can push the Overton Window some more. I have a friend who has disowned her parents over this. I publically promised to, myself, and was faintly relieved and nearly fell apart with relief to find that they had supported me in this. I swear to god, if they're my representatives, I'm making a habit of holding their feet to the fire as hard as I damn well can, and what's more I'm agitating among my friends, colleagues, and local allies to make damned sure that I'm not the only one.

*only changed because I moved; that slimesucker is still in office, gods help us
posted by sciatrix at 10:40 AM on December 16, 2016 [62 favorites]


I don't know if this has been previously posted in any of the election megathreads but Trump and Putin have been known about since July when Josh Marshall had one of his greatest viewed posts on TPM
Trump & Putin. Yes, It's Really a Thing
To my mind it just goes further to show how completely in the bubble and out of touch the leadership of your Democratic party is. You can blame whoever you like if it makes you feel better but the the sad and horrible truth is that you have been screwed over badly by your own blind arrogant and corrupt political leadership.
posted by adamvasco at 10:40 AM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


Both of those things have been all over "The Democratic Party and its allied media outlets" and the roots of their opposition.

We need to throw everything at Trump, and keep doing it for the next four years, how are there people out there who don't understand that? Unless a person is planning on just lying down and dying, the only choice is to contest every inch of ground with any tactic that has any utility.
posted by praemunire at 10:41 AM on December 16, 2016 [12 favorites]


> Forget everything else for a second, forget about health care and the New Deal and big government programs; it's about a tax break for the top 1%. Look at it that way and it's super simple.

Looking at it this way has certainly clarified American politics for me. Does it over-simplify it? Well, try to make some predictions by it. I think you'll find them fairly reliable.

What white-collar voters want more than anything else is the redistribution of wealth. But that phrase has been deliberately and systematically stigmatized by right-wing media in conjunction with conservative think-tank operators like Frank Lutz. That's why white working class voting behavior seems so incoherent. The thing they want more than anything, they dare not speak its name.

They've also been conned into believing that the respectable middle-class incomes they used to make as high-school educated blue-collar workers was redistributed from their wages to illegal immigrants and welfare queens and liberal college professors when in reality Trump's cabinet alone probably received more of it than everyone in those groups combined. Maybe progressives should try the phrase "the undistribution of wealth". From the Superrich back to the Twinkie bakers and eaters.

I've also been thinking a lot about California's recent political history, going back to the recall of Gray Davis. That was a Republican-orchestrated coup (Davis refused to stop the safety mechanism implemented as part of a cut in Vehicle Registration Fees that his predecessor Pete Wilson had passed) that led to, or extended, an unnecessary financial crises sustained by Republican obstructionism in the legislature. It bestowed upon us an action-hero celebrity as governor, who made a bunch of pie-in-the-sky promises he couldn't keep and ended up departing much unbeloved.

As soon as Jerry Brown regained the governorship and Democrats obtained an obstructionist-proof majority in the legislature, they were able right the ship financially. But at what cost to education and public services in that decade of totally avoidable mismanagement? I've always wanted to write up a People's History of the recall but that Wikipedia article does a pretty good job of telling the story. I think it provides some hopes for progressives looking for a future when Republican obstructionism on behalf of the Superrich doesn't reign supreme. (No predictions on when that might be.)
posted by bunbury at 10:44 AM on December 16, 2016 [16 favorites]


but on the charge that he is “soft” on Russia. That is, the Democratic Party has managed to attack Trump from the right.

"Soft" is a euphenism. I think the charge is that a foreign government has used underhanded methods to influence and sabotage our elections and politics. I don't really understand why something this unusual should not be at least properly and carefully looked at.
posted by FJT at 10:44 AM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


And by gods, like I said in the other thread, I will privately contact every Republican member of my family--including my grandmother--and make them justify the people they support in office to me. I already have contacted the family member best placed to do something about this and begged her to tell me what is going on, explained why I am terrified, asked what the Republican Party wants itself to be seen as. I am young, and I will leverage every weapon to hand to build lasting change in both public sentiment and political change, and I know how these things do change: in aggregate, as a result of thousands of small people doing small things.

Like the Whelk said on twitter back in November: I'm the angry grandpa now, and by god, will I make my Thanksgiving dinners uncomfortable. Explain to me why my career is worth throwing away, family members. Go on. Explain why you made the choices you did. And god help you if the trade-offs you tot up don't stack up against the reality of what we have lost.
posted by sciatrix at 10:45 AM on December 16, 2016 [40 favorites]


Re Krugman's take on the MSM's culpability in the Comey letter - the question is, what choices did they have?

The Comey letter existed. Trump had not let up about emails, emails, emails all campaign, ignoring the fact that the FBI had said earlier 'nope, nothing there', because he didn't and doesn't care about any sort of fact that doesn't serve him. It was still a live issue, no matter what the media said, and the electorate was responding to it. They had bought into the Trump shtick.

The MSM couldn't ignore that, because they hadn't found a modus operandi of dealing with Trump's shameless lies as a whole. It simply didn't matter what they said. (Remember that nigh on 500 newspapers endorsed Hillary, ten times those who endorsed Trump? What value was that?). Traditional media is structured to deliver news and opinion as two separate things - the news reports on what's happening, opinion gives analysis of what it means according to what a title thinks. The opinion side of much of the media was very anti-Trump and did call out his lies, but you can't do that in the news section - the rightwing media does, of course, but look at their rep for being good news sources.

You can blame the media for not defusing Trump and thus not doing its job. That's easy and obvious. What isn't easy or obvious is saying what they should have done, and believe me that a lot of responsible people gave this a lot of very serious thought, each and every day they covered the campaign and beforehand.

Once one side, and its media, decide to give up on pretending to play the game, and it takes its people with it, what do you do that can does any good whatsoever without abandoning the game yourself? And if you did that, how would it help the principles on which you operate?

Comey was and is a very serious attack on democracy, a filthy and shameless trick. But it's of a part with the rest of the systematic problem for the non-bonkers media of finding a viable strategy that doesn't just make things worse.
posted by Devonian at 10:45 AM on December 16, 2016 [10 favorites]


but on the charge that he is “soft” on Russia. That is, the Democratic Party has managed to attack Trump from the right.

Only if you're so profoundly shit-brained as to think that there's anything "left" about Russia in the modern day.
posted by Pope Guilty at 10:46 AM on December 16, 2016 [22 favorites]


The number of unsafe (i.e. competitive) GOP House seats is 8 percent. Swinging those would not be enough to bring the House back to Democratic control.

But don't those metrics of safe/unsafe seats come from traditional polling and LV filters based on normal, feeble mid-term turnout? I think part of acknowledging that this is not a normal situation is recognizing that the ways we have predicted these things in the past are not nearly as reliable as they used to be. Maybe our chances of getting the turnout to unseat more than 8 Republican congressfolk would be impossibly slim under a President Rubio or Cruz or Romney, but after two years of Trump? I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility that his shitshow of a presidency combined with our sustained rabble-rousing efforts will result in a lot of pissed off people ready to switch their votes, or more importantly to show up where they might not have otherwise. It would be an upset, sure, but this whole fucking thing is an upset. I don't think we should concede the midterms before the bastard even takes office just because the same sort of polling that told us he was gonna lose catastrophically is now telling us we can't win.
posted by contraption at 10:46 AM on December 16, 2016 [15 favorites]


The Magic-8-ball election thread was fun because every time you got to the end, the next post over was about orgasms and butt plugs. Now we got flying dildos? Metafilter, dear.
posted by stonepharisee at 10:48 AM on December 16, 2016 [7 favorites]


Mod note: A few comments removed. Coda Tronca, this has gotten to be a dead-horse situation with you, please cut it out.
posted by cortex (staff) at 10:48 AM on December 16, 2016 [20 favorites]


Her argument is basically ignore the hacking, do it for the good of the country.

Times have changed, because that's pretty much what the country decided to do after Bush II's hacked/stolen election(s) and popular vote loss.

"Get behind the President for the good of the country." and "Healing" and all that.

I hated it then, because that was fraud. Now, I guess I'm jaded.
posted by rokusan at 10:49 AM on December 16, 2016 [7 favorites]


Obama has already stated in the Trevor Noah interview that they've known that Russia has been involved for months. Obama did not order a review of the intelligence to see if Russia was involved in the email hacks, he ordered a review to see if Trump was involved.
posted by P.o.B. at 10:50 AM on December 16, 2016 [7 favorites]


what choices did they have?

As I recall, the emails were an "above the fold" story for the NYT (website) for the entire period between Comey's two communications. Every day. All for a law enforcement official saying "hey, turns out there are some documents we have access to but haven't looked at" and then "yeah, nothing there, actually." The coverage was absurdly overblown. The actual news there for them to cover was very little at the time of Comey's first announcement and then none at the end. The NYT abdicated its judgment on the importance of a particular news item to the Trump campaign.
posted by praemunire at 10:51 AM on December 16, 2016 [18 favorites]


Obama did not order a review of the intelligence to see if Russia was involved in the email hacks, he ordered a review to see if Trump was involved.

Presenting proof positive of Trump's knowing involvement would actually be something worth holding a press conference over. Let me dream.
posted by Pope Guilty at 10:51 AM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


President: My fellow Americans, approximately 15 minutes ago, at precisely 2pm EST agents from the Treasury Dept and IRS placed President-elect Donald J. Trump under arrest on charges of tax fraud and conspiracy to commit tax fraud. I'll take your questions now.
[utter fantasy]
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 10:51 AM on December 16, 2016 [40 favorites]


Never concede his legitimacy. Every time he is mentioned for the next four years, remind people that he was not chosen by the American people, Clinton was.

And if somebody tries to give you that "Popular vote doesn't matter, we don't live in a popular vote system" shit, remind them that he didn't actually win the electoral vote either.

In my home state of Michigan, before the recount was (illegally) stopped, we found evidence of massive election fraud. Seriously, a huge number of the Trump votes physically do not exist. Yeah, it's possible that this is the only place in the country where this happened, but it's... unlikely, to put it nicely.

And, given that, we can't really trust the Congressional elections either. It is probably the case that a huge a number of the election results from this year are illegitimate.
posted by IAmUnaware at 10:52 AM on December 16, 2016 [45 favorites]


Obama's Final Push to Adapt to Climate Change. Yes, that headline says "adapt," not "fight":
With little more than a month left in office, the Barack Obama administration is quietly trying to accomplish one last big thing on climate change: creating a policy for relocating entire towns threatened by extreme weather and rising seas.

The White House has asked 11 federal agencies to sign a memorandum of understanding establishing what it calls "an interagency working group on community-led managed retreat and voluntary relocation." The group's goal would be to "develop a framework for managed retreat" -- including deciding which agency should be in charge, identifying obstacles to relocation and how to remove them, and coordinating with communities that already want to move. The group is supposed to develop an "action plan" within nine months of the agencies signing on.
.
posted by zachlipton at 10:52 AM on December 16, 2016 [14 favorites]


Unless the National Guard in fifty states starts mobilizing an hour ahead of the press conference, I can't imagine it'll be anything too earth shaking.
posted by rokusan at 10:52 AM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


"U.S. Navy Capt. Jeff Davis told journalists there was no precedent for it in recent memory."

China Seizes Unmanned US Underwater Vehicle
posted by staggering termagant at 10:54 AM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


The Magic-8-ball election thread was fun because every time you got to the end, the next post over was about orgasms and butt plugs. Now we got flying dildos? Metafilter, dear.

Clearly, the next phase of election thread planning should be trying to make the threads before and after the election thread as ridiculous as possible.
posted by dinty_moore at 10:54 AM on December 16, 2016 [5 favorites]


> The group's goal would be to "develop a framework for managed retreat"

This is what it looks like when adults are in charge.
posted by stonepharisee at 10:54 AM on December 16, 2016


"Soft" is a euphenism. I think the charge is that a foreign government has used underhanded methods to influence and sabotage our elections and politics. I don't really understand why something this unusual should not be at least properly and carefully looked at.
South and Latin America is laughing it's socks off at that remark.
posted by adamvasco at 10:58 AM on December 16, 2016


In my home state of Michigan, before the recount was (illegally) stopped, we found evidence of massive election fraud. Seriously, a huge number of the Trump votes physically do not exist. Yeah, it's possible that this is the only place in the country where this happened, but it's... unlikely, to put it nicely.

I realize there are federalism concerns, but why can't we do the same thing with election boards we do when police departments or school districts utterly fail at civil rights and place them under supervision? I mean, at some point some group of grown-ups should be able to come in and get a court order saying "you clearly cannot run an election properly, so these people who know what they're doing are going to monitor everything and you're going to make sure you budget at least this much for elections so the job can be done right."
posted by zachlipton at 10:58 AM on December 16, 2016 [6 favorites]


GOP congressman on Russian hacking: 'Terrific' that voters got more truthful information
Republican Rep. Dana Rohrabacher said Thursday that it was "terrific" that voters got more truthful information about Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign, regardless of whether the hackers were Russian.

"The hackers, whether or not they're Russian hackers, I don't know," the California congressman said. "I know the CIA and the FBI disagree as to who the hackers are. But whether they're Russian hackers or any other hackers, the only information that we were getting from hackers was accurate information, was truthful. And that's not gonna turn the tide. If the American people have been given more truthful information, that's terrific."

Contrary to what Rohrabacher said, US intelligence agencies have near uniform consensus blaming Russia for hacks during the presidential campaign into the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman John Podesta. As CNN has reported, the disagreement between the FBI and CIA is over whether the Russians' specific goal was to get Donald Trump elected, not as the lawmaker says over who is behind the cyber attack.
Given Trump's tweet, this seems to be today's talking point.
posted by zachlipton at 11:00 AM on December 16, 2016 [7 favorites]


My feeling is that there are two layer to what's going on - there's what actually happened and there's people's strategies.

To me, what has actually happened is that because we have a non-robust system, various attacks on the process acted together to throw the election. Our system is sick - I mean, sicker than normal. That's why Comey was emboldened to act; that's why the Russian efforts worked and grew. Our system is sick for economic reasons and for racial reasons - people are poorer, and the poison stream of racism that flows from genocide and slavery has always meant that we do not have strong working class institutions or strong government to speak for working people. Between global economic changes and our underlying sickness, we have become vulnerable to Comey, Russia, the alt-right, etc. And because our system is sick, we ended up with two candidates who were, for various reasons, extremely unpopular with large swathes of the population.

Russia interfered; it's difficult for me to believe that Trump, his family and his advisors could have such close connections to Putin with the absolute absence of collaboration.

Look at the CIA playbook - do you think there was no collaboration when the CIA helped overthrow, say, the Allende regime? As the years have gone by, we've learned that US actors did collaborate directly with murderous right wing regimes in El Salvador, Chile, Guatemala, Brazil, Indonesia. That's how you do it. And Trump et al didn't even need secret communication channels - they're actually buddies with these people.

So, I think that's what happened.

And then there's a factional struggle on top of it. Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans are united about this. They're all working all the angles, and if people are running with the "It's Trump's fault" narrative, it's because they think that they can win that way, and win the kind of victory they want. My bet is that Democratic elites are running with this story because they think it's the one most likely to play well among people who vote, and it's the one that offers some face saving to any Republican who wants to come over. It's also the one that weakens the narrative about the Democratic party least, and least involves naming the sick system that got us into this mess.

So yeah, of course Democratic operatives are working all the angles on it. Just because it's a useful narrative for the Democrats doesn't mean it isn't broadly true. If it was true but not useful, we'd never hear of it again. Truth isn't the issue here.

For me personally, a weak, divided Trump administration is the best thing I can hope for. Right now, my interests align with the Democratic faction which is pushing this story and I think it's a true story.

Again, we've got a series of really bad choices.

One thing I've learned about myself during this: I do not believe that this is a revolutionary moment, and I am not holding my breath for revolution's arrival. I do not want to see the entire New Deal package swept away because I do not believe that we will be able to replace it in, say, the next twenty to thirty years. The world will have to change dramatically before there will be another truly small-d democratic moment like the end of the thirties/early forties, and there will probably have to be a war or the equivalent of a war. Wars are the engines of revolution - history shows us that. So I'm not eager to smash what we've got now - I think it's all we're getting for a good long while.

And for that reason, my interests align with the Democrats' around Trump and Putin and I hope they make some gains.
posted by Frowner at 11:00 AM on December 16, 2016 [32 favorites]


Have the people here who are skeptical about Russia's involvement read the early reporting from security firms like CrowdStrike, Fidelis and Secureworks? I keep seeing people on Mefi and elsewhere arguing that we shouldn't just take the word of every US intelligence agency, but multiple well-regarded security firms published their evidence and reasoning pointing to Russian intelligence months ago, and I feel like most of this reporting has been ignored or forgotten.
posted by skymt at 11:01 AM on December 16, 2016 [12 favorites]


On the Trump family corruption creep front, the charity auction to "Enjoy Coffee with Ivanka Trump in NYC or DC" reached over $72K before it was scrubbed without comment from the Trump Organizaiton (Google cache).

Meanwhike, Trump spokesblonde Kellyanne Conway confirmed to a journalist that it's "a fair assessment" to say that Ivanka and her husband are the most likely family members to take part in the administration.
posted by Doktor Zed at 11:02 AM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


I think the charge is that a foreign government has used underhanded methods to influence and sabotage our elections and politics. I don't really understand why something this unusual should not be at least properly and carefully looked at.

It should certainly be properly and carefully looked at, but the notion that it's "this unusual" is either disingenuous or naive. What do you think agencies like the CIA and FIS are for if not this sort of thing?

The three unusual aspects are that (i) perhaps it was a lot more successful meddling this time, possibly because (ii) there might have been in-America cooperation from a campaign, though it's hard to measure that because (iii) the autopsy is not usually done in public. I have never seen the CIA get right up to the media like this before and speak so directly about things that usually happen in the shadows. (Item (ii) is the one worth serious investigating, in my opinion, anyway.)

But if the US and Russia have not both at least attempted to meddle in each and every election in the other nation over the past fifty years (and hundreds of others, worldwide), then I'd be shocked.
posted by rokusan at 11:02 AM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


South and Latin America is laughing it's socks off at that remark.

We were born in countries with similar politics. Donald Trump merely adopted it.
posted by FJT at 11:02 AM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


I know the CIA and the FBI disagree as to who the hackers are.

I'm so glad that CNN immediately called that out as a straight-up lie by the congressman.
posted by diogenes at 11:03 AM on December 16, 2016 [13 favorites]


The United States being a Neoliberal Hegemon that has done bad things does not excuse a Russian autocrat manipulating our electoral system to help get his preferred candidate elected

I mean, both things are worth combating

I mean, combating the second makes it easier to combat the first
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 11:06 AM on December 16, 2016 [16 favorites]


I think this China thing is a big deal. Am I the only one? Thoughts? Anyone?
posted by staggering termagant at 11:06 AM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


I realize there are federalism concerns, but why can't we do the same thing with election boards we do when police departments or school districts utterly fail at civil rights and place them under supervision? I mean, at some point some group of grown-ups should be able to come in and get a court order saying "you clearly cannot run an election properly, so these people who know what they're doing are going to monitor everything and you're going to make sure you budget at least this much for elections so the job can be done right."

We could call it the "Voting Rights Act"
posted by tivalasvegas at 11:06 AM on December 16, 2016 [85 favorites]


via Facebook:

You know what would be really smart? If there was a televised "freedom concert" with huge celebrities like: Beyoncé and Jay Z, Madonna, Katy Perry, Justin Timberlake, Gaga, etc. that aired at the same time as the inauguration!!

Imagine how mad his tiny fingers would be!! He would totally lose all the ratings. And what if all the proceeds of the concert went to: the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, Lambda Legal, NAACP, CAIR, IRAP, SPLC, Environmental Defense Fund, etc.

I would add that Alec Baldwin should MC the event playing Trump as he does on SNL. How great would that be?
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 11:07 AM on December 16, 2016 [118 favorites]


Clinton chose a strange time to make a statement. Maybe she's had advance warning on Obama's message today? Because otherwise staying silent another 24 hours would have made a lot more sense, no?

Or, I suppose, she could be trying to steer his narrative.

Interesting, anyway.
posted by rokusan at 11:08 AM on December 16, 2016


That's brilliant, 317, but no Baldwin: it would be much more fun for us to watch, and more infuriating for Trump, if he was never mentioned or acknowledged in any way. On the day of his crowning, he would not exist.

Imagine how much he'd hate that.
posted by rokusan at 11:09 AM on December 16, 2016 [34 favorites]


As I recall, the emails were an "above the fold" story for the NYT (website) for the entire period between Comey's two communications.

My memory is that every day from the second letter through and including the morning of the election, the lead story on the NYTimes website included "Emails" in the headline.
posted by stopgap at 11:09 AM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


I've done "NOT HOW I EXPECTED TO LOSE THE COLD WAR"

Sciatrix, I ate lunch with the Texas delegation, they were voted by slate and the Texas electors, if I recall correctly, were also put in place by the Cruz slate. Despite Cruz going over, a lot of those people weren't happy about it. Any sign hoping to actually flip an elector's vote should probably be like your one above, or maaaaaaybe a "Vote Your Conscience" or "Obey god's Law, Not Man's" or even "Vote McMullin" (these would have worked better before Cruz's craven flip but still) - you basically want them to think you're a Republican.
posted by corb at 11:10 AM on December 16, 2016 [22 favorites]




Alec could just play Alec, with the winky winky.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 11:10 AM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


I think the charge is that a foreign government has used underhanded methods to influence and sabotage our elections and politics. I don't really understand why something this unusual should not be at least properly and carefully looked at.

On the Right, because it might cause trouble for their president, and political power is the only thing that matters.

On the Left, it's because that would involve a lot of people having to admit they were patsies for Russia. They'd have to look at their last year of statements about Clinton, the DNC and Wikileaks, and realize they were used. No one is going to be willing to accept the embarrassment and loss of influence that would entail.

So for example, Greenwald is going to be insisting up through 2024 that Wikileaks is totally going to start releasing dirt on Trump and the Republicans. Aaaaaaany day now....
posted by happyroach at 11:11 AM on December 16, 2016 [10 favorites]


"QUEER SCIENTIST ASKING WHY MY COUNTRY ABANDONED ME,"

Queer Science was an underappreciated sequel to 1985's Weird Science, in which two high-school nerds try to create a beautiful woman from scratch with their computer.

Allan Cumming looked better in the red dress, too.
posted by rokusan at 11:12 AM on December 16, 2016 [8 favorites]


Greenwald is going to be insisting up through 2024 that Wikileaks is totally going to start releasing dirt on Trump and the Republicans. Aaaaaaany day now....

The exact moment Trump stops being useful. Putin wants chaos more than he specifically wants Trump.
posted by C'est la D.C. at 11:13 AM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


One thing I've learned about myself during this: I do not believe that this is a revolutionary moment, and I am not holding my breath for revolution's arrival. I do not want to see the entire New Deal package swept away because I do not believe that we will be able to replace it in, say, the next twenty to thirty years. The world will have to change dramatically before there will be another truly small-d democratic moment like the end of the thirties/early forties, and there will probably have to be a war or the equivalent of a war. Wars are the engines of revolution - history shows us that. So I'm not eager to smash what we've got now - I think it's all we're getting for a good long while.

Cosigned. And another thing I've learned about myself, both through this and just through the history I've read and taken in:

I think there are more things to be lost here than there are to be gained by overthrowing anyone. No matter what we the people do, the things that give us political stability versus a series of dictators are going to be badly shaken and destabilized. I am being careful about what I do in the hopes of saving whatever crumbling remains of that system we have so that it can be potentially repaired, or we're on course for a political track that is terrifying for me on a number of levels.

I have found myself advocating for changes or for people to act that in any other circumstance I would feel destabilized the system too badly and put ourselves at too much risk of autocracies or losing what democracy we have--but I think the changes Trump is saying he will put in place are worse, so I am looking to see where I can shove at our crumbling system that will both mitigate his effectiveness but also not break too much of it before we can restore some of it.

At the same time, the crumbling, sick, infrastructure that Frowner mentions is so badly run-down that it would not take much to destroy it completely, and if it is destroyed... I think that no matter who takes power after that, no matter what pretenses they say, if they are not a person of incredible integrity and patriotism and the first thing they do is not to establish newer forms of that infrastructure with teeth and a plan for keeping it well repaired, then we're on track for a nasty dictatorship. Full stop.

So the calls for revolution and the hungry red-masked anarchists I see calling for bringing down the government over this election, because the election was illegitimate? They scare me nearly as much as the thought of pausing and standing down and "learning to live with" Trump. I am trying to thread the line between Scylla and Charybdis, and while I'm doing everything I can to keep Scylla away, well, I'd rather be swept into her baying curs than into Charybdis' hungry void. I can fight Scylla, even though I think I will take great losses. If instead we unmake the entire infrastructure of the country, I fear that we'll all be lost to the void whatever we do.
posted by sciatrix at 11:13 AM on December 16, 2016 [20 favorites]




I think this China thing is a big deal. Am I the only one? Thoughts? Anyone?


Reminds me of the Hainan Island Incident early in the Bush administration. Though China may just be hinting to the U.S. at their abilities in detecting and intercepting U.S. sea drones.
posted by drezdn at 11:14 AM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


I think this China thing is a big deal. Am I the only one? Thoughts? Anyone?

Yep -- it's a BFD. On the small scale, I'm sure there's some captured technology, not unlike when the Chinese got their hands on a US spy plane and returned it in a lot of crates. Not good.

On the big, substantive scale, it looks like a reaction to Trump's push on Taiwan. China is clearly stating that this is their turf, and they are Not Fucking Around So Back Off. I would not expect the new administration to heed that message, which can only lead to escalation on both sides.

Not good.

Edit: Dammit, dredzn!
posted by Capt. Renault at 11:15 AM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


Craig "the fake news guy" Silverman has a new investigation out on a fake news network responsible for the "Pope endorses Trump" story and many "[Celebrity X] is moving to [your improbable town]" stories.
posted by zachlipton at 11:15 AM on December 16, 2016


Sciatrix, I ate lunch with the Texas delegation

Those have pretty well been my tactics! And my thought processes. When I met with the Texas ACLU some weeks later, the sign I chose was something more like "Georgia invested $32,000 into my education; Texas has invested more like $80,000 into training its scientists; Trump is throwing that money into the drain and destroying my future." I have worn a hat in American flag colors to every march I've done, and am looking faintly into picking up a Captain America t-shirt as another visible sign that I love my country too, dammit. I won't play to stereotypes, and haven't.

Patriotism isn't only for Republicans. Nor is scorched-earth tactics; nor is love for family or a desire to serve one's country, although I am in no way suited for the military. I will build empathy any way I can, keeping in mind people like my grandmother as the audience I play to, and I swear to god I will trade that empathy as dearly as I can for progress.
posted by sciatrix at 11:18 AM on December 16, 2016 [37 favorites]




Sweden's preparing for war. Sweden.

Everything's fine.
posted by lydhre at 11:20 AM on December 16, 2016 [9 favorites]


Sweden is always preparing for war. Consider the neighborhood.
posted by rokusan at 11:22 AM on December 16, 2016 [10 favorites]


The debate is about proof of motive and whether or not Putin personally orchestrated the release of information.

Another even more important question is whether there was active collaboration and coordination between Russian intelligence services and one or more members of Trump's campaign team, or even Trump personally. A lot of analysts have been noting (according to a guy on an NPR panel) that some of the targeted attacks on state level democratic campaigns seemed to show a more sophisticated understanding of the innerworkings of our political processes and an awareness of the timing of key events in those state level campaigns. It's been suggested the circumstantial evidence points to some coordination with political operatives in the US.

If that were the case and were proven, we'd be talking treason here, wouldn't we?
posted by saulgoodman at 11:22 AM on December 16, 2016 [5 favorites]


Live stream of Obama's press conference on whitehouse.gov.

"You Might Also Like:
Meet President Obama's Supreme Court Nominee"

*sigh*
posted by jedicus at 11:24 AM on December 16, 2016 [5 favorites]


I would also like that. I would like very much if they were one and the same.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 11:25 AM on December 16, 2016 [5 favorites]


No matter how involved Russia was in hacking the Democrats, Hillary won the popular vote by at least two million votes but lost the electoral college. Not the Comey release, not Russian hacking, not racism, not anti-immigrant feelings alter the fact that the electoral college and not the popular vote won the election for Trump
posted by Postroad at 11:25 AM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


That reminds me: the other thing I've done a lot of is use a lot of very emotionally laden rhetoric. I have found several previously-conservative people who were going "oh you don't mean that, you're just trying to shame me out of my views", and I suspect that's partly because of the liberal cultural tendency to rely on truth and evidence and "what will work" to make arguments.

Well, that's all true, and I value those things, but I also believe the things I'm saying in my deepest heart of hearts. And I fear the future for very specific reasons. I have found that it helps to make my point and develop consensus if I weaponize my emotions and my stories and make myself into a person that conservatives might know. I say "My wife is an immigrant!" and add that she's from Canada, she moved here to be with me, she went through all the legal process but boy was it hard, and she wanted to be here badly and believed this would be a good place to raise children with me, but now she's so hurt she won't seek citizenship here because the country has told her that prospective Americans aren't welcome here, and how can you make me justify that to my wife?

That sort of thing. I choose what I'm emphasizing, and I leave out a few details, like the bit where my partner IDs as nonbinary; I am careful with the language I choose to use, so that I draw on positive images and the story of the things I'm talking about. I set up my story to hit the same knee-jerk talking points Trump does about immigrants, say, and then I just as quickly sidestep and set it on its side ("my wife's an immigrant/my wife's from Canada") and talk about how the Trumpian ideals hurt "good" people that aren't in the imagined target group, too. I humanize myself as hard as I can, and I never lie. I am honest about my emotions and I carry them with me. I listen to what people tell me back and then I tell them the costs or the places they've been lied to, and I don't engage with anyone who doesn't signal clearly that they are willing to listen to me, because my energy is so limited right now.

It seems to work, at least a little. And by god, I am so very afraid that I need to keep trying.
posted by sciatrix at 11:26 AM on December 16, 2016 [24 favorites]


i'm thinking we're gonna have to ban trump until we figure out what's going on.
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 11:27 AM on December 16, 2016 [15 favorites]


Washington Post breaking news: FBI backs CIA view that Russia intervened to help Trump win election
posted by Superplin at 11:27 AM on December 16, 2016 [31 favorites]


WashPost: FBI backs CIA view that Russia intervened to help Trump win election
posted by stopgap at 11:28 AM on December 16, 2016


Comey is trying to paper over his betrayal for the history books.
posted by T.D. Strange at 11:28 AM on December 16, 2016 [12 favorites]




As CNN has reported, the disagreement between the FBI and CIA is over whether the Russians' specific goal was to get Donald Trump elected, not as the lawmaker says over who is behind the cyber attack.

According to the Washington Post just now, this disagreement is also over now too. FBI backs CIA view that Russia intervened to help Trump win election
“Earlier this week, I met separately with (Director) FBI James Comey and DNI Jim Clapper, and there is strong consensus among us on the scope, nature, and intent of Russian interference in our presidential election,” CIA Director John O. Brennan said in a message to the agency’s workforce, according to U.S. officials who have seen the message.

“The three of us also agree that our organizations, along with others, need to focus on completing the thorough review of this issue that has been directed by President Obama and which is being led by the DNI,” Brennan’s message read.
...
“In recent days, I have had several conversations with members of Congress, providing an update on the status of the review as well as the considerations that need to be taken into account as we proceed,” Brennan wrote. “Many – but unfortunately not all – members understand and appreciate the importance and the gravity of the issue, and they are very supportive of the process that is underway.”
posted by zachlipton at 11:28 AM on December 16, 2016 [5 favorites]


i'm thinking we're gonna have to ban trump until we figure out what's going on.

Like, from MetaFilter?

Did his $5 check even clear?
posted by rokusan at 11:28 AM on December 16, 2016 [16 favorites]


Thorzdad: I think she should have taken the high road and simply responded as this being an issue for the government to sort out.

Clinton has been taking the high road for ages, and it's done sweet fuckall for her. If she feels like responding this way now, I say more power to her.
posted by Too-Ticky at 11:29 AM on December 16, 2016 [62 favorites]


Can I blame Russian hackers for this press conference starting late
posted by beerperson at 11:29 AM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


Is the live stream just not working for me or is not starting on time?
posted by feloniousmonk at 11:30 AM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


These things never start on time.
posted by stopgap at 11:30 AM on December 16, 2016


The Hainan Island Incident was an accident where both parties could save face, but this seems like an intentional-as-fuck and unprecedented move from China. 2017 is the Year of the Rooster -- I think there will be a shitload of strutting.
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 11:31 AM on December 16, 2016 [6 favorites]


late
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 11:31 AM on December 16, 2016


I was wondering why nobody was saying anything about the press conference yet!
posted by rabbitrabbit at 11:31 AM on December 16, 2016


Guys I kind of need to pee but I'm afraid to leave my desk.
posted by Fleebnork at 11:31 AM on December 16, 2016 [5 favorites]


Headline-softening paragraph omitted by your ellipsis, zacklipton:
"CIA and FBI officials don’t think Russia had a “single purpose” by intervening during the presidential campaign. In addition to helping Trump, intelligence officials have told lawmakers that Moscow’s other goal included undermining confidence in the U.S. electoral system."
Since some of the hacks occurred even before either Clinton or Trump was nominated (though I suppose Clinton was a foregone conclusion), I think this is important. And that second overall goal is consistent with what's been discussed for many many years as an open secret.
posted by rokusan at 11:32 AM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


In addition to helping Trump, intelligence officials have told lawmakers that Moscow’s other goal included undermining confidence in the U.S. electoral system."

Potayto, potahto
posted by soren_lorensen at 11:32 AM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


Guys I kind of need to pee but I'm afraid to leave my desk.

What, no Hillary catheter? I thought you were a Democrat!

Joke. It's a joke. We all laugh or we all die. Perhaps both.
posted by rokusan at 11:32 AM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


Well, there goes my plan to get the Electoral College to all vote for a Harlem Deer/Dying Kid Santa ticket. Thanks 2016.
posted by zachlipton at 11:32 AM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


but this seems like an intentional-as-fuck and unprecedented move from China.

They do stuff like this from time to time. From 2007: Chinese subs show up in U.S. Naval Exercise.
posted by drezdn at 11:33 AM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


So much tension for "have a great holiday, see you in January"
posted by Yowser at 11:33 AM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


Guess I'm wearing a black armband on January 20th.
posted by ocschwar at 11:33 AM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


oh god I'm about to go into my yearly performance review and I am not very focused because PRESS CONFERENCE.
posted by emjaybee at 11:33 AM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


No armbands, please. No armbands at all. Too close to home.
posted by rokusan at 11:34 AM on December 16, 2016


Is the live stream just not working for me or is not starting on time?

CNN is showing talking heads and an empty podium.
posted by zrail at 11:34 AM on December 16, 2016


FBI backs CIA view that Russia intervened to help Trump win election

welp

Guys I kind of need to pee but I'm afraid to leave my desk.

Might wanna go ahead and do it
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 11:35 AM on December 16, 2016


Headline-softening paragraph omitted by your ellipsis, zacklipton:

Fair point. I wasn't trying to hide anything so much as just copy/paste the couple of leaked memo bits rather than the entire news article, for the sake of everyone's cell phones. I'm sure there were multiple motives involved, and I also don't think the motive matters a whole lot. Whether the goal was to get Trump elected or just screw with us or a little of both, the actions and actors matter far more than the intent.
posted by zachlipton at 11:35 AM on December 16, 2016


Is the live stream just not working for me or is not starting on time?

Obama is master of dramatic tension.
posted by rokusan at 11:35 AM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


I need to make an armband to wear to the College on Monday. Maybe Sunday, too; there's two events in my city. I bet there's some for all of you if you need a place to stand alongside other people who care, too.
posted by sciatrix at 11:36 AM on December 16, 2016


I love Obama but I do not fucking think I can take any more goddamn dramatic tension THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
posted by emjaybee at 11:36 AM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


The "no single purpose" line doesn't soften the headline at all. They were hacking both to elect trump and to cause chaos. That's worse than just trying to elect Trump.
posted by Pope Guilty at 11:37 AM on December 16, 2016 [8 favorites]


Not to make this a pee derail (peerail?) but I just went and I'm back. So they can start the press conference any time now.
posted by Fleebnork at 11:37 AM on December 16, 2016 [7 favorites]


Guys I kind of need to pee but I'm afraid to leave my desk.

According to CNN, Obama is expected to take questions for "at least an hour." Pee now.
posted by zombieflanders at 11:37 AM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


Clinton has been taking the high road for ages, and it's done sweet fuckall for her. I

As usual, this is one of those "Whatever she does, it won't be seen as the right thing to do" situation.

Which is yet another reason why I think it's going to be another 32 years before we see another woman on the Democratic presidential ticket. It took about a generation and a half for the memory to fade of how the last one was treated, and I don't see anything changing now.
posted by happyroach at 11:37 AM on December 16, 2016 [11 favorites]


Would he need to take questions for an hour if he were just wishing everyone happy holidays before peacing out to Hawaii?
posted by lydhre at 11:39 AM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


Of course it does, your Holiness. The headline cites one motive, and only deeper down does it clarify that that motive was only part of the whole goal.

If the headline was "Carrots cause cancer" and the ninth paragraph said that it was actually carrots and cinnamon, that would be, you know, softening the headline.

I agree it's twice as bad as the headline, if that is your concern. But the headline reads as if that was the only goal, which I think is dishonest and untrue of the WaPo.

Headlines often are, of course.
posted by rokusan at 11:39 AM on December 16, 2016


LIVE
posted by sciatrix at 11:39 AM on December 16, 2016


My god the stream on whitehouse.gov has started and I cannot tell the difference between real world and an SNL cold open. I mean look at it!
posted by rokusan at 11:40 AM on December 16, 2016 [8 favorites]


You guys, I think it's a Christmas quartet vocal performance.
posted by Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug at 11:40 AM on December 16, 2016 [5 favorites]


On the contrary, you could just as easily say LOOK WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU DON'T ELECT THE QUALIFIED WOMEN, PEOPLE. LOOK. WHAT. HAPPENS.
posted by emjaybee at 11:40 AM on December 16, 2016 [7 favorites]


And here we go. 2 minutes.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 11:40 AM on December 16, 2016


wait false alarm, no one is actually talking yet, just sort of waiting
posted by sciatrix at 11:40 AM on December 16, 2016


Greenwald is going to be insisting up through 2024 that Wikileaks is totally going to start releasing dirt on Trump and the Republicans. Aaaaaaany day now....

The exact moment Trump stops being useful. Putin wants chaos more than he specifically wants Trump.


I don't think leaked dirt on Trump would hurt him at all. It hasn't hurt him thus far. If Reagan was the teflon president, Trump is like the NeverWet president - you know, that spray that you put on clothes which makes paint and shit roll right off it?

Should this scenario happen, Putin would just be one more person who thought he could control Trump but learned too late that Trump can't be controlled - no, he can't be controlled anymore than that disorder which makes you feel hungry no matter how much you eat can be controlled.

I think the only thing that can stop Trump is sunlight or Van Helsing or maybe running water, depending on your beliefs about lich kings.
posted by Joey Michaels at 11:40 AM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


If the headline was "Carrots cause cancer" and the ninth paragraph said that it was actually a combination of carrots and cinnamon, that would be, you know, softening the headline.

That's a bad analogy, since the reality is a single cause having multiple bad outcomes and your analogy uses multiple causes leading to a single outcome. The better analogy would be that carrots cause cancer, and also multiple sclerosis.
posted by Pope Guilty at 11:41 AM on December 16, 2016 [6 favorites]


Here he goes...
posted by XtinaS at 11:42 AM on December 16, 2016


"this is the most wonderful press conference of the year" -- I don't think its anything serious.
posted by anastasiav at 11:42 AM on December 16, 2016 [5 favorites]


Can't talk now. Obama on. Trump bad. Putin bad. Carrots bad. All friends here. Shhhh.
posted by rokusan at 11:42 AM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


Super goddamn quiet.
posted by Imperfect at 11:42 AM on December 16, 2016


I'm getting flashbacks to outgoing Kentucky governor Steve Beshear singing the praises of Kynect right before Bevin dismantled it.
posted by Rhaomi at 11:42 AM on December 16, 2016


I think if there was going to be anything new about Russia/Trump/the election would've led with that.
posted by kirkaracha at 11:42 AM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


Shhh. Santa Obama is telling us how much coal we're gonna get.
posted by sciatrix at 11:43 AM on December 16, 2016 [7 favorites]


He's currently reviewing the ways in which the US has improved while he's been in office. Income gains, stock market numbers, Obamacare, unemployment rate, deficit cuts, &c.
posted by XtinaS at 11:43 AM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


Obama is going to drop his version of "One Last Time" that was cruelly cut from the Hamilton Mixtape.
posted by drezdn at 11:44 AM on December 16, 2016 [18 favorites]


'anyway, so the economy is doing well, which brings me to World War III'
posted by beerperson at 11:44 AM on December 16, 2016 [41 favorites]


Aside from re-animating Osama Bin Laden, I'm pretty sure Trump can and will reverse all of these things.
posted by bootlegpop at 11:44 AM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


Yeah he would have led with big news about Russia. There's nothing. He's going to wish a happy holidays, take questions about Russia, say "we're looking into it" and peace out.
posted by windbox at 11:44 AM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


Patriotism isn't only for Republicans.

If I could favor this a thousand times, I would.

Russia is not allowed to intervene in our election not because we haven't done it elsewhere nor because we are pristine but because this country is *mine*, and any attempt to hem and haw around the issue misses how much fucking damage it's done. There's no "we had it coming" here.
posted by steady-state strawberry at 11:44 AM on December 16, 2016 [19 favorites]


Holy crap, I'm going to miss him.
posted by MaritaCov at 11:45 AM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


you laugh, drezdn, but if he does I will legitimately cry at my desk for like twenty reasons all at once
posted by sciatrix at 11:46 AM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


'anyway, so the economy is doing well, which brings me to World War III'

Hey man, fake tags please for those of us who can't watch/listen.
posted by rabbitrabbit at 11:46 AM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


Given the open, i'm not expecting anything ground-breaking to come from this conference.
posted by XtinaS at 11:46 AM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


forever asking that if you're going to liveblog something with comments in the thread, you give a little context for people who aren't watching
posted by everybody had matching towels at 11:47 AM on December 16, 2016 [11 favorites]


The kerning is bad on the White House emblem behind him and it's bugging me.
posted by Fleebnork at 11:48 AM on December 16, 2016 [5 favorites]


He's conversating on Aleppo now, stating that it's a tragedy, that the US is going to keep pushing for providing aid, and so forth. "The Assad regime cannot slaughter its way to legitimacy." (direct quote)
posted by XtinaS at 11:48 AM on December 16, 2016 [5 favorites]


He's talking Russia blocking the US trying to bring humanitarian aid to Aleppo now in the UN.
posted by sciatrix at 11:48 AM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


Speech over, no big news, taking questions.
posted by zombieflanders at 11:49 AM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


I mean, they leaked the "FBI agrees with the CIA" story to hit right before the press conference. They knew what they were doing here. It's kind of going to come up.
posted by zachlipton at 11:49 AM on December 16, 2016


"That's why we will continue to press for a transition to a more representative government" [in Syria].

Hahahaha, lolsob.

"The world should not be fooled. And the world will not forget." Direct quotes, albeit about Syria rather than home.
posted by sciatrix at 11:49 AM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


So, nothing. Jesus.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 11:49 AM on December 16, 2016


Well so much for the big reveal.
posted by vrakatar at 11:49 AM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]




> The kerning is bad on the White House emblem behind him and it's bugging me

You mean the White H o u se emblem.
posted by The corpse in the library at 11:50 AM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


Putin is the first question.
posted by sciatrix at 11:50 AM on December 16, 2016


The disagreement isn't on if Russia hacked, but if their intent was specifically to elect Trump or just to disrupt our democracy.

If a not horrible Republican had been elected, say Jeb, Russia would have dribbed and drabbed provocative content from the RNC hack out to maximize outrage.

With Trump, they don't have to do that.
posted by zippy at 11:51 AM on December 16, 2016


Damn, Mark Knoller needs a haircut and a shave.
posted by zachlipton at 11:51 AM on December 16, 2016


I don't think leaked dirt on Trump would hurt him at all.

If they have anything to leak on other Republicans from the RNC hacks I'm sure they'll release it and any dirt on Trump when divisions between Trump and Congress would suit them. Get Trump's people in to soften sanctions on Russia, wait a while, then cause a bunch of infighting that may lead to impeachment and they can extract what they want and then throw American leadership into even more disarray for the rest of the term and America is playing catch-up after 2020.
posted by jason_steakums at 11:51 AM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


Oh, Obama. Oh, honey, no.
posted by sciatrix at 11:52 AM on December 16, 2016


talk about how the Trumpian ideals hurt "good" people that aren't in the imagined target group, too. I humanize myself as hard as I can, and I never lie.

This shit actually works! It's how I killed a really bad anti-immigrant plank in the platform - by being like "let me tell you about my family's view of the American dream and our hard work and military service and how much I love America." Humanizing like that is the only way I've made headway against that stuff.
posted by corb at 11:52 AM on December 16, 2016 [24 favorites]


No reveal, no surprise.
posted by Imperfect at 11:53 AM on December 16, 2016


First question: someone is asking about Putin, whether Obama is going to state anything about his interference, whether there's anything to the rumors of not helping with a smooth transition. He says he's committed to a smooth transition, and that everyone should want foreign people to stay out of our elections. There's probably more, but it's so... boring. I can't find the right word.
posted by XtinaS at 11:53 AM on December 16, 2016


The bad keming isn't the only problem with that sign.
posted by stopgap at 11:53 AM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


"My hope is that the President-elect is going to similarly be concerned."

Really? What gives you the slightest bit of hope.

He's now doing a timeline on events going back to the beginning of the summer. He said he ordered agencies to brief the victims of the hacking (not wanting to be thrown under the bus for the FBI's voicemail nonsense) and bipartisan Congressional leaders.
posted by zachlipton at 11:53 AM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


More indirect interferance? This time from UK.
The UK’s biggest energy company, Centrica, has donated tens of thousands of dollars to a Texas-based climate denial think tank strongly linked to Donald Trump’s new energy secretary Rick Perry.
posted by adamvasco at 11:54 AM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


The disagreement isn't on if Russia hacked, but if their intent was specifically to elect Trump or just to disrupt our democracy.

Just on the timeline, seems obvious: it started as the latter, same as ever, and probably switched gears to emphasize the former late in the fall.
posted by rokusan at 11:54 AM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


oh shit obama now grabbing the mic and singing 'No alarms and no surprises' and his Thom Yorke falsetto is pretty good
posted by beerperson at 11:54 AM on December 16, 2016 [8 favorites]


Damn. Just a nothingbagel.
posted by rokusan at 11:54 AM on December 16, 2016


Obama should pull the sign down after the conference and take it home as a souvenir.

I mean, the new one is going to be gold foil and diamonds, anyway.
posted by rokusan at 11:55 AM on December 16, 2016 [13 favorites]


He's trying to basically block accusations that the allegations are politically motivated. He's going high at just the wrong moment. Fuck.

He's saying his highest priority was to not damage the integrity of the election or do anything that would be seen through a partisan lens. He's trying to be unimpeachable in his actions, but we need--we need him to take a stand.
posted by sciatrix at 11:55 AM on December 16, 2016 [8 favorites]


Oh hey, that's the feeling of hopes I didn't even know I had being dashed.
posted by dinty_moore at 11:56 AM on December 16, 2016 [41 favorites]


> He's saying his highest priority was to not damage the integrity of the election or do anything that would be seen through a partisan lens

What's wrong with being partisan during an election, anyway?
posted by The corpse in the library at 11:56 AM on December 16, 2016


And somehow, somehow!, in this shit year of 20fucking16, I still manage to feel disappointment.
posted by lydhre at 11:57 AM on December 16, 2016 [16 favorites]


Taking the high road and being the calm adult isn't going to help a damn thing.

This is just so fucked up right now.

Seconding "that's the feeling of hopes I didn't even know I had being dashed."
posted by erratic meatsack at 11:57 AM on December 16, 2016 [6 favorites]


This is like Everything Frustrating About Obama in a nutshell. He's so hyper-controlled that he can't even get mad when he should. Clinton too.
posted by emjaybee at 11:57 AM on December 16, 2016 [15 favorites]


Now he's attacking the press for writing about Podesta's emails.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 11:57 AM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


"You guys wrote about it every day!"
posted by Fleebnork at 11:58 AM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


WHAT DID YOU FIND, SIR.

WHAT IS YOUR CONSENSUS. WHAT DID YOU FIND.

WHAT DO YOU THINK, SIR, THE NATION IS HANGING ON YOUR EVERY WORD

SIR. HISTORY'S EYES ARE ON YOU.
posted by sciatrix at 11:58 AM on December 16, 2016 [10 favorites]


Now he's giving the press some shit for covering the Podesta emails so heavily.
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 11:58 AM on December 16, 2016


Whoa, this is the "as your father, I am so disappointed in you" talk to the media, not a warning to Trump.

Weird choice????
posted by a fiendish thingy at 11:58 AM on December 16, 2016 [14 favorites]


He's talking a little shit to the press just now about obsessing about Clinton's nothing scandals and the Podesta leaks in the face of everything else going on. Doing it in Dad Voice still, though.
posted by cortex at 11:58 AM on December 16, 2016


SIR, WHAT WILL YOU FALL FOR
posted by sciatrix at 11:58 AM on December 16, 2016 [8 favorites]


"You guys wrote about it every day!"

Context: He just snarled at the press for making front page headlines out of each drip-drip-drip of leaked e-mails... but he snarled through a smile.
posted by rokusan at 11:59 AM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


Blaming the media and public for not "figuring it out on their own" basically from the hints they dropped. Thanks.
posted by DynamiteToast at 11:59 AM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


"Dear press: why were you obsessing over Clinton's emails? Golly!" [paraphrase]
posted by XtinaS at 11:59 AM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


Nothing we know about Obama suggested he was going to do anything else. He's first and foremost an institutionalist. It's not clear he even realizes that the institutions are crumbling around him.
posted by T.D. Strange at 11:59 AM on December 16, 2016 [31 favorites]


Obama playing the long game when maybe the short game is all that matters?
posted by glhaynes at 11:59 AM on December 16, 2016 [8 favorites]


We're back on this point, which remains important: "Everybody's suddenly acting surprised that it looked like this was disadvantaging Hillary Clinton because you guys wrote about it every day, every single leak, about every little tidbit of political gossip, including John Podesta's risotto recipe. This was an obsession that dominated the news coverage ... How is is that a Presidential election of such importance with so many big issues at stake and such a contrast between the candidates came to be dominated by a bunch of these leaks. What is it about our political system that made us vulnerable?"
posted by zachlipton at 12:00 PM on December 16, 2016 [17 favorites]


This year has given me emotional whiplash. My soul can't handle going from 0 to white hot rage and right back to 0 so many times in one week.
posted by C'est la D.C. at 12:00 PM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


Pretty sure this is 14th-dimensional chess and Obama is setting up a huge power coup that'll hit right in the middle of his third term
posted by beerperson at 12:00 PM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


Nothing we know about Obama suggested he was going to do anything else.

Absolutely, but it's still frustrating because if anything could've flapped him it'd be this...
posted by DynamiteToast at 12:01 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


I think Obama is playing the only game available to him if he wants to prevent a constitutional crisis and/or civil war.
posted by soren_lorensen at 12:01 PM on December 16, 2016 [13 favorites]


Nothing we know about Obama suggested he was going to do anything else. He's first and foremost an institutionalist. It's not clear he even realizes that the institutions are crumbling around him.

It's like he's constitutionally incapable of comprehending that the Republicans are not playing the game anymore and are cutting hunks off the gaming table with axes. This was a problem from the start, and I thought he'd wised up after his first term. Guess not.
posted by Pope Guilty at 12:01 PM on December 16, 2016 [44 favorites]


The set has collapsed around him and yet he keeps declaiming amidst the rubble.
posted by bootlegpop at 12:02 PM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


"Dear press: why were you obsessing over Clinton's emails? Golly!" [paraphrase]

He said much the same thing in his Daily Show interview. I think the real "golly" for him is that they put out a massively unprecedented statement in October blaming the Russians for the hacked emails and, for various crazypants reasons and institutional failures, this didn't really become a story until early December.
posted by zachlipton at 12:02 PM on December 16, 2016 [6 favorites]


Obama in middle of 20-minute answer to first question.
posted by klarck at 12:02 PM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


"Just as I told Russia to stoppit--" (Context: He's been talking about this to other foreign leaders.)

Idk why, but that "stoppit" in 100% Dad Voice cracked me right up.
posted by XtinaS at 12:02 PM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


I think Obama is playing the only game available to him if he wants to prevent a constitutional crisis and/or civil war.

I don't know why he would want to prevent that, at this hour.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:02 PM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


I think Obama is playing the only game available to him if he wants to prevent a constitutional crisis and/or civil war.

Or he doesn't want to sell his soul to play the same scorched earth game as the Republicans. Republicans can quite happily threaten to burn everything down and their constituents don't give a shit because that only stops the USG from spending money on black people.
posted by Talez at 12:04 PM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


He doesn't want to do anything else other than hand over power to the guy who just got elected. He said that on day one.
posted by Coda Tronca at 12:04 PM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


Watching this, I can't really deal with the fact that future press conferences won't have, like, sentences in them.
posted by erratic meatsack at 12:05 PM on December 16, 2016 [51 favorites]


You don't know why someone might want to prevent a violent uprising? Mkay.
posted by soren_lorensen at 12:05 PM on December 16, 2016 [20 favorites]


I think we are too far along the constitutional crisis path already. What he doesn't ever seem to understand is that the other side is willing to set everything on fire to spite him/anyone who likes him.

I have no idea why he can't understand that. He's not a dumb man.
posted by emjaybee at 12:05 PM on December 16, 2016 [10 favorites]


"Obama just lied: Russia's hacking of our election systems continued even past election day. His talk w/Putin failed." --@AndreaChalupa. Citing Reuters today: U.S. election agency breached by hackers after November vote.

I'm not sure we have enough evidence to outright call it a lie though--it's unclear that the Russian government is responsible for the Election Assistance Commission hack or that US intelligence believes that to be the case.
posted by zachlipton at 12:05 PM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


Watching this, I can't really deal with the fact that future press conferences won't have, like, sentences in them.

Nonsense! Trump has beautiful flowing sentences! The press just mangles them because they're biased and targeting him!
posted by Talez at 12:06 PM on December 16, 2016 [5 favorites]


So he's essentially saying that they didn't disclose more because they wanted We the People to accept the outcome of the election?

Ugh.
posted by R a c h e l at 12:06 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


Because, perhaps, the Civil War was one of the bloodiest in American history, and wars have so many casualties, and I think he hope he can prevent out and out civil war from bringing our institutions to the ground. In that metaphor I made upthread, he's keeping a clear, safe distance from Charybdis... and hewing ever closer to Scylla. I think he's closer than he needs to be, but I'm afraid of civil war and whether the nation can recover from it, too.

Fucking hell.
posted by sciatrix at 12:06 PM on December 16, 2016 [10 favorites]


from the previous thread...
In that time, the hackers seized the computer credentials of Dempsey and hundreds of other senior officers -- the passwords and electronic signatures they used to sign on to the network. The only way to stop the attack was to take the network down.

This is a pretty common outcome - to short circuit data theft, execute a self-imposed massive system-wide DOS attack. It's a win-win for the attacker.
posted by j_curiouser at 12:06 PM on December 16, 2016


Asked if Clinton didn't win because of hacking, he replied... I look forward to reading a book about it.
posted by The corpse in the library at 12:07 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


So he's essentially saying that they didn't disclose more because they wanted We the People to accept the outcome of the election?

No he's saying that he didn't disclose more because he didn't want it to be a parisan election issue that would be forgotten about instead of taken seriously by the remaining Congressional Republicans with a spine.
posted by Talez at 12:07 PM on December 16, 2016 [5 favorites]


We're doomed.
posted by SansPoint at 12:07 PM on December 16, 2016 [5 favorites]


"I don't think [Clinton] was treated fairly during the election."

Still chewing out the media.
posted by sciatrix at 12:08 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


"The coverage of her [Sec. Clinton] was troubling."
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:08 PM on December 16, 2016


I have no idea why he can't understand that. He's not a dumb man.

The solution to someone threatening to burn it all down isn't to coat the house in gasoline and say "I double-dog dare you!"
posted by Talez at 12:08 PM on December 16, 2016 [8 favorites]


Obama: "How do we make sure that we are showing up in places where I think Dem policies are needed and helping and making a difference, but people feel are thinking they are not being heard and Democrats are being characterized as coastal liberal latte sipping politically correct out of touch folks. We have to be in those communities. And I've seen that when we we are in those communities it makes a difference. That's how I became President."
posted by zachlipton at 12:10 PM on December 16, 2016 [6 favorites]


Hey guys just a gentle request if you're liveblogging please use [fake] for even what seems obvious sarcasm? With 2016 I never know if it's real or not with some of this.
posted by corb at 12:10 PM on December 16, 2016 [28 favorites]


This is off topic but it always makes me chuckle how every time Obama moves his arms or gesticulates at all, the Camera shutters start flapping. I'm not sure I'd have the restraint to not try and direct them like they were an orchestra.
posted by DynamiteToast at 12:11 PM on December 16, 2016 [15 favorites]


The other way of looking at it is that when someone is actively burning your house down, you don't put on your Dad Voice to chide them from the patio.

The GOP cheats, is continuing too, with nothing and no one standing up to stop them. They now have all three arms of government under their control. GG.
posted by Slackermagee at 12:11 PM on December 16, 2016 [8 favorites]


Or he doesn't want to sell his soul to play the same scorched earth game as the Republicans. Republicans can quite happily threaten to burn everything down and their constituents don't give a shit because that only stops the USG from spending money on black people.

THEY'RE ALREADY BURNING THE HOUSE DOWN. The rules are over. The Democrats' continued insistence on ignoring that fact will produce nothing pleasant or useful.
posted by Pope Guilty at 12:12 PM on December 16, 2016 [25 favorites]




will the South China Sea be the new Gulf of Tonkin?

uhhh....we had to escalate...they stole another drone...that's my story and i'm stickin to it...
posted by j_curiouser at 12:13 PM on December 16, 2016


via my brother: "His first 2012 debate was a better performance than this."
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:13 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


I think the thing scaring me most is that he is trying to normalize this because he is afraid we will crumble if he doesn't. He's trying to shore up the faith in institutions as badly as he can because he is afraid of what will happen if they break.

But this is not normal and in many ways those institutions have snapped. The question to ask of ourselves now is.... what are we the people going to do about it? What do we triage? What do we fix, and what can we fix right now before Trump gets the chance to try juggling chainsaws in the institution room?
posted by sciatrix at 12:14 PM on December 16, 2016 [19 favorites]


Welp, if this is his final press conference and the guy coming after wants to watch the US burn, well done, I guess. Jeez. I mean, I guess I wanted something more but I am also not surprised to be disappointed.
posted by Kitteh at 12:14 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


DynamiteToast: "This is off topic but it always makes me chuckle how every time Obama moves his arms or gesticulates at all, the Camera shutters start flapping. I'm not sure I'd have the restraint to not try and direct them like they were an orchestra."

it should have been bernie
posted by Rhaomi at 12:14 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


The best he can say is that Trump has "listened" as he's made suggestions to preserve institutions and the dignity of the office.
posted by zachlipton at 12:14 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


I don't know why he would want to prevent that, at this hour.

If you think for a few minutes about what a second American Civil War would entail, you shouldn't have much trouble coming up with some reasons.
posted by Juffo-Wup at 12:15 PM on December 16, 2016 [21 favorites]


he clearly wants to deligitimate trump without calling the election itself into question which is an impossible needle to thread
posted by murphy slaw at 12:15 PM on December 16, 2016 [16 favorites]


Anyways I'll always love Obama, but I guess he's fine with Trump taking over and Ulysses S. Granting his legacy while driving the country into the ground and that really shouldn't surprised me.
posted by DynamiteToast at 12:16 PM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


I mean he won't even criticize the FBI. The agency that obsessed over Hillary's emails while not bothering to drive over to the DNC to sound the alarm that they were under attack. What the fuck is wrong with him?
posted by zachlipton at 12:16 PM on December 16, 2016 [11 favorites]


There’s no sense in being precise when you don’t even know what you’re talking about
John von Neumann
posted by robbyrobs at 12:16 PM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


He basically just dodged the Comey question. Pathetic.
posted by homunculus at 12:17 PM on December 16, 2016


I sure hope Putin has learned his lesson from all this...
posted by Candleman at 12:17 PM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


Obama: "How do we make sure that we are showing up in places where I think Dem policies are needed and helping and making a difference, but people feel are thinking they are not being heard and Democrats are being characterized as coastal liberal latte sipping politically correct out of touch folks. We have to be in those communities. And I've seen that when we we are in those communities it makes a difference. That's how I became President."

he continued...
"I then tried the opposite, reversing Howard Dean's 50-state strategy- that served my campaigns so well- by gutting the DNC and local party system and moving all the organizing to a non-profit called Organizing for Action. The last three years of elections have shown that was a colossal failure with Republicans winning everywhere and culminating with the election of Donald Trump as President. Anyone have any other ideas?"
posted by gus at 12:17 PM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


Well I guess I don't have *less* hope than I did the day after the election so I'll probably be ok.
posted by emjaybee at 12:18 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


THEY'RE ALREADY BURNING THE HOUSE DOWN. The rules are over. The Democrats' continued insistence on ignoring that fact will produce nothing pleasant or useful.

I mean he won't even criticize the FBI. The agency that obsessed over Hillary's emails while not bothering to drive over to the DNC to sound the alarm that they were under attack. What the fuck is wrong with him?

If the Democrats start playing with the independence and legitimacy of the institutions like the Republicans do the Republic is truly over. There will still be a country but it will be a sectarian battle not a representative* democracy.

* Yes you can make the joke that it's not representative now. Well done.
posted by Talez at 12:18 PM on December 16, 2016 [15 favorites]


I think the thing scaring me most is that he is trying to normalize this because he is afraid we will crumble if he doesn't. He's trying to shore up the faith in institutions as badly as he can because he is afraid of what will happen if they break.

Remember the situation when Obama first took office? The economy had completely broken, institutions had snapped, actual cornerstone banks were collapsing. He did pretty much the same thing to keep the country running on the (illusion) of stability, he didn't blame anyone, and it worked.

I imagine he's thinking the same way now, which must take some serious willpower, given the weight oppressing him.
posted by rokusan at 12:18 PM on December 16, 2016 [9 favorites]


I gotta say, the 'shoulda been bernie' quarterbacking drives me bugfuck nuts, and the more I think about it the more it demoralizes my initial belief that I can get where I want to based on actual competence. I mean, I wear a bra in the morning, so fuck knows I'm always gonna be less likeable than any dude who shares my traits. Goddamn.

I don't have time to watch that youtube link, Rhaomi, because I am listening carefully to a man make the wrong fucking choices through all our fear. So I acknowledge that I could be levying an undeserved salvo based on the gotcha you think is implicit in the linked context absent from your actual words. But jesus fucking christ.
posted by sciatrix at 12:18 PM on December 16, 2016 [57 favorites]


Well I guess I don't have *less* hope than I did the day after the election so I'll probably be ok.

Given what the president elect has done since the election, i have much, much much much much less hope.
posted by localhuman at 12:19 PM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


During this press conference, the Governor of North Carolina signed the bill stripping powers from the new Governor.

"As this is happening, President Obama is on TV right now speaking proudly about how Dems play by the rules in politics"

I'm so done with "we go high." What happened to no fucks Obama? He doesn't even have a word of mild criticism for the FBI or Comey right now?
posted by zachlipton at 12:20 PM on December 16, 2016 [44 favorites]


We're not in a perfect place now. Fine.

What do we do going forward?!?
posted by sciatrix at 12:20 PM on December 16, 2016


* Yes you can make the joke that it's not representative now. Well done.

But it's not a joke...
posted by meese at 12:20 PM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


For Christsakes, get Biden to the podium to drop some f-bombs about this shit.
posted by klarck at 12:21 PM on December 16, 2016 [10 favorites]


We need to tell prospective Trump electors that they may be voting for the Antichrist. Do I believe Trump is the Antichrist? I believe if there is an Antichrist, it is him.

Grandmother's family name: Christ. (grandson of Christ) Wants to move the U.S. embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, an end days type of thing. MAGA sounds a lot like Magog. Joining with Russia (who is Magog in the standard fundamentalist interpretations.)
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 12:21 PM on December 16, 2016 [8 favorites]


Somebody passed out.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 12:21 PM on December 16, 2016


Somebody in the press corps is not feeling good.
posted by glhaynes at 12:21 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


Somebody needs a medical evacuation now, too.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:22 PM on December 16, 2016


Whoever is falling ill in the back of this press conference speaks for me.
posted by SansPoint at 12:22 PM on December 16, 2016 [31 favorites]


Someone is having a fucking heart attack or puking or something offscreen. Not fake.
posted by sciatrix at 12:22 PM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


I feel like he's trying to gaslight us with this shit. We heard him say what he truly thought about Trump before the election. And now he's all "oh no, it will be fine, Trump's just like any other PEOTUS" (not real quote). Stop trying to gaslight us into ignoring our fear.
posted by melissasaurus at 12:22 PM on December 16, 2016 [10 favorites]


we resist. but without support from the administration or the deep state it will necessarily be reactive.
posted by murphy slaw at 12:22 PM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


I guess I expected something between this tepid response and him standing on a tank like Yeltsin.
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 12:22 PM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


I sure hope Putin has learned his lesson from all this...

Hmph. I hear Obama telling Putin to stop it and I hear exactly the same sort of weak sauce that Clinton unveiled by telling corrupt Wall Street to cut it out. It's disappointing, to be sure.

(And yeah, I am sure there is a Clinton hot sauce joke here somewhere but I feel strangely unmotivated to put in the mental effort to find something funny right now. Not an encouraging day so far.)
posted by rokusan at 12:23 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


he continued...
"I then tried the opposite, reversing Howard Dean's 50-state strategy- that served my campaigns so well- by gutting the DNC and local party system and moving all the organizing to a non-profit called Organizing for Action. The last three years of elections have shown that was a colossal failure with Republicans winning everywhere and culminating with the election of Donald Trump as President. Anyone have any other ideas?"


That quote is [fake], though the spirit is not wrong. However, he did go on to acknowledge that he failed to do this in the midterms and for downballot candidates as President and generally seemed to regret this. I can only transcribe a paragraph or so at a time and he started speaking quickly, so I didn't get that part.

Now someone in the briefing room has taken ill and some chaos has ensued.
posted by zachlipton at 12:23 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


They're holding up the conference for someone needing to go to the doctor, which seems weird. Carry on. No need to film someone having to leave.
posted by The corpse in the library at 12:23 PM on December 16, 2016


obama calling for his own doctor
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 12:23 PM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


Someone passed out in the back of the room and they're waiting for a doctor? [real]

Obama literally giving directions to the doctor's office. [surreal]
posted by rokusan at 12:23 PM on December 16, 2016 [8 favorites]


This presser is a shitshow but Obama giving directions is pretty charming.
posted by OverlappingElvis at 12:24 PM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


I know how you feel, Person who Passed Out. I know how you feel.
posted by emjaybee at 12:24 PM on December 16, 2016 [23 favorites]


I'd honestly be fine with the standing on a tank one, at this point. I feel like I'm watching our democracy -burn-, and the guy who's the guardian of it doesn't seem aware of it.
posted by Archelaus at 12:24 PM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


I quit watching after he ducked the Comey question. I'm done. So disappointing.
posted by Fleebnork at 12:25 PM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


I am so fucking sick of being held hostage by people who are eager, willing, and in fact promising to burn down the house I live in.
posted by erratic meatsack at 12:25 PM on December 16, 2016 [20 favorites]


They're holding up the conference for someone needing to go to the doctor, which seems weird. Carry on. No need to film someone having to leave.

That someone appears to have become suddenly and seriously ill; it's not like you're in school and you have to leave an hour early for a dentist appointment.
posted by zachlipton at 12:25 PM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


What do we triage? What do we fix, and what can we fix right now before Trump gets the chance to try juggling chainsaws in the institution room?

So for now, my triage list of questions goes:

1. How likely is this to be undermined in a Trump presidency?
(a) How likely to be passed by House/Senate/Departmental means?
(b) How likely to be impacted by extralegal actors?

2. How likely are people to be harmed by this?
(a) Permanently and tangibly?
(b) Short term?
(c) Affecting the character of our society?

3. How likely am I to be able to impact this?
(a) Alone?
(b) With my family and friends?
(c) Within my community?
posted by corb at 12:25 PM on December 16, 2016 [17 favorites]


sciatrix: "So I acknowledge that I could be levying an undeserved salvo based on the gotcha you think is implicit in the linked context absent from your actual words."

It was gallows humor link to a Full Frontal clip of Sanders waving his hands at a debate set to orchestra music.
posted by Rhaomi at 12:25 PM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


Obama is a constitutional prof with an even keel disposition. He's not a bomb thrower. 1/
For eight years progressives have clamored for him to get angry, to get dirty. It's not how he operates. This is a lecture. 2/
I'm not saying he's right, but it's what's happening. As any professor, he wants us to learn for ourselves. Not what people want 3/3
--@JYSexton
posted by zachlipton at 12:26 PM on December 16, 2016 [8 favorites]


I mean, I don't think a series of sick burns are in order here, but seriously? He's talking like he's handing over the reins to Romney. As others have noted, at least an acknowledgment that this is not normal would be nice. And I don't think the possibility of a civil war hangs in the balance.

I really want to believe that he's playing it cool now because the gloves are coming off later. But his track record doesn't leave me too hopeful in that regard.

Also, Jesus fuck, is a doctor really that far away from POTUS at any given time?
posted by Rykey at 12:26 PM on December 16, 2016 [8 favorites]


There really isn't anything else an outgoing President could do.

Comey caving makes me more optimistic than anything Obama could do with 30 days left.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 12:26 PM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


I am deeply saddened that (for at least 4 years), like his answers or not, this is the last time we will have an actual adult able to field questions in a thoughtful and eloquent manner standing in front of that seal and taking questions from reporters.
posted by Justinian at 12:27 PM on December 16, 2016 [26 favorites]


I skimmed down to here, so my apology if this is a repeat.

Here's the really scary thought:

The Russians hacked the RNC and the DNC. They only gave the DNC information to wikileaks. What does that mean that they have on the RNC? How much blackmail material on current senators, representatives and people on Trump's team do they have? Maybe they released the DNC email stuff because it wasn't juicy enough to blackmail anyone over.
posted by Hactar at 12:28 PM on December 16, 2016 [8 favorites]


> That someone appears to have become suddenly and seriously ill; it's not like you're in school and you have to leave an hour early for a dentist appointment

True, I withdraw my irritation. And it's an interesting moment. Obama telling people how to get to his doctor's office, as if they'll be allowed to wander the hallways looking for it and as if there aren't people right there with radios to call in help. Maybe it's an example of Obama remaining very calm at a time when other people would cause a scene.
posted by The corpse in the library at 12:28 PM on December 16, 2016


There really isn't anything else an outgoing President could do.

This. Challenging the peaceful transition of power is not a Pandora's Box we want to open when it's Trump that's going to have to hand over power in 4/8 years.
posted by Talez at 12:28 PM on December 16, 2016 [22 favorites]


Meanwhile, the North Carolina GOP has completed its repeal of democracy.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 12:29 PM on December 16, 2016 [29 favorites]


"I can assure the public that there was not the kind of tampering with the voting process that was their concern... the votes that were cast were counted, they were counted appropriately, and we have not seen evidence of machines being tampered with." [real]

(The word "appropriately" made me flinch, but I don't think he was being clever.)
posted by rokusan at 12:30 PM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


We have not seen evidence of machines being tampered with? With recounts being shut down before they've finished happening?

Oh, Obama, no.
posted by sciatrix at 12:30 PM on December 16, 2016 [10 favorites]


@JoyAnnReid: Obama didn't really answer the "free and fair" election question. His answer was limited to the voting machines being hacked.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:31 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


You don't need to tamper with vote counts when you can manipulate who casts the votes.
posted by Justinian at 12:32 PM on December 16, 2016 [10 favorites]




They're wrapping up a damn coup in North Carolina and the President of the United States and most trusted Democrat in the country thinks we want another lecture right now.

He says there's a lot of information they aren't going to declassify. "This is one of those situations where unless the American people genuinely think the professionals in the CIA, FBI, our entire intelligence infrastructure...[many are Republicans] are less trustworthy than the Russians, then people should pay attention to what our intelligence agencies say." Sounds like the theme is "trust us."
posted by zachlipton at 12:33 PM on December 16, 2016 [6 favorites]


We need to tell prospective Trump electors that they may be voting for the Antichrist. Do I believe Trump is the Antichrist? I believe if there is an Antichrist, it is him.

This is not a negative to them. They want the Antichrist to get here so we can get on with the rapture.
posted by dilaudid at 12:33 PM on December 16, 2016 [11 favorites]


The first time I ever saw President Obama, it was roughly 2006 and I was in middle school. It was my first exposure to real in-the-flesh politicians, and in sharp contrast to a different speaker's combative response to a disruption from the crowd, then-Senator Obama held up his speech by several minutes to ensure that someone who fell down the bleachers had medical attention before anything resumed.

There's no moral to the story, just that this incident in the press room just reminded me of that. I still remember part of what he said in that speech (despite the fact that to this day I'm a horrible auditory learner) and I still remember shaking his hand on the way out. Regardless of whether he's doing everything that others want him to, I'm so proud that same man is my president today and the fact that someone like him is in power, well, I have faith that empowered Americans can still do the right thing again in the future.
posted by R a c h e l at 12:35 PM on December 16, 2016 [11 favorites]


I don't know if this has been previously posted in any of the election megathreads but Trump and Putin have been known about since July when Josh Marshall had one of his greatest viewed posts on TPM
Trump & Putin. Yes, It's Really a Thing
To my mind it just goes further to show how completely in the bubble and out of touch the leadership of your Democratic party is. You can blame whoever you like if it makes you feel better but the the sad and horrible truth is that you have been screwed over badly by your own blind arrogant and corrupt political leadership.


Yes, it was posted in those threads, multiple times. I am not really sure what you're accusing the leadership of--are you claiming they weren't paying attention? Because they tried, but the media and public largely ignored all the facts in favor of Trump scandals and EEE-MAAAALEZZZZ.


Blaming the media and public for not "figuring it out on their own" basically from the hints they dropped. Thanks.

What. The. Fuck.

I remember reading the articles and releases about the hacking. I remember talking about the story with others. And I remember being called a Clinton-apologist and conspiracy theorist by both sides of the aisle for daring to pay attention to the evidence. Trump people were Trumpists, obviously, but from the left it was person after person saying it was all an irrelevant distraction from the DNC's Great Corruption and The Wronging Of Bernie and Horrible Hillary. That happened on this site.

This was all out there, and the administration, investigative journalists, and the Clinton campaign tried to bring it up, and all shut down by the rivers of bullshit being rained on their heads by the media and public who were more interested in confirming their biases than listening to anyone else. It has been driving me fucking crazy since the puzzle pieces started falling together during the primaries.

It is deeply, deeply frustrating to read all this blame and snark aimed at Obama/Clinton/Democrats for not bringing this up, because they fucking tried and you didn't care.

I'm glad he chewed out the media. They need chewing out. Right now, the bulk of media figures are either turning out thinkpieces about white people or pointing fingers at fake news on Facebook instead of engaging in an iota of reflection on their own practices.
posted by Anonymous at 12:35 PM on December 16, 2016


This. Challenging the peaceful transition of power is not a Pandora's Box we want to open when it's Trump that's going to have to hand over power in 4/8 years.

This is also why lobbying electors really scares me. If that ever becomes normalized, the actual public election itself and its hundred million votes will no longer ever matter again: the only election that would matter would be the direct lobbying of the 1076 before, and the 538 thereafter.

I mean, you think it wouldn't happen every single time hereafter?
posted by rokusan at 12:35 PM on December 16, 2016 [10 favorites]


"Ronald Reagan would roll over in his grave" is gonna piss off exactly the right people.
posted by Justinian at 12:35 PM on December 16, 2016 [34 favorites]


He's now calling out Republicans who have previously been pro-Russia for not calling Trump on Russian ties; also calling out people for supporting anti-American politics just because the GOP candidate is doing so. Huh. Had to be dragged kicking and screaming, though.

"Ronald Reagan would roll over in his grave." Direct quote.
posted by sciatrix at 12:36 PM on December 16, 2016 [5 favorites]


"Ronald Reagan would roll over in his grave." — POTUS, regarding Republican approval of Putin, a former KGB agent, because he helps them relative to Democrats
posted by glhaynes at 12:36 PM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]




You're right schroedinger. We had essentially the same information we have now back in October. And nobody wanted to face the truth then. And I get that, it was scary and vague and hard to know what to do with that information, just as it is now. And it was wrapped up in a partisan fight. But if we spent 2% of the time we spent talking about Clinton emails on the fact that intelligence agencies dropped a bombshell in the middle of this, we might be in a better place.
posted by zachlipton at 12:38 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


We need to tell prospective Trump electors that they may be voting for the Antichrist.

You misunderstand the religious crazies.

The Antichrist is not something you fight, oppose, or delay. You also don't bring it about yourself. You are a witness, not an actor. The coming of the Antichrist is something you observe and celebrate, because it means the glorious End Times are near.
posted by rokusan at 12:38 PM on December 16, 2016 [10 favorites]


god IF ONLY they'd all be raptured away
posted by poffin boffin at 12:40 PM on December 16, 2016 [44 favorites]


i will break the seals MYSELF
posted by poffin boffin at 12:40 PM on December 16, 2016 [72 favorites]


I mean, you think it wouldn't happen every single time hereafter?

You think it won't anyway? You think that the party that has gerrymandered beyond the legal limits, that is right now playing this game in North Carolina, that has sold itself to people who are sending death threats and epilepsy triggers to journalists, isn't going to try this the next time they come close in the EC regardless of whether the Dems do it now?
posted by Etrigan at 12:40 PM on December 16, 2016 [19 favorites]


I mean, you think it wouldn't happen every single time hereafter?

I think it works be the end of the electoral college, and that would be okay with me.
posted by meese at 12:40 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


If lobbying electors becomes a problem, we can get rid of the electoral college. It's a shitty system and I don't care anything about preserving it.

We know that the EC does not do what's it's supposed to--keep unfit people out of office. In this case, quite the opposite. Shut it down.
posted by emjaybee at 12:42 PM on December 16, 2016 [12 favorites]


Martha Raddatz asks him if he can finger Putin specifically and brings up Iraq WMD as a counterexample. He won't go there, says he's waiting for the report to come out, but he has "great confidence" it was Russia and says that the evidence has been provided to bipartisan members of Congress and some of them have taken it seriously.

Most he'll say on blaming Putin specifically is: "Not much happens in Russia without Vladimir Putin" and that "this happened at the highest levels of the Russian government" and you can ask yourself if "high level Russian officials go off rogue and decide to tamper with the US election."
posted by zachlipton at 12:42 PM on December 16, 2016


Why Didn't Obama Do More About Russian Election Hack?
The Obama administration didn't respond more forcefully to Russian hacking before the presidential election because they didn't want to appear to be interfering in the election and they thought that Hillary Clinton was going to win and a potential cyber war with Russia wasn't worth it, multiple high-level government officials told NBC News.

"They thought she was going to win, so they were willing to kick the can down the road," said one U.S official familiar with the level of Russian hacking.
posted by kirkaracha at 12:43 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


What can we even do in the face of that?

we must begin construction of the thunderdome
posted by poffin boffin at 12:43 PM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


Obama, is Putin threatening to nuke us if Trump doesn't take office? Blink twice if yes.
posted by SansPoint at 12:44 PM on December 16, 2016 [12 favorites]




Kick The Can Down The Road: A History Of The Human Race
posted by The Card Cheat at 12:45 PM on December 16, 2016 [10 favorites]


Okay, Obama's argument that extreme partisanship is at the root of our vulnerability to misinformation and outside disruption is reasonable. I still hate it.
posted by klarck at 12:46 PM on December 16, 2016 [12 favorites]


So how many more national security agencies have to get in on agreeing the Russian hack criminally tainted the election results before anything gets done about it? Homeland Security too? Security Service? The FDA? Does the Supreme Court have to make a ruling? What's the tipping point required for "this is bullshit, we're throwing it out and starting over"?

What is even happening if all we get is the FBI and CIA going "Welp, we agree that some shady criminal shit and some probably treasonous shit went down, but OH WELL, WHATCHA GONNA DO, MOVING ON!"
posted by nicebookrack at 12:47 PM on December 16, 2016 [5 favorites]


klarck: "Okay, Obama's argument that extreme partisanship is at the root of our vulnerability to misinformation and outside disruption is reasonable. I still hate it."

The people who need to hear and internalize that message are not going to be persuaded by anything coming out of Obama's mouth.
posted by erratic meatsack at 12:47 PM on December 16, 2016 [8 favorites]


Obama Continues to Treat Americans as Adults [notOnion]
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 12:47 PM on December 16, 2016 [8 favorites]


"For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect." [or electors?]

Matthew 24: 24, KJV
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 12:48 PM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


who is this super-depressing depressed guy and does anyone know what happened to the dude who ran for president eight years ago
posted by beerperson at 12:48 PM on December 16, 2016 [11 favorites]


who are these super-depressing depressed people and does anyone know what happened to the people who elected this enthusiastic guy full of hope eight years ago?
posted by zachlipton at 12:49 PM on December 16, 2016 [8 favorites]


he looks so very tired and I can't blame him
posted by murphy slaw at 12:50 PM on December 16, 2016 [13 favorites]


If I were Obama and knew the stuff he must know, I don't know how I'd even get out of bed in the morning.
posted by The Card Cheat at 12:51 PM on December 16, 2016 [14 favorites]


what happened to this voter was 6 years of congressional obstruction and constant racist attempts to deligitimize the first african american president
posted by murphy slaw at 12:51 PM on December 16, 2016 [37 favorites]


I know it's unpleasant and uncomfortable to think about, erratic meatsack, but extreme partisanship leads to blinders and echo chambers on both sides of the political landscape. Are they equally distorting or harmful? Almost certainly not, but they do exist.

Democratic blinders and echo chambers and the squishing of dissent, at the very least, lead to a whole lot of overconfidence this election, for example, and we cannot dig in into this position where it's only the other guys who must learn and change. It's self-defeating.
posted by rokusan at 12:54 PM on December 16, 2016 [7 favorites]


So how many more national security agencies have to get in on agreeing the Russian hack criminally tainted the election results before anything gets done about it?

Nothing is going to get done about it. Millionaire Sex Predator Donald Trump will be president. The best we can hope for is that the intel report the Obama admin is producing, combined with massive resistance from centrists, liberals and the left based on the illegitimacy of a Trump administration makes him a lame duck from day one.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 12:54 PM on December 16, 2016 [5 favorites]


If the Democrats start playing with the independence and legitimacy of the institutions like the Republicans do the Republic is truly over.

But wait, doesn't it even matter if it's not "playing" but actual reality? If someone in Trump's campaign actively fed info to Russian intelligence services even just to try to help them swing the election, that's already a complete breakdown in our democratic institutions and system. In reality, not as a political play. Doesn't anybody in power even want to be sure that's not what happened?!?
posted by saulgoodman at 12:57 PM on December 16, 2016 [7 favorites]


[time-travel *POOF*]

2016 PBO: Hey
2012 PBO: what the hell is it now
2016 PBO: I just wanted to let you know that we had a little daydream about Mitt Romney being semi-unconstitutionally handed the office of the presidency and it was just the most wonderful, comforting thing to imagine
2012 PBO: stop visiting me, you are the fucking worst. I hope you get sucked into a god damned wormhole on your return trip
2016 PBO: oh believe me so do I
posted by prize bull octorok at 12:59 PM on December 16, 2016 [114 favorites]


"So how many more national security agencies have to get in on agreeing the Russian hack criminally tainted the election results before anything gets done about it?"

Hacking the DNC (not sure whether the reports are about the 2015 hack or the 2016 hack) and hacking Podesta's email now counts as tainting the actual election results?

I think every major election should be investigated and double-checked (especially when they use voting machines that have been proven to be easily hackable) but I don't think that the intelligence agencies said anything about the literal hacking of the election (as in changing the votes and such). The disagreements between the intelligence agencies lie on whether the DNC and Podesta hacks were just intelligence gathering or whether they were done to introduce doubt into the electoral process or whether they were done specifically to get Trump elected.

Also, is it now official that the RNC was hacked as well? Because when I heard the claim months ago, it was later said to not be accurate. Is it official now though?
posted by I-baLL at 12:59 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


You don't need to tamper with vote counts when you can manipulate who casts the votes.

You might think so, but again, in Michigan we found that the vote counts had been tampered with in something like 60% of the precincts that got checked.
posted by IAmUnaware at 1:01 PM on December 16, 2016 [14 favorites]


Prize Bull Octorok ... or President Barack Obama????
posted by ChuraChura at 1:02 PM on December 16, 2016 [24 favorites]


But wait, doesn't it even matter if it's not "playing" but actual reality? If someone in Trump's campaign actively fed info to Russian intelligence services even just to try to help them swing the election, that's already a complete breakdown in our democratic institutions and system. In reality, not as a political play. Doesn't anybody even want to be sure that's not what happened?!?

I guess what I'm trying to say is that being able to fix this shit in the long term we're going to need a party that hasn't sold itself out and can be the party of respect and decency. There's currently one obvious choice. If it becomes zero there will need to be a massive upheaval in the political party status quo and the process becomes orders of magnitude harder and longer.
posted by Talez at 1:02 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


Today @ 2:20pm FBI backs CIA view that Russia intervened to help Trump win election

Comey’s support for the CIA’s conclusion — and officials say that he never changed his position — suggests that the leaders of the three agencies are in agreement on Russian intentions, contrary to suggestions by some lawmakers that the FBI disagreed with the CIA.

“Earlier this week, I met separately with (Director) FBI James Comey and DNI Jim Clapper, and there is strong consensus among us on the scope, nature, and intent of Russian interference in our presidential election,” CIA Director John Brennan said in a message to the agency’s workforce, according to U.S. officials who have seen the message.

“Earlier this week, I met separately with (Director) FBI James Comey and DNI Jim Clapper, and there is strong consensus among us on the scope, nature, and intent of Russian interference in our presidential election,” CIA Director John Brennan said in a message to the agency’s workforce, according to U.S. officials who have seen the message.

A separate House intelligence briefing by a senior FBI counterintelligence official last week left some Republican and Democratic lawmakers with the impression that the bureau wasn’t on the same page as the CIA, according to officials present.

“The truth is they were never all that different in the first place,” an official said of the FBI and CIA positions.

posted by futz at 1:03 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


"How do we get to a point where some voters see Michelle Obama's healthy eating initiative as a greater threat than the administration threatening the press over a story they don't like." [real]
posted by Superplin at 1:06 PM on December 16, 2016 [26 favorites]


Thank you President Obama. So long and thanks for all the fish.
posted by Justinian at 1:07 PM on December 16, 2016 [11 favorites]


Well, that was depressing.
posted by diogenes at 1:08 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


"How do we get to a point where some voters see Michelle Obama's healthy eating initiative as a greater threat than the administration threatening the press over a story they don't like." [real]

With a very, very, very long pause after the "as a greater threat than..." while he came up with an example.
posted by Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug at 1:08 PM on December 16, 2016 [5 favorites]


Xeni Jardin on Twitter:
Maybe Obama is subtweeting us this thought bubble with code blinks

* WHAT EXACTLY
WOULD YOU HAVE ME DO *

posted by The corpse in the library at 1:09 PM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


Obama: "Mele Kalikimaka!"

@realDonaldTrump in about five minutes: "This immigrant problem is out of control. When I'm President, we'll build a wall to keep Hawaiians out, and they'll pay for it!"
posted by tonycpsu at 1:09 PM on December 16, 2016 [8 favorites]


Obama said goodbye by saying a Hawaiian Mele Kalikimaka! to the press. [real]

Which you know is about to be all over your Facebook feed as the "mysterious coded Arabic message" Obama sent his secret supporters.
posted by rokusan at 1:09 PM on December 16, 2016 [15 favorites]


Prize Bull Octorok ... or President Barack Obama?

My god, they've been the same person all along. It was right there in front of us.
posted by rokusan at 1:10 PM on December 16, 2016 [15 favorites]


Well, you can't say he's not staying true to himself to the end, but his seemingly unyielding faith in institutions amid an enormous number of people who demonstrably do not care and actively want to destroy said institutions (see also: North Carolina right this moment) is hard to swallow.

I do think there's some possible truth to the theory that this press conference was about modeling to a singular audience--Trump, that institutions matter, but the idea that said audience cares enough to watch, manages to take away a message that's not printed on the front of a hat, or is even physically capable of paying attention for that long is one I really can't get behind.
posted by zachlipton at 1:11 PM on December 16, 2016 [6 favorites]


it's interesting how the Republican party (specifically, Evangelical Republicans, but it might as well be all of 'em) are motivated by this

Woe to the world because of the things that cause people to stumble! Such things must come, but woe to the person through whom they come!
posted by tel3path at 1:12 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


* WHAT EXACTLY
WOULD YOU HAVE ME DO *


throw back his head and cackle maniacally after informing us that even now, drones are reducing Trump Tower to rubble while an enormous Shepard Fairey banner unfurls behind him

sigh
posted by prize bull octorok at 1:13 PM on December 16, 2016 [24 favorites]


https://www.facebook.com/newsandobserver/videos/1444351518911116/

citizens demanding entry to the NC general assembly.
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 1:14 PM on December 16, 2016 [6 favorites]


The best we can hope for is that the intel report the Obama admin is producing, combined with massive resistance from centrists, liberals and the left based on the illegitimacy of a Trump administration makes him a lame duck from day one.

That's a pretty grim "best we can hope for", though. Trump is a horrifically incompetent piece of shit who isn't fit to run a salad bar, much less a country, for sure, but even if the rest of us agree to just ignore everything he says for the next four years we still have a government packed with Republicans (quite a few of whom were not provably elected!) who are looking forward to doing as much evil as possible with no executive branch to stand in their way. I mean, just look at what's happening right this moment in North Carolina. Honestly, even if Trump got hurled into the sun and we all just decided there wasn't going to be a President at all until the next election things would still be all fucked up. We need a very serious shifting of the population in Congress.
posted by IAmUnaware at 1:15 PM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


I hope GOP media attack him for saying mele kalikimaka. Maybe he should have said "happy holidays" instead?
posted by melissasaurus at 1:15 PM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


throw back his head and cackle maniacally after informing us that even now, drones are reducing Trump Tower to rubble while an enormous Shepard Fairey banner unfurls behind him

Yes. Because if there's one thing that's associated with stable, liberal democracies it's violent coups to keep a leader in power.
posted by Talez at 1:15 PM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


rokusan: "I know it's unpleasant and uncomfortable to think about, erratic meatsack, but extreme partisanship leads to blinders and echo chambers on both sides of the political landscape. Are they equally distorting or harmful? Almost certainly not, but they do exist.

Democratic blinders and echo chambers and the squishing of dissent, at the very least, lead to a whole lot of overconfidence this election, for example, and we cannot dig in into this position where it's only the other guys who must learn and change. It's self-defeating.
"

Fair warning, I'm really angry about goddamn everything and this isn't meant to be a rant towards you personally. The only reason it's "unpleasant and uncomfortable think about," for me, is because only one side seems to believe in actual democracy at this point. And already the amount of pushing and pulling happening to "accommodate" and "work together with" and "reach across the aisle" towards the racist shitbags the other party has embraced has been making me physically sick.

And yes, it feels like the decent and moral thing to do is to be the adult in the room and sigh and say "Well no we clearly need to escape our own echo chamber". Except... when only one of the two parties embraces actual diversity, it's real difficult to take this attitude seriously.

No, I do not have blinders to take off. I am far less secluded than the people who surrounded themselves with their equally white, equally straight, equally gender-conforming, equally Real American nonsense.
posted by erratic meatsack at 1:16 PM on December 16, 2016 [25 favorites]


when they go low, they win — @netw3rk

When they go low, we surrender.
or
When they go low, we roll over and play dead.

We knew President Obama wasn't going to save us from the impending disaster that will be a Trump administration. Just as Clinton won't. Or Sanders. Or the Electoral College. But if that was a harbinger of how the Democrats will fail to stand up and resist Trump and the GOP for next two years, we're all deeply fucked.
posted by zarq at 1:17 PM on December 16, 2016 [24 favorites]


Show me a bridge that bipartisanship built during the Obama era, a job that it saved, or a pipeline that it stopped from being built. Partisanship is the only responsible strategy when one party's ideology does not believe in government at all. If it weren't for Wall Street kicking their asses, they would have defaulted on our debt. How do you negotiate with an opposition party that's willing to don a suicide vest to stop routine legislation that keeps the country afloat?
posted by tonycpsu at 1:19 PM on December 16, 2016 [16 favorites]


My concern is that there's not going to be enough of a public intel report and it will just be reduced to yet another matter of opinion: every intelligence agency and Democrats+Lindsay Graham/John McCain say it was Russia, Trump and Russia and teaparty folks say "who knows? could have been anyone?" and it will become like climate change or any other issue that's been pushed into this realm of doubt and uncertainty that can be used as an excuse for inaction.
posted by zachlipton at 1:19 PM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


Yes. Because if there's one thing that's associated with stable, liberal democracies it's violent coups to keep a leader in power.

is it really a coup if he's not in office yet

asking for a friend
posted by poffin boffin at 1:21 PM on December 16, 2016 [8 favorites]


Now Jonah Goldberg claims that "Never Trump" was really just "not until he got elected Trump," because the word "never" need not have any meaning.
posted by zachlipton at 1:22 PM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


is it really a coup if he's not in office yet

It's kind of moot because violently disposing of an opposition leader is also not a hallmark of a stable, liberal democracy.
posted by Talez at 1:23 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


What's that old rhyme about "the best among us lacking conviction," or something something...?
posted by saulgoodman at 1:23 PM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


> Patriotism isn't only for Republicans.

If I could favor this a thousand times, I would.

Russia is not allowed to intervene in our election not because we haven't done it elsewhere nor because we are pristine but because this country is *mine*, and any attempt to hem and haw around the issue misses how much fucking damage it's done. There's no "we had it coming" here.


Terrorism Analyst Malcolm Nance on Brian Williams: A Crisis of Patriotism
posted by homunculus at 1:24 PM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


"who knows? could have been anyone?"

Don't forget the president elect's favorite possibility: a fat guy.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 1:24 PM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


Stop, Trump is going to be sworn in next month. The way to deal with this is to push for impeachment if you think it is deserved.
posted by Justinian at 1:25 PM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


No offense taken, meatsack. I understand completely. It's all pretty damn awful.

I don't know what we have to change, but we have to change something. We can't just blame everyone else and while raging that they have to change, just because that demonstrably does not help in the long run.
posted by rokusan at 1:25 PM on December 16, 2016


> The Russians hacked the RNC and the DNC. They only gave the DNC information to wikileaks. What does that mean that they have on the RNC? How much blackmail material on current senators, representatives and people on Trump's team do they have? Maybe they released the DNC email stuff because it wasn't juicy enough to blackmail anyone over.

How Russian Hackers Can Blackmail Donald Trump—and the GOP: If it is true that the Russians hacked the Republican National Committee as well as the DNC, then their power over POTUS potentially knows few bounds.
posted by homunculus at 1:25 PM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


I'm not carrying any more of the "but DEMOCRATS" baggage. Republicans are acting traitorously by allowing (and in Trump's case, possibly colluding with) interference by a hostile foreign power. There is NO equivalent on the Dem side. NONE.

This is not a dispute over manners at an ice-cream social. The Republican party has been taken over by traitorous (in the Russian but also the Confederacy-loving) sense blowhards, who were in turn weaponized by an elite that sought to break down any barriers to their ability to exploit and oppress anyone who got in their way. And now they have the entire government at their beck and call. We are way past any useful critiques of Democratic Party politics. We are at Oh Fuck We're Losing Our Democracy.
posted by emjaybee at 1:25 PM on December 16, 2016 [71 favorites]


it will become like climate change or any other issue that's been pushed into this realm of doubt and uncertainty that can be used as an excuse for inaction.

Yep, and creating that sort of paralyzing confusion is SOP for tradecraft, which to me seems likely deliberate, too... Ugh.
posted by saulgoodman at 1:25 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


Comey’s support for the CIA’s conclusion — and officials say that he never changed his position

That's Comey and his allies desperately trying to cover the FBI's ass. I would bet my life on it that the initial reports of how the FBI did not support the CIA's conclusions of Russia's responsibility are 100% accurate.
posted by longdaysjourney at 1:27 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


Nothing is going to get done about it. Millionaire Sex Predator Donald Trump will be president. The best we can hope for is that the intel report the Obama admin is producing, combined with massive resistance from centrists, liberals and the left based on the illegitimacy of a Trump administration makes him a lame duck from day one.

Agreed. All the fantasies about a do-over election, or the faithless elector installation of Clinton, or a Romney or McMullin or Ryan or whatever are just that: a comforting story that conjures a world where Trump just quietly goes away. The fascists aren't about to say "ok you're right, election invalidated, we'll just go play golf now." The facists have tasted power and are not about to give that up without a fight.

I'm not saying I don't think Trump needs to be opposed at every step. I do. But I am saying Democrats need to seriously prepare for things to, unfathomably, get even uglier. The chances of a coup being civil and bloodless are slim to none. So you either start talking about mobilizing against preventing a Trump presidency from accomplishing anything, and going hardline at every step and even push for impeachment, or you prepare to overturn the election and spark massive uprisings and violence.
posted by joechip at 1:28 PM on December 16, 2016 [13 favorites]


Obama being Obama, I believe he's convinced that any serious moves have to be made by the Republicans for any action against Trump to be seen as legitimate. It's clear that if Trump and the Republicans spin it as us vs them 50% of the country will flat out ignore every bit of evidence no matter how concrete just like we're seeing now. Flipping the Republican base's view of Putin to favorable took no time at all, no amount of evidence will outweigh "lol fuck you liberals". Obama could publicly burn every intelligence source on this and lay every piece of evidence on the table and the same people who don't believe it now will find a way to disbelieve it then and whether it's because of political pressure, opportunism or true belief, the Republican Congress will go along with it. This dynamic can change if this becomes an internal fight among Republicans and if the first major punch is thrown by a Graham or McCain with incontrovertible evidence, though. It's an "only Nixon could go to China" situation, and it sounds exactly like the kind of solution Obama would try because he has that weird combination of a realistic view of the situation and, somehow, still, an optimistic faith in institutions and norms that have failed him before. If that's the game Obama is playing, I am very nervous because he's been burned by putting faith in the Republicans more times than any of us can count. I just hope that his strategy involves helping Graham and McCain hit the ground running before the broader Republican machine can respond, because they're the best hope at that point.
posted by jason_steakums at 1:31 PM on December 16, 2016 [45 favorites]


But I am saying Democrats need to seriously prepare for things to, unfathomably, get even uglier.

i think the speed with which ugly gross hateful shit started happening immediately after the election, with gleeful viciousness and a strong feeling of invincibility, will continue apace at the same or greater speeds, which is why i'm having trouble caring very much about midterm elections.
posted by poffin boffin at 1:35 PM on December 16, 2016 [16 favorites]


Like I said, it's the Republicans in my family--in particular those who have served on Capitol Hill--I am pushing hardest right now to take a side against American sovereignty or for it. And I'm with you, jason; I just hope that there are still Republicans that exist who do care more about the nation than their personal power.

Ahahahahaha, I'm trying not to sob through the hysterical laughter rising now
posted by sciatrix at 1:35 PM on December 16, 2016 [7 favorites]


via kos: dems have shitty, spineless, business-as-usual senate leadership

#schumerReallyWTFwereYouThinking #fuckingSchumer #replaceThisAsshat
posted by j_curiouser at 1:37 PM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


Ugh, how do you look at GOP leadership getting together when Obama was elected and vowing to oppose everything regardless of what it was, look at the current state of affairs, and say "we'll work with him," seriously, how?
posted by everybody had matching towels at 1:40 PM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


I don't know nothin' 'bout politics er nothin', but I know a good insult when I hear one and the best one for Donald is mangled apricot hellbeast.
posted by Mental Wimp at 1:41 PM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


I am very nervous because he's been burned by putting faith in the Republicans more times than any of us can count.

He doesn't put faith in the Republicans, he puts it in the American people. That's all there is in a democracy. Without that faith there can be no going forward in any way that is meaningful. So, yeah, it isn't up to Obama, he's doing what needs to be done for all Americans. It's up to the rest of us to do what needs to be done to ensure his example can be followed in future years. Electors need to do what they deem best for the nation, which Obama didn't contradict, and if that doesn't satisfy, then the rest of us need to hold our elected officials to task and make sure President Trump works for the betterment of America or faces impeachment and the peaceful transfer of power to his successor and so on. If that doesn't work, then we're already at the brink of the end of the American experiment and whatever happens after that would represent a new chapter in this land's legacy, one likely not to be connected to the old ways of the constitution, which Obama is acting in faith of. It's on us, not him or any hero or savior to swoop in and settle everything for us so we can go on without thought over what it means to live in a democracy or be an American.

Maybe that isn't enough, but I'm not sure what else he could do that wouldn't proceed directly to that end stage where the constitution and the entirety of our system of government would no longer matter.
posted by gusottertrout at 1:43 PM on December 16, 2016 [39 favorites]


In case you're sad that we've gone multiple minutes without a prominent Republican effort to overturn an election result on the basis that they they would prefer dictatorship so fuck you, Maine Gov. Paul LePage is refusing to implement a minimum wage hike passed via referendum. (H/T to The Whelk via Twitter)
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 1:45 PM on December 16, 2016 [28 favorites]


Maybe that isn't enough, but I'm not sure what else he could do that wouldn't proceed directly to that end stage where the constitution and the entirety of our system of government would no longer matter.

+1. I just deleted a long comment because yours is much better stated.
posted by chris24 at 1:46 PM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


i mean real talk by 2018 i expect the ny metro area will be the new pale of settlement.
posted by poffin boffin at 1:48 PM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


...which is why i'm having trouble caring very much about midterm elections.

Those are reasons to care about the midterms. If the mangled apricot hellbeast gets into office, he will be screwing the American public so hard fulltime that it will create an opportunity to end the nightmare after only two years.
posted by Mental Wimp at 1:50 PM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


And just to put it out there, if Obama took action with emergency powers or whatever there are a whole lot of registered Democrats in red states or red areas of purple states like me who would have a scarily high chance of a good ending for the weekend meaning we're just under armed guard in some shitty high school gymnasium and not something worse. So, y'know, as frustrated as I am with the stasis we're in right now, I'd like to sincerely say "thanks, Obama."
posted by jason_steakums at 1:50 PM on December 16, 2016 [6 favorites]


We are way past any useful critiques of Democratic Party politics. We are at Oh Fuck We're Losing Our Democracy.

I think there may be a misunderstanding of what some of us are talking about when we say that everyone needs to work on crossing aisles and fighting partisanship in our daily lives.

I, at least, am doing it because I think the potential of civil war is fairly high, and increased visible partisanship is one of the key markers that usually predates civil war. I mean I genuinely think this is a real possibility within the next eight years enough that I am letting it shape my future.

Building those bridges mean when the MAGA militia rolls through, maybe my neighbors won't say "the immigrant rabble rouser family is over there."
posted by corb at 1:52 PM on December 16, 2016 [20 favorites]


It's frustrating we don't have any common sense mechanisms for investigating and verifying the integrity of election results with any uniformity. We're always in such a rush to declare a winner, we're busy declaring one before the polls even close. We should strive to make elections a much more scientific, rigorous, and uniform process in general. But why is there no mechanism to even investigate the possibility of real treasonable acts and spy plots? It's just such a glaring area of vulnerability.
posted by saulgoodman at 1:52 PM on December 16, 2016 [10 favorites]


i mean real talk by 2018 i expect the ny metro area will be the new pale of settlement.

Or the DMZ.
posted by Gaz Errant at 1:53 PM on December 16, 2016


Those are reasons to care about the midterms.

the reason i am having trouble caring is not that i think the elections won't make a difference, it's because i am not at all certain that i, a naturalized citizen and a jew, will still be allowed to vote.
posted by poffin boffin at 1:54 PM on December 16, 2016 [13 favorites]


The chances of a coup being civil and bloodless are slim to none.

The coup already happened: the election. The Republicans (and the Russians, apparently) stopped paying even lip service to the idea of democracy and stole the election in a way that wasn't even subtle. This shit happening in NC and Maine is a direct result of that working. They're done pretending to give a shit about what the electorate thinks, because they're not living in a democracy anymore.

Now we have to decide if we're okay with that. It's worth noting that even if the fraudulent votes they created represented real people, we know we outnumber them significantly.
posted by IAmUnaware at 1:55 PM on December 16, 2016 [27 favorites]


During this press conference, the Governor of North Carolina signed the bill stripping powers from the new Governor.

I don't understand how there is no organized effort to send bananas to the NC GOP/legislature.
posted by dilettante at 1:55 PM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


Yep, and creating that sort of paralyzing confusion is SOP for tradecraft, which to me seems likely deliberate, too... Ugh.

Exactly. The best description I've seen of this comes from Richard "Dr Evil" Berman, who has led these campaigns on behalf of the tobacco, oil, and fast food industries, among many others. A couple years ago, he succinctly summarized his philosophy:
You want to get people to say, one of my north stars is to get people to say, "You know, I never thought of it that way before."

Because, if you can get people to say that, here's what you get: instead of getting the 'he said, she said debate,' what you will get with the factual debate, often times, you're going to get into people get overwhelmed by the science and 'I don't know who to believe.' But, if you get enough on your side you get people into a position of paralysis about the issue.

We're not experts and so you don't want them trying to be experts. But if you put enough information out there and say, "Well, it could go to $10.10 but ou could also lose a lot of jobs, the Congressional Budget Office says you can lose a lot of jobs." And again, we got a lot of ads on this thing.

You get in people's minds a tie. They don't know who is right. And you get all ties because the tie basically ensures the status quo.

People are not prepared to get aggressive and in moving one way or another. I'll take a tie any day if I'm trying to preserve the status quo.
And the thing is that the GOP has mastered this technique in a way that really suits their interests, because their entire philosophy has been about stopping everything, and one of the primary mechanisms of our democracy is that we provide a lot of hooks where people can stop something and preserve the status quo whether that's what the people want or not. Ties break for the conservative party every time, and our entire system is setup to produce ties and gridlock if you elevate partisan winning above the nation.

If you want to pass some new program or new law, you actually have to convince people that it's a good thing. If you want to be like the GOP and just stop things or roll them back, you don't have to do that hard work; you just have to convince people that the issue is complicated, fill their minds with doubt, and then go do whatever you want while the left is busy with their Vox explainers and fact checks. Fact checks assume that the goal is truth, when the actual goal is just to create uncertainty and confusion, let the media cover the issue as a "one side says A, one side says B: a land of contrasts" story, and then use the resulting paralysis to avoid action.
posted by zachlipton at 1:59 PM on December 16, 2016 [59 favorites]


Building those bridges mean when the MAGA militia rolls through, maybe my neighbors won't say "the immigrant rabble rouser family is over there."

Pointing is so last world war. They'll nail you with big data algorithms and GPS.

And if you are counting on your neighbors standing up for you, well, we already have the data on that one.
posted by srboisvert at 2:02 PM on December 16, 2016 [6 favorites]


I just hope that his strategy involves helping Graham and McCain hit the ground running before the broader Republican machine can respond, because they're the best hope at that point.

Those two schmucks had their chance to speak up, do the honorable thing and try to save the American republic from the likes of Trump months ago.

They're not gonna start now.
posted by zarq at 2:06 PM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


Pointing is so last world war. They'll nail you with big data algorithms and GPS.

It would look like Aleppo on bath salts
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 2:06 PM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


Those two schmucks had their chance to speak up, do the honorable thing and try to save the American republic from the likes of Trump months ago.

Graham, anyway, never endorsed Trump, as far as I can remember.

McCain was utterly spineless, however. He should've fulgurated with righteous outrage after Trump mocked his time as a POW. Everybody would've liked it.

Thats the thing about the Democrats this year that drive me nuts. Outrage works, the people feel it, they want you to feel it back and reflect it for them. Anger is justified and it would've won.
posted by dis_integration at 2:11 PM on December 16, 2016 [11 favorites]


Or Grandees with JDAMS
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 2:12 PM on December 16, 2016


A really disheartening thing to think about is that any executive option Obama takes right now, unless it decisively takes Trump out of power and discredits Trumpism with the electorate which is ridiculously improbable, will be almost certainly be used by the Republicans in revenge in 2020.
posted by jason_steakums at 2:12 PM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


They're not gonna start now.

They might start now, because they won their elections and are not vulnerable (for a while at least) to primary challenges from the right.

Also, the alternative to Trump during the election was Hillary Clinton. Now the alternative is Mike Pence (or just barely possibly Romney or someone.) That's a lot better from McCain and Graham's POV. The tricky part for them is how to do it without making the party look bad. We have to hope they can find a way.
posted by OnceUponATime at 2:16 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]




He doesn't put faith in the Republicans, he puts it in the American people. That's all there is in a democracy. Without that faith there can be no going forward in any way that is meaningful. So, yeah, it isn't up to Obama, he's doing what needs to be done for all Americans. It's up to the rest of us to do what needs to be done to ensure his example can be followed in future years.

You are absolutely right, and there are places over his term where all of us have failed to fight: "If we're REALLY being honest, we've always asked POTUS to fight harder for us than we ever have for him."

But I do think one of the regrets of his Presidency has been a failure, on his part but also on the part of other Democrats, to organize and lead that fight. The dismantling of OFA and the lack of leadership at times has allowed that fight to be disorganized and for many of us to lose interest or faith, to think that we've got our guy in the White House and the job was done. And the President regrets that too it sounds like. Thanks to the transcript, I now have the second half of the quote I wasn't able to transcribe live:
And so the question is, how do we rebuild that party as a whole, so that there's not a county in any state -- I don't care how red -- where we don't have a presence and we're not making the argument, because I think we have a better argument. But that requires a lot of work. You know, it's been something that I've been able to do successfully in my own campaigns.

It is not something I've been able to transfer to candidates in mid-terms and sort of build a sustaining organization around. That's something I would have liked to have done more of, but it's kind of hard to do when you're also dealing with a whole bunch of issues here in the White House. And that doesn't mean, though, that it can't be done, and I think there are gonna be a lot of talented folks out there, a lot of progressives who share my values, who are gonna be leading the charge in the years to come.
One of the reason's this press conference felt like almost a slap in the face, despite it being utterly consistent with the President's longstanding traditions and views, is that we're dying for leadership right now. We want and need someone to tell us where to go, what to do. The election has been hacked by a foreign power and we want someone to take a stand and tell us how to fix it, not quietly express vague notions of confidence the next President will somehow do the right thing despite all evidence to the contrary. We don't want a law professor patiently explaining his faith in institutions that Republicans are actively smashing at this very moment as he hopes that now we'll all collectively grasp the message that voters have just (grumble, grumble, popular vote, etc....) rejected.

And look, I get it, the President is done, he's off to vacation, and it's not his job to lead that fight now, nor should it be. And I'm actually excited that Ellison or Perez will be good choices to put that into place. Because I do think that, as much as we've failed Obama, we haven't been organized in a way that makes us effective, and I think people were, reasonably enough, applying wishful thinking in hoping that the President was magically going to start doing that this afternoon. But no; it's on all of us now.
posted by zachlipton at 2:17 PM on December 16, 2016 [31 favorites]


mangled apricot hellbeast

That's not a mangled apricot hellbeast. This is a mangled apricot hellbeast.
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 2:21 PM on December 16, 2016


folks, when corb presents her real fears in here maybe we cold have a response other than "*scoff* you're {hyperbolic statement of how fucked she is}"
posted by murphy slaw at 2:25 PM on December 16, 2016 [54 favorites]


A really disheartening thing to think about is that any executive option Obama takes right now, unless it decisively takes Trump out of power and discredits Trumpism with the electorate which is ridiculously improbable, will be almost certainly be used by the Republicans in revenge in 2020.

Then it's our job to lead the crusade: anyone whose politics prize their own power above the American legal system and the wellbeing of the nation's institutions is a traitorous thief of power, no better than any Nazi or Stalinist bootlicker, and should be absolutely be ripped from power where possible according to those institutions. Republicans who don't pull this crap can be spared, but we need to fight these assholes on their own ground and rip them out, root and branch.

I have not been subtle when addressing Republican leadership: the existence of Republicans who act fast and act now to stem this shit is literally the only thing that might convince me that the party isn't so rotten it's not worth saving. I have fifty or sixty years ahead of me as a voter and I haven't missed an election since 2010, and I am loud as shit and have completely lost all remaining fucks in my enraged terror. They can save their worthless asses by acting now and finding some pit of respect for my poor tattered nation's infrastructure, or I swear by everything I have in me that I will mobilize every single person I can to ruin the name of the Republican party for a full generation.

Like I said, I told that in as many words to my own damned grandmother, and I said it to my elected officials in about three different modes this month, and I will keep saying it until I'm either hauled away out of the country by my wife--who is waiting to flee the country as soon as I graduate, assuming there's anything still to graduate in two years--or I'm hauled away by armed guards. If I didn't have a family here, well, the hell with my own skin--the only way I see to keep myself safe is by fanning the flames of public opinion anyway, because the moment people stop caring about this I'm fucked. So I'm about to get a whole lot louder in any way I can, as soon as I can work out what is sustainable and what will leave me dead on my feet.

(And if Tay hauls me away first, I swear to god I will do what I can via absentee ballots and social media. I'm a stubborn bastard and they took away my whole future and my country and I am spitting mad, and I never did like to put up with liars and bullies.)
posted by sciatrix at 2:28 PM on December 16, 2016 [23 favorites]


This stuff is getting worse by the day. And the thing that makes it even harder for me is the fact that we have NO LEADER right now. I mean, for fucks sake, millions of people in this country are floundering and terrified and strong Democratic leadership is totally MIA. We're gathering any hope we can get from people like Evan McMullin and Justin Amash. Think about that. Democrats. Turning their eyes and hopes to diehard Republicans. If that doesn't show a vacuum of leadership I don't know what does.
posted by triggerfinger at 2:28 PM on December 16, 2016 [31 favorites]


I'm amazed at the people here who actively want a civil war. It's like they haven't actually ever fucking paid AND attention to Rwanda, Yugoslavia, Spain...and none of those countries had nukes. Maybe they just think it'll be singing some songs and then the Big Daddy wish figure the Left keeps hoping for will save us all.

The reality is, if you think a civil war is a reasonable outcome, then look around, and tell me how many of your loved ones you're willing to see dead. Then round that figure up to the nearest million. Or maybe people could step back and actuality think about what they're saying.
posted by happyroach at 2:31 PM on December 16, 2016 [123 favorites]




I regret that I do not have more favorites to give to happyroach right now.
posted by sciatrix at 2:32 PM on December 16, 2016 [9 favorites]


I certainly don't want a civil war but I still think we're heading in that direction.
posted by Gaz Errant at 2:32 PM on December 16, 2016


If you want to pass some new program or new law, you actually have to convince people that it's a good thing. If you want to be like the GOP and just stop things or roll them back, you don't have to do that hard work; you just have to convince people that the issue is complicated, fill their minds with doubt, and then go do whatever you want while the left is busy with their Vox explainers and fact checks. Fact checks assume that the goal is truth, when the actual goal is just to create uncertainty and confusion, let the media cover the issue as a "one side says A, one side says B: a land of contrasts" story, and then use the resulting paralysis to avoid action.

Here's the thing, though. The left and Dems are now in the position of trying to maintain the status quo. The GOP wants to change things by undoing all the programs that we already have. So all we have to do is say no and get to that tie and maintain what we have, the rights and benefits we have.

Normally, of course, we want to be Progressive and make progress, but with the GOP controlling all branches of government we know THAT'S not happening. Our job is now to keep hold of all the progress we have made and not let them undo it. The momentum of inaction is now on OUR side.
posted by threeturtles at 2:32 PM on December 16, 2016 [19 favorites]


Graham, anyway, never endorsed Trump, as far as I can remember.

That bar is set about a half a centimeter above floor level.
posted by zarq at 2:37 PM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


So, everyone's (ie, all branches of govt) are just going to let what's happening in NC and Maine stand? Why even have a federal government?
posted by maxwelton at 2:37 PM on December 16, 2016 [10 favorites]


It turns out when you live in a society which venerates the rich, and being rich, more than any other thing--more than whatever religion or beliefs people give mouth service to, more than whatever humanitarian instincts people might have (very few, it turns out), more than competence or knowledge or any other actual valuable trait a person might have--you will inevitably end up with Trump and the GoP.

I'm 50 and am damn glad I'll be dead in 30 years, at the outside. I am sick and fucking tired of humans.
posted by maxwelton at 2:45 PM on December 16, 2016 [25 favorites]


I guess the thing that hits me about lack of leadership... it's that-- why do we need leaders to spur us to action? Why do we need someone to tell us that the shit has hit the fan? We are passing around all manner of "things that might help," from protests to calling officials to showing up to town halls to registering people to vote to donating to professional nonprofits like the ACLU. It's not like there aren't plenty of ideas about what a worried liberal might do to hold the line in these dark years.

Get up and do something small. Hell, go out and talk to someone about your politics and what you're feeling about. Check out the "what I'm doing" thread for ideas. Run for dogcatcher. Pick a little thing and do it, consistently. Scream into the fucking void if you want--not armchair muttering or prognosticating, but outright insistence that this is not normal, this is not okay.

Because all the snarky remarks about the bar or the CIA or how they're gonna target us for the camps or whatever, those might make you laugh and feel better, but they ain't going to do jack all to keep us all safe. Going out and talking to each other, showing up for your elected officials, registering as a voting registrar--that shit, that might. I keep looking around at people who are afraid, and because they are afraid they're trying to tell themselves this might be business as normal.

It ain't. Get up and do something about it. Please.

I'm with corb--I'm mobilizing because I am desperately afraid that if I don't, my family and my profession will become direct targets. But I'm one 26-year-old person with a $24,000 salary which is about to get cut and a very time-intensive job. No one person here can stem this tide, but if we all do small things and don't let this go "oh, those Republicans again, bein' all corrupt"--if we expect better and we put boots on the ground and show up to demand it--well, maybe we got a chance. And if that's the national mood, maybe if he does something truly horrifying, enough of us will stand up and disrupt it to head it off before it has a chance to send anyone off to camps as "unAmerican" enough.
posted by sciatrix at 2:48 PM on December 16, 2016 [35 favorites]


The reality is, if you think a civil war is a reasonable outcome, then look around, and tell me how many of your loved ones you're willing to see dead. Then round that figure up to the nearest million. Or maybe people could step back and actuality think about what they're saying.

Yeah, if you weren't willing to run from your desk, grab a butcher knife from your kitchen, and then go through your neighborhood murdering every Republican of fighting age before they could get organized, then you weren't actually ready for Obama to declare that Trump was under arrest and that he was going to be president for a third term.

2% of the US population died during the Civil War, which would be about 7 million people today. And that was in a time before planes, nukes, Tomahawk missiles, etc.
posted by sideshow at 2:50 PM on December 16, 2016 [17 favorites]


Also, the alternative to Trump during the election was Hillary Clinton. Now the alternative is Mike Pence (or just barely possibly Romney or someone.) That's a lot better from McCain and Graham's POV. The tricky part for them is how to do it without making the party look bad. We have to hope they can find a way.

This is where we have to pick up the ball and start running it before we worry about who will be in charge of the DNC because that election is a long ways off and even then the whole organization won't turn on a dime. Dems in areas with Republican representatives need to be vocal about their policies and work to amplify moderate Republican voices and narratives in their backyards. Representatives who have moved on over to the right to court the Tea Party have a vulnerable left flank that moderates can attack just as easily as Dems, so work to make these Republicans think they're going to have to divvy up their war chest between a protracted Republican primary and a strong Dem challenger in the general with a potential big orange weight around their necks. I know I keep bringing it up, but look to the Save Kansas Coalition for a blueprint. If you're fighting insanity your allies are the sane, and it's not like you have to stop fighting for your own progressive principles at the same time as you create common cause with honest allies you have disagreements with. Work both angles. Don't just paint a picture of a new Democratic party, but also have a hand in cultivating an opposition you wouldn't feel bone-deep dread losing to. Don't just call your representatives, pass on press releases and editorials to your local media that amplify an anti-Trump narrative - the silver lining to the overworked, understaffed, corporate owned local news outlets is that if you can serve a story up on a platter they'll be grateful for your legwork, that's how modern PR works. And Trump fights sell papers and get eyes on screens.
posted by jason_steakums at 2:52 PM on December 16, 2016 [14 favorites]


It's so cute how so many people liveblogging the press conference still assumed that there will be future press conferences in the new administration. /returns to weeping
posted by TwoStride at 2:53 PM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


As much as I hate that Obama didn't bring a deus ex machina to the press conference, sideshow is right. How does anyone here think Putin is still Russia's head of state after exhausting his original term of office?
posted by tel3path at 2:53 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


Eric Lipton (no relation) at the Times is trying to get the Trump camp to respond as to why Eric won't just donate the money to St. Jude himself after he made a whole big stink that canceling the coffee auction would hurt "the children of St. Jude". They won't answer.
posted by zachlipton at 2:57 PM on December 16, 2016 [12 favorites]


Was just informed I'll be moderating a panel discussion on "President Trump and the First Amendment" at the end of January.

Now I need to decide the pros and cons of showing up for that after a few tequilas. I suppose that would just increase the likelihood I'll sob into the microphone for an hour, right?
posted by Superplin at 2:57 PM on December 16, 2016 [12 favorites]


Because all the snarky remarks about the bar or the CIA or how they're gonna target us for the camps or whatever, those might make you laugh and feel better, but they ain't going to do jack all to keep us all safe. Going out and talking to each other, showing up for your elected officials, registering as a voting registrar--that shit, that might. I keep looking around at people who are afraid, and because they are afraid they're trying to tell themselves this might be business as normal.

Some of us are already doing this. And exploring our options. I ranted about this a bit in the last thread.

Being angry (to be clear, not snarky, but angry) about what is going on is a reasonable reaction. And I daresay it's not going away any time soon.
posted by zarq at 3:00 PM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


Now I need to decide the pros and cons of showing up for that after a few tequilas. I suppose that would just increase the likelihood I'll sob into the microphone for an hour, right?

Depends on how good the tequila is.
posted by kirkaracha at 3:01 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


So, everyone's (ie, all branches of govt) are just going to let what's happening in NC and Maine stand? Why even have a federal government?


The will of the voters are being ignored. This is government without representation. But ther are protests in NC. Without strong leadership opposing our lack of representation, ordinary people must become the leaders. We must find new founding mothers and fathers among ourselves. I am going to try to follow the example of sciatrix and talk with passion with my relatives and representatives about how I don't want to see the basic protections of our nation taken away from its people. She leads by example just by letting us know how she's speaking out.

We must all lead by example. Then we can find those that we traditionally look to as leaders: those that will take some of the everyday burden of leadership by being its public face and organizing as a whole. But right now we must organize our own thoughts, avoid paralysis, and start speaking out. With grief and anger.

For my part, I've started talking about politics with my wife, and soon my relatives. I feel slow to start since I am ordinarily quite reserved about such things. But this election is like a gut punch and I'd rather stand back up and maybe take a few more gut punches than lay down in despair. I'm also hoping to attend my first Citizen's Climate Lobby meeting soon, among other things.

The hardest thing I've had to come to grips with is maybe not making it to 2018 or 2020...or in the case of global warming 2060. But the alternative to doing nothing just means its that much more likely. We're Americans, aren't we? We don't sit down for this shit. Sometimes it's okay to listen to your gut and just start doing.
posted by Mister Cheese at 3:01 PM on December 16, 2016 [18 favorites]


remind people that he was not chosen by the American people, Clinton was.

In reality she was chosen by the Californian people. Remove the 4 million vote margin Clinton had in California, and Trump leads the popular vote by 1.5 million.

I'm proud of my home state, but that kind of influence of a large state is why we ended up with the screwy electoral college.
posted by Edward L at 3:04 PM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


Remove the 4 million vote margin Clinton had in California, and Trump leads the popular vote by 1.5 million.

That may well be, but have you considered what happens if you pretend other giant swaths of the electorate don't exist?
posted by contraption at 3:08 PM on December 16, 2016 [88 favorites]


WaPo has an article out comparing Trump's win to Moneyball. It goes into how the Trump campaign may have been completely ignoring the popular vote to take advantage of EC numbers.
posted by corb at 3:10 PM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


Every campaign ignores the popular vote.
posted by Yowser at 3:12 PM on December 16, 2016 [10 favorites]


It goes into how the Trump campaign may have been completely ignoring the popular vote to take advantage of EC numbers.

Actually, the Trump campaign was ignoring all of the numbers, because they knew that how people voted wasn't going to affect the election.
posted by IAmUnaware at 3:12 PM on December 16, 2016 [12 favorites]


WaPo has an article out comparing Trump's win to Moneyball.

They're not the first to draw that comparison, either.
posted by Doktor Zed at 3:12 PM on December 16, 2016


In reality she was chosen by the Californian people. Remove the 4 million vote margin Clinton had in California, and Trump leads the popular vote by 1.5 million.

Fuck that, she was chosen by 65 million people. Take Texas from Trump then. Take the Old South. What fucking asinine thing to say.
posted by chris24 at 3:13 PM on December 16, 2016 [93 favorites]


Every campaign ignores the popular vote.

As it should. EC is the game. Playing the game for popular vote is like playing Chess by the rules for Checkers. You can argue that the EC is good or bad, but whatever it is the game we have and if you are politicking you have to keep your eye on that goal, because it's what matters when the chips are counted.
posted by Bringer Tom at 3:16 PM on December 16, 2016 [5 favorites]


The status quo isn't good enough for many of us; the status quo was already killing us. My (naive) hope is that, now that we have a majority of anti-fact fascists and bigots who explicitly want to dismantle democracy and social services in the US with genuine hatred for minorities pushing to legislate our real and tangible deaths, these things will make leftist voices organize and shake off their sleep. The US has not had anything resembling a viable leftist option at a national level at any point in my lifetime. Democrats are center-right at best, okay with incremental progress when it's politically convenient, but otherwise perfectly content to shrug off oppression and inequality not affecting cishet upper-middle class white people. With actual far right fascists ascendant, I have been seeing many people express dissatisfaction with a continuation of the status quo, and there is some hope of leftists getting organized enough to be politically viable. It is looking like it'll have to be either that or fascism. The center-right is no longer free of risk. Leftist politics reaching across racial, class and gender lines desperately need to be built.

But I'm not really preparing for that to go anywhere. I'm preparing for things to go from being bad to getting worse, and trying to get myself and people I care about to safety, while asking myself what I, realistically, can do to help get through what is going to be a rough time even if a Trump administration and Republican majority follow a status quo figurehead term, which looks very unlikely. The next four+ years look like they are going to be about staying as safe as possible, preserving every scrap of functional society that can be saved and huddling together for on the ground support while institutions fail us.

Even so, I will be as loud as I can be about it. It's just a bad habit I can't seem to break.
posted by byanyothername at 3:16 PM on December 16, 2016 [9 favorites]


Playing the game for popular vote is like playing Chess by the rules for Checkers.

Yeah, we know. The King stay the King.
posted by rokusan at 3:18 PM on December 16, 2016 [6 favorites]


... I'll be moderating a panel discussion on "President Trump and the First Amendment" at the end of January. Now I need to decide the pros and cons of showing up for that after a few tequilas.

Before, during, and after, my friend.

Before, during, and after.
posted by rokusan at 3:23 PM on December 16, 2016 [5 favorites]


Before, during, and after, my friend.

A very good quality light tequila is indistinguishable from water in that glass you will surely have to sip from during the discussion. Or you could always go for cheap vodka, which is just as effective.
posted by Bringer Tom at 3:29 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]




In reality she was chosen by the Californian people. Remove the 4 million vote margin Clinton had in California, and Trump leads the popular vote by 1.5 million.

Coming back to this because it pissed me off so much. Took a second to find an old tweet. Take away the Race Belt and Trump gets slaughtered.

@Nate_Cohn
The E.C.-popular vote split isn't really about California, Trump won Appalachafornia just as much--AL/MS/LA/AR/OK/TN/KY/WV. [chart]
posted by chris24 at 3:30 PM on December 16, 2016 [26 favorites]


Fuck that, she was chosen by 65 million people. Take Texas from Trump then. Take the Old South. What fucking asinine thing to say.

Agreed. I've been pushing back on Reddit against this very thing. Are Californians no longer American? Every vote should count the same. This is a national office. The only one we have which is selected by the public voting.

Though if we're going to subtract states, let's subtract those which have overly restrictive voting policies. Or at least put them in the votes column with the asterisk of shame. Here's how Clinton did with Americans who were allowed to freely show up at the polls, here's how she did with Americans who had restricted access.

This is how we'd report and think about elections in some corrupt hellhole.
posted by honestcoyote at 3:31 PM on December 16, 2016 [36 favorites]


Did you guys know that if you remove all the states Clinton won, Trump won 100% of states?
posted by Justinian at 3:35 PM on December 16, 2016 [55 favorites]


Guys, we gotta face the inevitable. Our next reality check comes on Dec 19 when nothing will change the current trajectory of Trump. I think cribbing the rethuglican/Tea Party rule book is a great 1st step to survival.
posted by yoga at 3:39 PM on December 16, 2016 [10 favorites]


In reality she was chosen by the Californian people. Remove the 4 million vote margin Clinton had in California, and Trump leads the popular vote by 1.5 million.

I don't know why declaring that Californians aren't Real Americans has become popular this year, but I didn't somehow become less patriotic or more brainwashed by moving here. Was I more worthy of democracy in Pennsylvania?
posted by jetlagaddict at 3:44 PM on December 16, 2016 [34 favorites]


What if we remove all the states Clinton won, put some ramjets on them and get the hell out of dodge.
posted by ian1977 at 3:44 PM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


@HeerJeet
1. Obama is not going to rescue you from Trump.
2. Hillary Clinton is not going to rescue you from Trump.
3. The Electoral College is not going to rescue you from Trump.
4 The Republican Party and Never Trump people are not going to rescue you from Trump.
5. The Deep State is not going to rescue you from Trump (at best they can slightly hamper him on specific policies).
6. The Democratic Party as it exists is not going to rescue you from Trump.
7. The media is not going to rescue you from Trump.
8. The only thing that will rescue you from Trump is organizing politically, pushing the Democrats into opposition mode, & winning elections
posted by chris24 at 3:51 PM on December 16, 2016 [64 favorites]


I think it is an important thing to observe here, that politics is a game.

It is of course much more than that for a hell of a lot of people, but in reality, it is still a game.

I paid off my house playing games in casinos. When playing a game you need to understand the rules, the conditions for winning, and you need to be willing to do what is necessary to win. You also need to know when to walk away because the game is rigged -- an option we generally don't have in the game of politics.

Politics is partly a metagame because the rules allow those in the lead to alter the rules. There has been a long-standing unwritten rule about not abusing that but unwritten rules aren't rules, a fact the Republicans have decided to wholly endorse lately. See North Carolina.

The Presidential game is about the EC. That's not ideal, it might not even be "right," but those are the current rules for the game and if you don't play by them, you lose. The House game is in large part about redistricting and gerrymandering as a strategy, and the Republicans have doubled down on that strategy in a way that has really worked. See also North Carolina.

It is a basic principle not just of politics but of law that the rules are ascendant, whether they seem "right" or "wrong" because "rightness" and "wrongness" are subjective but rules are something all of us can agree exist and are the same for everybody. This is why (some of us at least) consider it better that a guilty man go free than that an innocent man be convicted of a crime based on improperly collected evidence. This is an example of rules being ascendant. Allowing the EC to determine the Presidency is exactly the same to an infinite number of decimal places. It's the rule, it's the current game.

Now, it can be shown mathematically that the US version of the politics game is very flawed. First past the post, redistricting, the EC -- all big problems. Historically though, how big those rules seem to be as problems seems very directly related to how badly you are getting hosed by them in the scoring. And in our system the winners, who are not getting hosed by the rules, get to decide whether the rules should be changed. No wonder it's been stable for so long.

But in the end, there are only two choices -- play the game, or upend the table. I really don't think there is much appetite in the US for upending the table of our status quo. That could change though; repealing Obamacare could be a big trigger. Many studies suggest that a poor oppressed population is stable, but a population that has ascended to something like the middle class and then had the rug pulled from under them is ripe for revolt.

Upending the table in the US will be unlike anything the world has ever seen. Our citizens have a metric fuckload of weapons but our government also has the largest military in the world, and in an existential crisis I have no doubt whatsoever that military will be directed inward if the ruling powers consider it necessary. In the 1950's Robert Heinlein envisioned a future dystopic America willing to nuke its own cities to put down a resistance, and I wouldn't even put that out of consideration. Especially with the antigovernment Trump seems to be assembling.

But we got here by playing a game and playing it badly. We got here by playing Checkers when the game was Chess, by trusting our opponent to observe the unwritten rules just because everyone else always had since the game began, and by not complaining when there was obvious cheating. Because of the metagame the rules are now being rewritten so we might never be able to win again. And that isn't on our opponents who were smart and shrewd. It's on us for not realizing what was going on until it was too late.

Politics isn't, and never was, about idealism. It is a game. It is a game our side played badly and lost. And it is a game we will continue to lose, even if it remains possible for us to ever win it again, if we keep doing the same goddamn thing.
posted by Bringer Tom at 3:54 PM on December 16, 2016 [26 favorites]


Team Trump and the RNC being as awful as expected.

@GlennThrush
When asked about Russia hacking @seanspicer just said 'blame the DNC tech department' -- he said that. Really. No kidding.

To which John Weaver, senior Kasich strategist replied:

@JWGOP
@GlennThrush @seanspicer pathetic

John also had this to say about events of the day:

@JWGOP
What the hell is wrong with these Republican legislators in North Carolina? Banana Republic behavior all around.

Even Bill Kristol got in on the sane Republican act today:

@BillKristol
I guess I missed the memo to conservatives explaining that because we dislike Obama and Clinton, we have to become Putin apologists.
posted by chris24 at 4:05 PM on December 16, 2016 [35 favorites]


I think part of why California has been getting more of the "not real Americans" noise than usual from the right is that pretty much the entire apparatus of government at both the state and local levels has been vocal about their opposition to Trumpism and its policies. I'm sure you can find some exceptions to this, but we've had it from the governor, the legislature, our Congressional delegation, and the mayors, county supervisors, and city councilors of many of the state's largest areas.
posted by feloniousmonk at 4:06 PM on December 16, 2016 [6 favorites]


Meanwhile, the questions/answers and reviews are perhaps not going as the boot "designer" hoped.
posted by Wordshore at 4:06 PM on December 16, 2016 [20 favorites]


If politics is a game, it is only true insofar as life overall is a game, at which point the term ceases to have meaning. This isn't abstract, and if I lose I am not convinced I'm going to walk away and play another day.

It is perhaps as correct to say: politics is people, and if you can leverage public opinion then you can certainly use that to achieve political ends. And what I have noticed with respect to people is that I see the language of games used when someone wants me to take something I care about less seriously, to emphasize that it is an abstraction. I'm not saying you're doing this here, but that is something I've observed happening frequently with that metaphor.

Nonsense. Just as people are important, so is politics. And just as people pay closer attention to someone who is talking about something that they make clear they value very much; well, so goes politics. Liberals have this problem of wanting to be right or at least accurate, so that it becomes tempting to model politics as a game, in order to better understand it. But like all models, doing so omits key aspects of reality: and one of those aspects is motivation.

Emotions motivate people, sir. Framing this as life and death--because to many of us it is--motivates people. Reducing this to a game the Republicans just play better is all very comforting and easy to break down, but it carries a crucial trap: the comfortable move less. And right now, the very last thing we should be doing is moving less.
posted by sciatrix at 4:07 PM on December 16, 2016 [11 favorites]


I think part of why California has been getting more of the "not real Americans" noise than usual from the right is that pretty much the entire apparatus of government at both the state and local levels has been vocal about their opposition to Trumpism and its policies.

I disagree. I think it's because we aren't all white people.
posted by Justinian at 4:09 PM on December 16, 2016 [47 favorites]


I'm certain that's another part of it.
posted by feloniousmonk at 4:11 PM on December 16, 2016


I mentioned this in the last thread, but I just wanted to point again to Daily Action Alerts for those who might need a little boost to start calling their reps. emjaybee had pointed them out, and I am finding the service very helpful.

They are also on Facebook.

Oh, and in case anyone hasn't seen the re:act newsletter (I'm sorry, I don't remember who first pointed that out in these threads) I am also finding it provides me with the direction I need - you can find that here.

It seems in these threads that a lot of people don't need as much hand-holding as I do, which is fantastic - but if you need some assistance finding ways to get active about Our Current Nightmare, these may be helpful to you as well.
posted by hilaryjade at 4:11 PM on December 16, 2016 [18 favorites]


I think this document might have already been posted, but it's been popping up all over my twitter feed today: Indivisible: A practical guide for resisting the Trump Agenda
posted by dinty_moore at 4:14 PM on December 16, 2016 [7 favorites]


Emotions motivate people, sir. Framing this as life and death--because to many of us it is--motivates people.

This is true, and you do need motivation to prevail in any game. But in the end, what you have to motivate people to do is play the goddamn game, because if you don't play it by the rules and with skill, it doesn't matter how motivated you are; you will still lose.
posted by Bringer Tom at 4:15 PM on December 16, 2016


Jonathan Chait, New York: Charles Schumer Is Leading Democrats to Their Doom, Continued
Obviously Schumer is not providing candid accounts of his political strategy to the public. But a series of reports from Democrats who have spoken with him paints a consistent account of a leader who thinks his party’s best chance of survival lies in working with Trump.
Scott Lemieux, LGM: No.
Senate Dems don’t need to shut down the government and shouldn’t engage in debt ceiling brinksmanship. But, otherwise, the political calculus is very straightforward: say no. Stop as much stop from passing as possible and give no support to what does pass. There might be some extreme case where the policy benefits justify taking the political hit, but given how unlikely it is with Ryan and McConnell in charge that something you can deal with if it happens. The default is no. Making Trump as unpopular as possible is by far the most important thing Democrats have to do going forward, far more important than any campaign tactic. It just isn’t complicated, and it’s amazing if watching McConnell for this many years hasn’t caused Schumer to realize this.
posted by tonycpsu at 4:25 PM on December 16, 2016 [26 favorites]


I disagree. I think it's because we aren't all white people.

Not just that. Texas is just as hispanic as California is and is seen as a part of "real" America. The difference is that California's minorities vote. If the Hispanics voted in Texas at the rates they do in California there wouldn't be a Republican president ever again.
posted by Talez at 4:25 PM on December 16, 2016 [10 favorites]


@Nate_Cohn
The E.C.-popular vote split isn't really about California, Trump won Appalachafornia just as much--AL/MS/LA/AR/OK/TN/KY/WV.
(chart)

Those states together have 60 EVs, and California has 55.

David K ‏@HarlemCavalier
@Nate_Cohn Same exercise with New York and West York (AK/ID/IA/KS/MT/NE/ND/SD/UT/WY): similar margins, Trump +13 in electoral college. (chart)

New York has 29 EVs and those states together have slightly less population, but 42 EVs.
posted by Rainbo Vagrant at 4:26 PM on December 16, 2016 [5 favorites]


Oh man I just checked the mail and I didn't know that you get to literally be a card-carrying member of the ACLU, like they send you an actual card. Rad.
posted by jason_steakums at 4:26 PM on December 16, 2016 [34 favorites]


Texas is just as hispanic as California is and is seen as a part of "real" America. The difference is that California's minorities vote. If the Hispanics voted in Texas at the rates they do in California there wouldn't be a Republican president ever again.

Eennnnh. Kinda.

Latino voters in California also vote at much lower rates than their white counterparts. But those white counterparts are less likely to vote Republican in California than in Texas. And Latino voters in CA do vote at modestly higher rates than in TX but not any great shakes.

So the goal needs to be to get Hispanic turnout up to white/black turnout rates, not just to push TX turnout up to CA turnout levels. I don't think that would be enough to overcome the heavily Republican white vote in TX.
posted by Justinian at 4:37 PM on December 16, 2016


Mod note: A few comments removed, cool it.
posted by cortex (staff) at 4:38 PM on December 16, 2016


I don't know why declaring that Californians aren't Real Americans has become popular this year, but I didn't somehow become less patriotic or more brainwashed by moving here. Was I more worthy of democracy in Pennsylvania?

I think it's important, before I try to explain the decent-human perspective on this, to acknowledge that there exist a lot of shitty-human perspectives on this too. Like, I have no doubt that there exist a lot of people who do think that California is a majority-minority state and as such shouldn't have as big a say as it does. If there is one thing this election has taught me, it's that humans are terrible.

But there does exist a principled reason to support that one state shouldn't be able, even if it does have an enormous population, to dominate all the other states, and it's essentially the idea that states have inherent character - that we are in essence a nation of states, not a single nation. That there exist fundamental differences between the interests of Vermont and Texas, or Nebraska and Louisiana. Kind of like how when we go to the UN, we vote by nation, and kind of by power of nation, but not by "who has the biggest population". And this is kind of a thing we've built our country around - see the Senate.

So I am genuinely sorry for the assholes who are like "lol like California is part of America" - those people fundamentally misunderstand this democratic republic of ours. But I do want to stress that not everyone who is saying the popular vote should not be the thing we go by is that asshole.

And remember - it is fate that this time, the populist fascist lost the popular vote but won the electoral college. It could so easily have gone the other way. Reshaping our democracy - like the well intentioned laws that prohibit delegates and electors from exercising their judgment- too often negatively impacts the robust immune system we need to that crap.
posted by corb at 4:39 PM on December 16, 2016 [7 favorites]


Google, Apple, and Uber said they would not help build a Muslim registry. Meanwhile, Oracle declined to comment.

"Oracle declined to respond to the same questions about a Muslim registry. It also declined to say whether the National Security Agency is still an Oracle customer. Oracle’s refusal to comment comes one day after CEO Safra Catz announced that she would join the transition team for President-elect Donald Trump, while remaining at Oracle."
posted by chris24 at 4:39 PM on December 16, 2016 [23 favorites]


I would like the aliens in "The Women Men Don't See" to take us away with the other opossums.
posted by nicebookrack at 4:42 PM on December 16, 2016 [5 favorites]


For comparison's sake, white voters in California gave Clinton something like a +5 margin. White voters in Texas gave Trump something like a +40(!) margin. You can see why simply increasing Hispanic turnout in Texas to match that in CA might not be enough.

Also this is another reason I am proud to be a Californian. Even the white people here rejected Trump, even if by a shitty margin.
posted by Justinian at 4:43 PM on December 16, 2016 [16 favorites]


Fact Check: Vanity Fair’s Numbers Are Not “Way Down, Big Trouble, Dead!”
Vanity Fair’s new subscriptions increased 100 fold after the president-elect tweeted without evidence that the magazine is failing.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:44 PM on December 16, 2016 [21 favorites]


"Oracle’s refusal to comment comes one day after CEO Safra Catz announced that she would join the transition team for President-elect Donald Trump, while remaining at Oracle."

Welp, time to sell that stock.
posted by sutureselves at 4:44 PM on December 16, 2016 [7 favorites]


I'm going to link The Diversifying Electorate—Voting Rates by Race and Hispanic Origin in 2012 (and Other Recent Elections) from census.gov again, even though I linked it in (two?) other threads. It really is the best single source I've ever found on this topic, and the geographical color-coded maps comparing demographic turnout illustrates things in a clear and interesting way that I have never seen anywhere else. Even if you don't have time / want to read the thing it's worth scrolling halfway down to look at the pretty maps.
posted by Justinian at 4:46 PM on December 16, 2016 [5 favorites]


I think this document might have already been posted, but it's been popping up all over my twitter feed today: Indivisible: A practical guide for resisting the Trump Agenda

One really important point from this document is the idea than as groups band together to resist, they shouldn't get distracted by "the policy details we want to enact later when we win", because that way lies infighting and schism, and it's totally irrelevant in the near term.
As discussed in the second chapter, we strongly recommend focusing on defense against the Trump agenda rather than developing an entire alternative policy agenda. This is time-intensive, divisive, and, quite frankly, a distraction, since there is zero chance that we as progressives will get to put our agenda into action at the federal level in the next four years.
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 4:46 PM on December 16, 2016 [18 favorites]


Fact Check: Vanity Fair’s Numbers Are Not “Way Down, Big Trouble, Dead!”

@Scott_Gilmore
Vanity Fair circulation numbers
1992: 997,000 (when Graydon Carter took over)
2016: 1,200,000
Compare that to the rest of the print media
posted by chris24 at 4:49 PM on December 16, 2016 [8 favorites]


@JoyAnnReid What Team Trump is texting right now:

Its a Flash Sale! The Authentic MAGA Cap Christmas Ornament is on sale. 2 for $79.00 or 3+ for $59.00 I thought these things were a spoof ad the first time I saw them advertised for $250.00 each-- they are hideous. They are no less hideous at 75% off.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:52 PM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


And thanks for posting that Gravy. Reminded me to subscribe.
posted by chris24 at 4:53 PM on December 16, 2016


@PhilipRucker Tonight in Orlando, outdoor Trump rally. Lotsa energy. Balmy. Folks eager to see PEOTUS. 16 Xmas trees on stage. Plenty of "Lock her up!"

Hoo Boy Nothing gets me in the mood for Christmas like a good ole hatefest. I have to wonder how long these rallies are going to go on and how long the "Lock Her Up" chants will continue? After a couple of years maybe the "Her" invoked will no longer mean a particular person but become a stand in for all pushy women.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:58 PM on December 16, 2016 [30 favorites]


Ugh. Russia's winning Syria and going full steam on bombing civilians and there's nothing anybody can do. Isn't it possible the recent surprise swings to the right all across Europe, too, are related to Russian interference? By their own admission, they've stepped up their covert operations against the U.S. and it's allies to higher levels than even during the Cold War. This isn't just about Trump. It's about American sovereignty, too.
posted by saulgoodman at 4:58 PM on December 16, 2016 [7 favorites]


Thanks for that link, Justinian! I'm really interested to learn more about what the Democrats have and haven't done to try and increase Hispanic turnout, and why they can't seem to really crack it in a big way. My gut feeling is that what Hispanic votes there are are treated like a given and there's a serious lack of effective outreach and engagement at the local level and lackluster identification and support of leaders in Hispanic communities. I've seen plenty of local businesses and nonprofits in Midwestern areas with significant Hispanic populations going basically "ehh I don't speak Spanish, it's too hard" and treating the issue as if it's a problem of Hispanic communities being insular without even trying to get to know those communities, and I can absolutely see lower level politicians doing the same outside of super bare minimum gestures like translated campaign materials at best. I don't trust my gut feeling though, I'd like to get a better picture of the reality because it seems like a huge problem that white Democrats never really try hard enough to solve.
posted by jason_steakums at 5:00 PM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


Google, Apple, and Uber said they would not help build a Muslim registry. Meanwhile, Oracle declined to comment.

Yup. That's Oracle.

Welp, time to sell that stock.

Oracle's been evil since.... well, since ever. It's right up there with big banks and oil companies, in terms of glowingly-toxic unethical investments.
posted by rokusan at 5:01 PM on December 16, 2016 [6 favorites]


After a couple of years maybe the "Her" invoked will no longer mean a particular person but become a stand in for all pushy women.

When liberals and feminists looked at Hillary Clinton as a model for a woman who believes women can be strong leaders, we didn't realize the extent to which conservatives and reactionaries were looking at her in just the same way.

An archetype: either celebrated, or loathed.
posted by tivalasvegas at 5:03 PM on December 16, 2016 [13 favorites]


You know what? I miss the USSR. I was reading some Guardian article about how a big percentage of Russians feel like they were better off under communism and miss the Soviet Union, and I was like, "You and me both, buddy". Maybe we can defuse at least some international tension by organizing some kind of "let's all skype Russia so we can drink vodka and cry" movement.

(The Guardian spun this as "oh the Russians and their authoritarianism, which is garbage. The Russians have authoritarianism. It's very clearly the Russians and their having-a-job-ism, the Russians and their having-access-to-medical-care-ism, the Russians and their I-used-to-be-sure-I-could-retire-and-still-have-somewhere-to-live-ism.

I feel like, fuck this, let's have a Bring Back Low Quality Really Existing Communism Because At Least It's Better Than Trump And Putin movement.
posted by Frowner at 5:07 PM on December 16, 2016 [12 favorites]


Hoo Boy Nothing gets me in the mood for Christmas like a good ole hatefest. I have to wonder how long these rallies are going to go on and how long the "Lock Her Up" chants will continue? After a couple of years maybe the "Her" invoked will no longer mean a particular person but become a stand in for all pushy women.

Christmas is about goodwill toward men. Women are apparently fair game.
posted by Talez at 5:09 PM on December 16, 2016 [12 favorites]


I'd like to get a better picture of the reality because it seems like a huge problem that white Democrats never really try hard enough to solve.

And just to clarify because the phrasing is bugging me, the problem is a failure among white Democrats to really get to know and understand Hispanic communities and advocate for their ideas on how to increase turnout and amplify Hispanic voices in the party, not some "lol guess us white Dems just need to get involved and our presence'll fix it" thing - my phrasing seemed a little ambiguous to me upon review.
posted by jason_steakums at 5:10 PM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


Mod note: Brookings Institution: The Emoluments Clause: Its text, meaning, and application to Donald J. Trump
Foreign interference in the American political system was among the gravest dangers feared by the Founders of our nation and the framers of our Constitution. The United States was a new government, and one that was vulnerable to manipulation by the great and wealthy world powers (which then, as now, included Russia). One common tactic that foreign sovereigns, and their agents, used to influence our officials was to give them gifts, money, and other things of value. In response to this practice, and the self-evident threat it represents, the framers included in the Constitution the Emoluments Clause of Article I, Section 9. It prohibits any “Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under [the United States]” from accepting “any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.” Only explicit congressional consent validates such exchanges.
...
In the attached brief PDF, we examine the Emoluments Clause in detail and conclude that Donald Trump’s diverse dealings violate both the spirit and the letter of this critical piece of the U.S. Constitution.
posted by kirkaracha (staff) at 5:27 PM on December 16, 2016 [19 favorites]


I'm convinced Oracle would sell a despotic government the licenses to register all Oracle employees on the "evil intelligentsia" list they were compiling. There has never been a clearer illustration of Lenin's bit about capitalists being willing to sell you the rope you use to hang them.
posted by Justinian at 5:29 PM on December 16, 2016 [8 favorites]


Top spy office: Intel agencies will not brief Electoral College members on alleged Russian interference
Spy agencies will not brief members of the Electoral College on alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential race before the Dec. 19 vote, despite pleas from 70 electors, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence indicated today.
...
President Barack Obama has ordered a "deep dive" on that alleged Russian interference that will be completed before he leaves office on Jan. 20.
Why the fuck didn't he order a shallower dive that could've been released today, before the electors vote? Trump will pay just as much attention to the "deep dive" as Bush did to the Rudman-Hart Commission's January 2001 warning that "Americans will likely die on American soil, possibly in large numbers," as a result of terrorist attacks.
posted by kirkaracha at 5:35 PM on December 16, 2016 [9 favorites]


WTF Friday: These Islands In The Pacific Are Blocking People From Creating TRU.MP Websites
The Northern Marianas Islands, which voted to become a U.S. commonwealth in 1975, control any site ending in .MP. Internet activists who tried this month to regster domains such as Tru.mp or ResistTru.mp found all of their attempts blocked. Anything, it appeared, that ended in Tru.mp couldn’t be purchased, no matter how long a string of random letters or numbers came before it.
I believe the most likely explanation is that it's a shady registrar (thanks ICANN) that realized they're sitting on a profit opportunity and is trying to figure out how to exploit it, but it's still pretty messed up.
posted by zachlipton at 5:37 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


Why are we back to self-criticism? This loss most likely wasn't the Dems fault entirely. The other side cheated and possibly collaborated with another nation's intelligence services to win, regardless of whether the outside interference made the difference or not. That's the whole point of this issue. The Dems aren't losing under normal rules of competition. They're losing because the other side is willing to destroy the integrity of the whole system to win. The Dems have screwed up here, royally, sure, but the other side may have handed the Republic over to a foreign power, and at the very least, their dirty political trickery, hatred, and manipulations are eroding our society's ability to function and trust in each other. This is much bigger than the "game" of our election process. This is exactly our problem: we're dissociative as a culture. We actually do literally believe this is just a game now. The original idea behind our legislative process was that it would be deliberative and cooperative; the point of the process wasn't just to win, it was to use reasoned debate to get at the best possible solutions because the enlightenment era belief was that you got at the truth through a ďialectic process of arguing. Our system really wasn't meant to be a game, it just turned into one once parties got introduced into the process (as George Washington worried it would if we ever allowed parties to form).

The competitive aspect in our system was supposed to be reasoned, gentlemanly intellectual debate, not a constant, bloody battle to the death for control and power.
posted by saulgoodman at 5:39 PM on December 16, 2016 [27 favorites]


After a couple of years maybe the "Her" invoked will no longer mean a particular person but become a stand in for all pushy women.

This has already happened in Alberta where people at an anti-carbon tax rally chanted it about Rachel Notley, the premier of the province.
posted by any portmanteau in a storm at 5:40 PM on December 16, 2016 [8 favorites]


I'd like to get a better picture of the reality because it seems like a huge problem that white Democrats never really try hard enough to solve.

This is the question that has caused me a lot of sleepless nights over the last few months, what with the reality of my entire fucking Nicaraguan-American extended family gleefully voting for Trump this year.

Mind you, there's a lot of variance even within the Hispanic community, and these are only a few reasons, but my current guess/anecdata - which has definitely shifted from time to time - is that rightly or wrongly, the perception is among my niche demographic that Democrats think of Hispanics as only poor, illegal immigrants- not as business owners, property owners, people trying to save money for important events. They think that Dems think they are suckers, unimportant people. And they don't want to be unimportant people who rely only on charity-they want to be respected members of the community.

They also intersect a lot with Dem-created regulations meant for the best, but that cause them personal grief in self-starter business models. Things like running a restaurant out of their kitchen, a hair salon out of their front parlor, an illegal taxi service, an unauthorized ice cream truck. They see the regulations as discriminatory- that they're meant to keep the little guy from rising up. I know they're not - that it's about worker stuff and health stuff and a bunch of other stuff - but that's how it's perceived.

I don't know how to fix that, though. I don't know how you can make it easier for people starting up not to have to worry about that stuff, while still ensuring the rules bind larger companies. I don't know if you'd even want to, or if that niche demographic is worth it vote wise. But there you have it.
posted by corb at 5:42 PM on December 16, 2016 [43 favorites]


Holy fuck, Trump, at his Florida event, just said 'Evan McMuffin.'
posted by box at 5:43 PM on December 16, 2016 [16 favorites]


Holy fuck, Trump, at his Florida event, just said 'Evan McMuffin.'

Does he sincerely think that's Egg's name? Or did he appear to be in on the joke?
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 5:45 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


Evan McMullin appears to be a principled guy with whom I disagree on so many things. Wouldn't it be nice if he was the type of person who ran the Republican party?
posted by Justinian at 5:48 PM on December 16, 2016 [24 favorites]


WTF!
@SopanDeb Multiple people are in the press pen here at the Trump rally wearing pro-Trump shirts and openly cheering the speech.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 5:50 PM on December 16, 2016 [10 favorites]


I'd say in on the joke.

I mean, making fun of someone's name is a very easy joke.
posted by box at 5:50 PM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


Per @SopanDeb: "!!! In Orlando, Trump just repeated someone calling @Evan_McMullin "Evan McMuffin." I am not kidding. Still won't say his real name."

He also says:
"Multiple people are in the press pen here at the Trump rally wearing pro-Trump shirts and openly cheering the speech.
One of them, unclear if he has a credential or not, just yelled that Hillary Clinton should be waterboarded. In the press pen."
posted by zachlipton at 5:51 PM on December 16, 2016 [7 favorites]


Hey, DCCC?

I super wish I could throw more donations your way to help the Dems with 2018, and I will when I can, and I know a lot of newly-energized people are in the same boat, but ffs it's the holidays and people only have so much they can donate and you haven't even done the bare minimum to convince us you have your shit together on resisting fascism and putting a damn plan together, so maybe don't make all your fundraising emails sound like you're scolding us right now? Cause people are going to jump ship if you do that

Ok sorry, just had to get that off my chest.
posted by jason_steakums at 5:52 PM on December 16, 2016 [27 favorites]


> Trump will pay just as much attention to the "deep dive" as Bush did to the Rudman-Hart Commission's January 2001 warning that "Americans will likely die on American soil, possibly in large numbers," as a result of terrorist attacks.

Jake Tapper, Sep 12, 2001: “We predicted it.” A bipartisan commission warned the White House and Congress that a bloody attack on U.S. soil could be imminent. Why didn't anyone listen?
posted by homunculus at 5:53 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


Ooh, yes Donald, get good and mad at our Egg and give him the same profile bump you gave Vanity Fair, please. Have a good long fight with him, you'll wear out before he does. That shit where we unintentionally legitimized you by arguing with you cuts both ways.

Also, that story about pro-Trump people in the press pen: this is a guy who hired actors to fill the audience for his campaign announcement event. I'm skeptical that they're really press.
posted by jason_steakums at 6:02 PM on December 16, 2016 [18 favorites]


Looks like the Trump supporters in the press pen are from "Conservative" radio

@SopanDeb Guy on the left - Christopher Hart, hosts a show called "American Adversaries" in Orlando on AM660. [link goes to video]
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:03 PM on December 16, 2016


Christopher Hart is waving a sign saying "Make Christmas Great Again." I really want someone to explain to me what is wrong with Christmas now. Other than it being too commercial-- but that has been a complaint since the Puritans were in charge. Not enough mangers? I see manger scenes everywhere including on Main Street in my town. Not enough people in church? Black Santas? Undecorated Starbucks cups? Too few angels? What? What is it that is driving this narrative?
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:12 PM on December 16, 2016 [6 favorites]


A bipartisan commission warned the White House and Congress that a bloody attack on U.S. soil could be imminent. Why didn't anyone listen?

It's OK. That was the last time an incoming Republican president that lost the popular vote blew off the warnings of the outgoing, more popular Democratic president.
posted by kirkaracha at 6:17 PM on December 16, 2016 [10 favorites]


I'm really interested to learn more about what the Democrats have and haven't done to try and increase Hispanic turnout, and why they can't seem to really crack it in a big way.

In Texas at least there is 1)a lack of funding and outreach from the national party and 2)draconian voter registration laws and a history of political persecution on organizations seeking to increase minority turnout. See Texas Voter Registration Laws are Straight Out of the Jim Crow Playbook.
posted by threeturtles at 6:19 PM on December 16, 2016 [6 favorites]


Christopher Hart is waving a sign saying "Make Christmas Great Again." I really want someone to explain to me what is wrong with Christmas now.

It's just shorthand for all the usual narrow bullshit: Real Americans say "Merry Christmas." Real Americans celebrate Christmas. Real Americans know this is a Christian nation. Real Americans are Christians and believe in Jesus. Real Americans are not politically correct, diversity-loving pinko atheist liberals.
posted by FelliniBlank at 6:19 PM on December 16, 2016 [10 favorites]


Why the fuck didn't he order a shallower dive that could've been released today, before the electors vote?

I dunno if it matters anyway. After all, only a single Republican elector asked to be briefed. Can't imagine the rest are likely to be swayed with a detailed accounting of IP addresses and such, and would find some excuse to disregard the evidence. (Also, the impracticality of clearing hundreds of people, the likelihood of leaks, etc.)
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 6:19 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


Also an electoral college vote that depends on classified information is ... troubling.
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 6:22 PM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


This Time, Obama's Calm in a Crisis Isn't Helping He’s right to be exasperated, but at this late date, absolute Republican bad faith should be assumed in all Democratic decision making.

He never learned the lesson that was obvious from the beginning. Republicans don't believe in democracy. They're working to end it and install themselves as the permanent sole legal party of the 1000 year American Reich.
posted by T.D. Strange at 6:23 PM on December 16, 2016 [31 favorites]




What? What is it that is driving this narrative?

The fact that people acknowledge the existence of other holidays.

Christmas will be "great again" when other holidays are abolished.

Man. I am SO PISSED at my Republican friends and family who actually believe this stuff right now. Not feeling in the mood to give them any benefit of the doubt. Can barely talk to my mom. Desperately hoping for McCain and Graham etc to restore some amount of faith in the other half of my country.

My Republican Facebook friends have gone silent since the election. I kind of don't think they really expected to win. They aren't feeling like defending Trump. I have shared just a constant barrage of Russia/conflicts of interest/alt-right crap since the election, though. Not sure if they're embarrassed or have just all unfollowed me.
posted by OnceUponATime at 6:26 PM on December 16, 2016 [9 favorites]


I disagree. I think it's because we aren't all white people.

I mean, also because SF and LA have a reputation for tolerance of queer people. The amount of rhetoric I've seen about "degenerates" lately is pretty alarming.
posted by en forme de poire at 6:27 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


"A Trump supporter just came to the press pen, tossed a water bottle at @JDiamond1, called him trash, and then walked away."

So that's how they'll stifle coverage. Credential rabid AM hate radio hosts and put them right next to legitimate reporters to physically intimidate them or worse.
posted by T.D. Strange at 6:28 PM on December 16, 2016 [10 favorites]


DCCC?... maybe don't make all your fundraising emails sound like you're scolding us right now?

I'm really unimpressed with how nothing is the party's fault, nothing is the campaign's fault, yadda yadda. It's everyone else's fault the Democrats lost. Yes, yes, there were outside factors, and this time some of them were pretty weird outside factors, but for fuck's sake take some responsibility. Some. Any. Soon?

The next step after blaming everyone else, is doing the same thing you always did, because, hey, it wasn't your fault. It's everything-is-fine-ism writ large.

I don't have a lot of faith in current leadership (such as it is) even trying to make anything better.
posted by rokusan at 6:34 PM on December 16, 2016 [12 favorites]


He’s right to be exasperated, but at this late date, absolute Republican bad faith should be assumed in all Democratic decision making.

He's not acting as a Democrat, he's acting as the president. He can't be partisan in his constitutional role. Otherwise he destroys the democracy we all want to save without Trump even having to. Unless you're fine with a benevolent dictatorship and/or civil war, he needs to maintain the system's survival and we need to fight to regain the power in it.
posted by chris24 at 6:36 PM on December 16, 2016 [27 favorites]


Why are we back to self-criticism? This loss most likely wasn't the Dems fault entirely.

Because Democratic leadership and center-Left pundits appear to be seizing upon a couple of factors out of their control to build upon a narrative for themselves in which the loss was entirely not their fault, and I don't buy that.

(yeah what rokusan said)
posted by atoxyl at 6:40 PM on December 16, 2016 [5 favorites]


Or he could have called on congress to go into some kind of emergency investigative process and pass an emergency resolution to make it possible to investigate further before confirming the results. There have to be democratic mechanisms for protecting the mechanisms of democracy, or of course foreign powers hostile to U.S. interests and democracy will do whatever they can to gain control of our system. Especially nations led by former spies from a failed empire our own nation's policies deliberately destroyed just a couple of decades ago.
posted by saulgoodman at 6:42 PM on December 16, 2016 [7 favorites]


I don't have a lot of faith in current leadership (such as it is) even trying to make anything better.

Well, right now the loudest voices for "Do something different!" seem to also be the voices saying "Start a civil war!" So I'm not thinking the Democratic Party is not exactly getting good advice in any direction.
posted by happyroach at 6:47 PM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


Obama may be the last actual President we ever have. Bob help us.
posted by Bringer Tom at 6:48 PM on December 16, 2016 [6 favorites]


Rokusan - if you haven't seen it yet, I'd suggest watching the Keith Ellison speech from Wednesday (here, Keith starts about 25 minutes in). It's one of the few things I've seen since the election that has given me any real hope for the democratic party.
posted by dinty_moore at 6:48 PM on December 16, 2016 [6 favorites]


"Rebellions are built on hope."

Saw Rogue One tonight and it was just what I needed at the moment. It couldn't have been more topical if someone had said "stronger together." (Which means Trumpski should definitely start a fight with Star Wars.)

I feel for Obama tonight. Rarely has a President been so fucked if he did and fucked if he didn't. Say too little and you're the President who let a Russian stooge become the most powerful man on Earth; say too much and you're the President who called into question the legitimacy of the US government and possibly incited a second civil war. Merry fucking Christmas, O.

Politics isn't, and never was, about idealism. It is a game. It is a game our side played badly and lost.

Appealingly cynical tho this is, it's at least half untrue. Politics is a game; it's also about idealism. You can't win if you can't play the game ruthlessly, but you can't govern (or can't govern wisely and beneficially) if you aren't idealistic. (This is implicit in Rogue One.)

You know what? I miss the USSR

I can't honestly say that I miss the USSR and I'm betting that a lot of Germans, Baltic, and East Europeans don't either, but I do miss Mikhail Gorbachev. He looked like he had a real future there for a moment. I'll bet a lot of people on the American right still hate him as much as they like Putin.

So Trumpski's giving the NEA to Sly Stallone? Bet he thinks he can connect him with Ivan Drago.
posted by octobersurprise at 6:51 PM on December 16, 2016 [14 favorites]


Obama may be the last actual President we ever have. Bob help us.

Kinda makes Zach Galifinakis' question when Obama did Between Two Ferns take on a whole new meaning: "How does it feel to be the last black President?"
posted by Justinian at 6:53 PM on December 16, 2016 [3 favorites]


He can't be partisan in his constitutional role.

It's never stopped Mitch McConnell. Which is why they were able to steal a Supreme Court seat.

This the farce phase of Obama's 8 year failure to recognize that the Republicans were flipping over the chess board and lighting it on fire while also shitting on the floor, while he continued to offer them Grand Bargains, compromise candidates and now tacit acceptance of foreign undermining of democracy.
posted by T.D. Strange at 6:53 PM on December 16, 2016 [11 favorites]


Here's the transcript of the McMuffin moment. Lesson: call Trump a "lightweight" on every possible opportunity. He doesn't like that.
posted by zachlipton at 6:54 PM on December 16, 2016 [6 favorites]


If it's really at the point where civil war would be the only counter response from Trump supporters to even investigating into covert operations to manipulate our elections with possible collision from one of the candidates or his campaign, then Russia has already won here, just as surely as civilians in Syria will keep being massacred with impunity
posted by saulgoodman at 6:54 PM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


The State of the Union will be interesting this year, eh?
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 6:59 PM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


You know you're living in bizarro world when you'd actually prefer the state of the union address in Idiocracy.
posted by Justinian at 7:00 PM on December 16, 2016 [9 favorites]


It's never stopped Mitch McConnell. Which is why they were able to steal a Supreme Court seat.

Mitch isn't president. He isn't a constitutional officer. You can say Obama should've been more partisan in the past in legislative battles, but doing so in his constitutional duties in facilitating a peaceful transfer of power just does Putin's work for him.
posted by chris24 at 7:01 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


Majority Leader of the Senate isn't a constitutional position? He's an elected member of the legislature, tasked with all kinds of shit under the constitution, including deciding that "advice and consent" doesn't mean either advise or consent.

It's the same thing, we're debating the rules of the boardgame that's on fire, while they're laughing about the house burning down and that we haven't even noticed the shit smeared on our faces.
posted by T.D. Strange at 7:07 PM on December 16, 2016 [7 favorites]


if you haven't seen it yet, I'd suggest watching the Keith Ellison speech from Wednesday (here, Keith starts about 25 minutes in). It's one of the few things I've seen since the election that has given me any real hope for the democratic party.

That wasn't bad, dinty_moore, thanks. Sanders was probably more focused-and-angry than Ellison, even. (I dunno where he gets the energy or heart after all this, but he's still fighting, so that's nice, because there's really nobody else stepping up yet.)

Overall, both of them still sounded a little heavy on "Trump is bad, amirite?" rhetoric, and not as forward-looking and forward-planning as I'd like to see, but it's definitely refreshing to hear anyone say we have to move into acceptance so we can start fighting what comes next instead of complaining about what has passed over and over and over again.

I don't know the other DNC candidates much, but I like what I've seen of Ellison.
posted by rokusan at 7:09 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


You know there's something about political victories that the winning side did not expect to win, like Trump and Brexit. There are a lot of anti-establishment people out there who don't really believe the establishment can evr actually be taken down. They're cynical about democracy and disenfranchised and they think voting is at best a futile and symbolic guesture. They are shocked, maybe, to learn that the establishment was a lot more vulnerable than they thought, and that they really do live in a democracy. Accelerationists and rapture-ready types take note...Be careful what you wish for.
posted by OnceUponATime at 7:09 PM on December 16, 2016 [7 favorites]




Majority Leader of the Senate isn't a constitutional position?

"The posts of majority and minority leader are not included in the Constitution, as are the president of the Senate (the vice president of the United States) and the president pro tempore. Instead, party floor leadership evolved out of necessity. During the nineteenth century, floor leadership was exercised by the chair of the party conference and the chairs of the most powerful standing committees...

Although party floor leadership posts carry great responsibility, they provide few specific powers. Instead, floor leaders have largely had to depend on their individual skill, intelligence, and personality. Majority leaders seek to balance the needs of senators of both parties to express their views fully on a bill with the pressures to move the bill as quickly as possible toward enactment. These conflicting demands have required majority leaders to develop skills in compromise, accommodation, and diplomacy. Lyndon Johnson, who held the post in the 1950s, once said that the greatest power of the majority leader was "the power of persuasion."
posted by chris24 at 7:13 PM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


I hope just one performer agrees to perform and then at the last minute they sing edelweiss.
posted by ian1977 at 7:15 PM on December 16, 2016 [54 favorites]


Brookings Institution: The Emoluments Clause: Its text, meaning, and application to Donald J. Trump

Since the GOP House will obviously be disinclined to impeach on these grounds, can outside groups file any useful lawsuits related to this?
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 7:18 PM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


Because Democratic leadership and center-Left pundits appear to be seizing upon a couple of factors out of their control to build upon a narrative for themselves in which the loss was entirely not their fault,

I goddamn warned you. Bernie and Linc, not even actual Democrats, sharing the stage with lesser Third Way lights and Hillary. Bernie getting a fuckton of first-time voters to the polls, and that's where a lot of her popular vote lead comes from. Bernie getting rat-fucked every inch of the way, and he still took how many states? As a septuagenarian Socialist?

Bernie was so clearly not the way forward, but it was too late. The decks were cleared, the decks were stacked, 30 years worth of highly effective disinformation were no-uh-uh-uh-thing to worry about, MEANWHILE!

White men in the rust-belt have been dying in droves, in numbers not seen since the early days of Aids. And not the kinds of white men certain segments of left-leaning voters would prefer to die. The ones who voted for Obama by double digits were absent. It's a wasteland of despair, no wonder only the religious zealots showed up. Michael Moore told you straight up why Trump was going to win, and you laughed at him.

Hillary's plan to save the Rust Belt? Did she have one? Did she promote it or was she trying to humiliate her opponent for being crude?

Do you know how little money Trump and the few SuperPacs willing to risk it actually spent on his campaign compared to Hillary?

Next time, let's not anoint a champion and put the DNC's thumb on the scales. I mean, Dubbya beat the christfuck out of McCaine... McCaine was the anointed successor, as was Hillary, and Obama beat them both.

Trump thrashed the best and brightest the GOP could bring to bear, and now he will be president.

I mean, it's awful we have to put social justice behind economic justice, but WE CANNOT HAVE SOCIAL JUSTICE WITHOUT THE WHITE VOTE. The current and actual demographics are against you. Republican voter suppression is against you. You will win or lose depending on how good of a deal you can cut with suburban white voters. If they buy into your plans to make their lives easier and cheaper and more prosperous, watch how angry they will be when they feel their prosperity will be taken away because cops kill minorities at will. Hell, watch them go all super-saiyan pissed when you tell them, as a white person, if you are killed by someone you don't know? Gonna be a cop who killed you. Plus this shit is making you struggle and be poor?

All in all, in making mainstream white Americans the enemy in every Social Justice story, you put them either in the enemy's MASSIVE voter block, or you convince them that this isn't their story or fight, so they'll stay home.

I do not like Ellison as DNC head. He thinks he can play demographic games. The GOP has seen that coming, and will suppress the fuck out of that action. I like Dean, because he can learn a lesson, and he will contest every election with the lessons learned in every state, in every county, in every city, in every precinct, with lawyers and recounts.

Why the fuck shouldn't we take Montana?
posted by Slap*Happy at 7:19 PM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


can outside groups file any useful lawsuits related to this?

I believe you'd have the case tossed out on multiple grounds. Standing, possibly sovereign immunity, and so on.
posted by Justinian at 7:19 PM on December 16, 2016


another great piece from Sarah Kendzior, We’re heading into dark times. This is how to be your own light in the Age of Trump
None of us deserves what’s coming

Write your biography, write down your memories. Because if you do not do it now, you may forget.

Write a list of things you would never do. Because it is possible that in the next year, you will do them.

Write a list of things you would never believe. Because it is possible that in the next year, you will either believe them or be forced to say you believe them.

You can look to the president-elect himself for a vision of what is to come. He has told you his plans all along, though most chose to downplay or deny them. You can even look back to before his candidacy, when in February 2014, he went on Fox News to defend Russia. Why a reality TV host was on Fox News defending Russia is its own story, but Listen to what Trump said already back in 2014. here is what he said about his desired outcome for the United States:

“You know what solves it? When the economy crashes, when the country goes to total hell and everything is a disaster. Then you’ll have a [chuckles], you know, you’ll have riots to go back to where we used to be when we were great.”,
posted by localhuman at 7:21 PM on December 16, 2016 [9 favorites]


Another WTF

Trump says his supporters were 'violent'

Trump made the admission Friday night during a rally here on the Florida leg of his "Thank You" tour. During the campaign, he repeatedly downplayed violent outbursts his supporters displayed at times toward protesters and insisted that paid activists were instead responsible for inciting violence at his rallies.

"You people were vicious, violent, screaming, 'Where's the wall? We want the wall!' Screaming, 'Prison! Prison! Lock her up!' I mean you are going crazy. I mean, you were nasty and mean and vicious and you wanted to win, right?" Trump said Friday. "But now, you're mellow and you're cool and you're not nearly as vicious or violent, right? Because we won, right?"

posted by futz at 7:22 PM on December 16, 2016 [12 favorites]


See! he wasn't being literal. He just wanted to win and this fired up the base. Come January 21, it'll be like Ford was back in the White House.
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 7:25 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


"But now, you're mellow and you're cool and you're not nearly as vicious or violent, right? Because we won, right?"

It's like for him words are just things that get thrown around in deals, not to be taken seriously unless they're ornamenting something Serious, in which case they're yugely important, otherwise they're just the things people say with the things
posted by Rykey at 7:27 PM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


"You people were vicious, violent, screaming, 'Where's the wall? We want the wall!' Screaming, 'Prison! Prison! Lock her up!' I mean you are going crazy. I mean, you were nasty and mean and vicious and you wanted to win, right?" Trump said Friday. "But now, you're mellow and you're cool and you're not nearly as vicious or violent, right? Because we won, right?"

I was just watching this video of children at a hospital in Aleppo (seriously, don't watch it. You won't make it that long) and I'm wondering if tonight's speech in Orlando is going to be considered the "good old days."

I'm so incredibly angered by the president's press conference today. It just seems to me, and maybe I'm an alarmist, that his government is the one thing standing between us and this truly terrible fate.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:27 PM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


I do not like Ellison as DNC head. He thinks he can play demographic games.

I really don't get that impression from him. He's all about empowering people to fight with a progressive message in counties where the old DNC wouldn't give anyone resources. He's explicitly talking about pursuing Obama/Obama/Trump rust belt votes without throwing POC under the bus. And he's so totally behind the Howard Dean model that he wants to take it to the next level.
posted by jason_steakums at 7:33 PM on December 16, 2016 [12 favorites]






RE: North Carolina legislative coup...

@cflav
The people who said Obama couldn't fill a SCOTUS seat in his last year, b/c it would thwart the will of voters, must be furious about this.
posted by chris24 at 7:42 PM on December 16, 2016 [36 favorites]


This Is What the Resistance Sounds Like
Governor Jerry Brown of California got Twitter-verse attention for saying two days ago that if Donald Trump actually shuts down satellite collection of climate data, “California will launch its own damn satellites.”

I’ve now seen the short speech from which that line was taken, thanks to a tip from reader CS. It’s remarkable enough to be worth your time. It’s a genuine fighting speech, with a tone that is resolute but positive, rather than resentful or doomed.
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 7:44 PM on December 16, 2016 [38 favorites]


Well, right now the loudest voices for "Do something different!" seem to also be the voices saying "Start a civil war!" So I'm not thinking the Democratic Party is not exactly getting good advice in any direction.

Oh that's definitely not where I'm coming from and I think e.g. Electoral College hopes are a fantasy and/or probably a very bad idea. Nor am I in favor of:

- war with Russia (?)
- "obviously America is hungry for a respectable third way I like to call myself a radical centrist"
- "obviously America is hungry for more Trump we should be more like Trump but you know, we can still call ourself Democrats"
- "what no that went great except they cheated we'll get them next time *loses downballot everything again*"
- "fucking kids and their identity politics get off my lawn"

Hoping for something more like "inclusive and authentically populist coalition built from the bottom up, rallying behind exciting and charismatic candidates." Didn't say mine wasn't a fantasy too (especially the last part). But I think some of that "tea party of the Left" stuff may suggest some places to start.
posted by atoxyl at 7:49 PM on December 16, 2016 [7 favorites]


another great piece from Sarah Kendzior, We’re heading into dark times. This is how to be your own light in the Age of Trump

I feel like this kind of thing is maybe... not so helpful? I mean, if the future described in the article does come to pass, we're screwed anyway, so if we pre-terrorize ourselves about it, we're doing the authoritarians' work for them.
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 7:55 PM on December 16, 2016 [8 favorites]


In the meantime... the Northeast needs to coalesce. Maine and Mass and NJ will be non-starters for the next two years, but we need to start building the scaffolding. Separate states, singular goals, economies of scale work. From VA up to the Canadian border needs to act like its own nation for a while, as the actual Federal Government eats itself alive. We will need to plan a shared single-payer healthcare system. We will need to build a new post-secondary education system. We will need to make the Trumpists sore and sorry for even dabbling a pinky-toe into our business. Hellfire, we'll send up our own satellites, too.

But we need to start organizing and co-operating now, and plan on MA and ME and NJ coming onboard with enthusiasm once the voters see what we're doing to resist and build. We need to convince our local politicians that they can be even bigger wheels once we're all acting together. Doable. Let's do it.
posted by Slap*Happy at 7:57 PM on December 16, 2016 [9 favorites]


It doesn't even matter to anybody strategizing here that there's a real possibility it won't matter how much we organize or campaign or otherwise persuade and do politics in the future if our campaign and election processes have been captured by Russian hackers and spies?

Without knowing or even trying to make a serious effort at investigating the possibility, we might never know if any future elections are truly legitimate. That sits okay with some of you way more than it ever could me.
posted by saulgoodman at 8:05 PM on December 16, 2016 [8 favorites]


Maine and Mass and NJ will be non-starters for the next two years,

NJ governor race is 2017. As is VA.
posted by chris24 at 8:05 PM on December 16, 2016 [7 favorites]


Evan McMuffin is trending on the Twitter. :D
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:05 PM on December 16, 2016 [6 favorites]




Having seen the Martini I can't imagine what the steaks are like. The horror... the horror...
posted by Justinian at 8:07 PM on December 16, 2016 [5 favorites]


He does like his well done, so...
posted by chris24 at 8:08 PM on December 16, 2016


Gotta say, one of the things I like about Evan McMullin is his normal human ability to have a sense of humor about the Egg McMuffin thing. It's refreshing in the age of Trump.
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 8:08 PM on December 16, 2016 [14 favorites]


the Northeast needs to coalesce

Lumping Virginia in with that plan is not going to happen, Virginia is only slightly less gerrymandered than North Carolina and the Republicans have an overwhelming near supermajority in the General Assembly, and a 1 seat hold on the State Senate. Democrats only control the statewide offices on the strength of huge turnout in Arlington and Fairfax, with some help from Richmond and parts of Norfolk, the rest of the state is basically Alabama.
posted by T.D. Strange at 8:09 PM on December 16, 2016


Trump is all about power, and not in the sophisticated sort of way, but in the high school bully/mean girls sort of way. We should be trying, from the poster on the net to the national politician, to get under his skin, so we can have as many "no-puppet, no-puppet" moments as possible.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 8:11 PM on December 16, 2016 [7 favorites]


I just...look, I would never vote Republican, except if Egg primaries Trump I might switch party affiliations. And that is weird, man. I'd infinitely rather have a Democrat, but at least Egg has a moral framework.
posted by Frowner at 8:13 PM on December 16, 2016 [22 favorites]


Yes, she did. But you and the media weren't listening.

I'm skeptical of a lot of the takes that blame the media but I think the media did fail to convey in a positive and straightforward way what Hillary Clinton offered. I dunno, maybe my media intake tends to be negative. Maybe I've just made myself a friend of Vox! Negative commentary about Trump (of which there was lots) alone didn't cut it because a.) his whole message was pretty negative, and saying "fuck you" to the establishment part of it, and b.) he had his own network of truly enthusiastic supporters to tell his story for him. So all that coverage just meant more visibility for his favorite brand name.

(Still not absolving the Clinton campaign here. Stuff like "America is already great" are you fucking kidding me?)
posted by atoxyl at 8:14 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


Trump Has a Plan to Break Up the EU

No, that's a longstanding Russi--- oh.
posted by rokusan at 8:16 PM on December 16, 2016 [33 favorites]


We should be trying, from the poster on the net to the national politician, to get under his skin, so we can have as many "no-puppet, no-puppet" moments as possible.

Yep, Evan McMullin has goaded Trump into saying his (nick)name by calling him out repeatedly on twitter. (Trump had made several previous rally references where he referred to McMullin as "some guy in Utah".) And now he's trending.

Vanity Fair? Same thing. Hilarious restaurant takedown --> tweet --> massive subscription boost.

Best thing Keith Ellison could do if he gets the DNC Chair gig is work to recruit House candidates who will *thrive* on that sort of thing for 2018. Like, regardless of their particular policies, they need the right sort of cheerfully pugnacious personality to go with it. Find the people who will bust out in a huge grin when their staffers tell them that Trump tweeted @ them personally.
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 8:18 PM on December 16, 2016 [20 favorites]




He isn't wrong.
posted by Justinian at 8:22 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


It doesn't even matter to anybody strategizing here that there's a real possibility it won't matter how much we organize or campaign or otherwise persuade and do politics in the future if our campaign and election processes have been captured by Russian hackers and spies?

I think it should be thoroughly investigated. I'd want to make sure there was not e.g. a full-on hack of voting though I'm not that confident we'd ever find out if there was. I would like to know, as somebody who has had opinions about their contents, if any of the DNC emails were doctored - I believe there is evidence that at least some are authentic. I am still not feeling like "Russian dudes spear-phished John Podesta" rises to the level of "the electoral process was captured by hackers and spies."
posted by atoxyl at 8:23 PM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


What's most embarrassing is that American action movies spent 35 years talking about how much ass we'd kick if Russia ever fucked with us. What actually happened was Republicans were in the crowd cheering on Ivan Drago while he beat Apollo Creed to death.
posted by T.D. Strange at 8:26 PM on December 16, 2016 [55 favorites]


Perez also made a statement about NC.

@TomPerez:
I'm angry, and you should be too. We can't stand for this denigration of our democracy. My statement
posted by chris24 at 8:27 PM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


There's more evidence than just the leaks: Russia also had squads of hackers manipulating comment boards to troll people, evidence of at least attempts to hack some elections systems, and weird disagreements between exit polling and final results in some key states. A lot of our voting systems are still purely electronic, without even the possibility of manual hand recounts, and the voting software is known to security experts to be vulnerable and has been hacked in demonstrations many times. If Russia's covert operations against the U.S. really have been stepped up to higher levels than the Cold War, if that energy was largely directed at outright stealing our elections, they could have gone to those lengths. But you're right, atoxyl: we couldn't prove the election rigging, specifically, because there's not enough accountability built into our polling and elections processes.
posted by saulgoodman at 8:32 PM on December 16, 2016 [13 favorites]




Trump finds an unlikely partner: Chuck Schumer
Oh great. Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer is working with Trump
Schumer and Pelosi Have a Plan to Make Trump Popular


Let's make the best possible assumption here: they are floating this as a trial balloon to see how much the Democratic electorate pushes back and supports them in resisting. So call your Democratic Senators and Representatives and say: "Are you idiots out of your damned minds!?"
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 8:38 PM on December 16, 2016 [23 favorites]


Complaining about professional commenters on message boards is a slippery slope when the Clinton campaign also hired and paid those, remember.

Exit polling also differed widely in many states during both primaries, long before the general election's disparities, especially in electronic-only districts. It's one of the things that the more suspicious Sanders supporters were very upset about.

I'm not saying these are nothing issues, but I think it's better to take shots from outside glass houses, you know?

Focus should be on the integrity of the voting and collating machines, possible hacks thereof, and on the systemic voter suppression, purges and gerrymandering. Those are things that have to be fixed systemically for the future to even work, and that nobody on the Dem side (I hope) has taken much part in, making them much firmer moral grounds.
posted by rokusan at 8:39 PM on December 16, 2016


Clinton didn't hire poor Macedonians at a pittance to build hundreds of fake news websites did she? Have Democrats been doing that and I just hadn't heard about it because of my personal online media bubble? Reality bubbles suck. We should discourage them.
posted by saulgoodman at 8:45 PM on December 16, 2016 [7 favorites]


Ron Wyden is speaking out more forcefully: new statement today.

Wyden summarizing these concerns earlier today on Twitter: "Our democracy, and its independence from foreign interference, is at stake."

Wyden rang the bell on mass surveillance and secret legal interpretations of the Patriot Act before these issues got mainstream traction. When he says that our democracy is at stake, I take him seriously.
posted by compartment at 8:48 PM on December 16, 2016 [26 favorites]


No, of course not, the Clinton campaign paid much better, I am sure, but that wasn't really my point. The fact that the Correct the Record troops even exist(ed) makes it the wrong thing to complain about re Republicans, no matter who's footing the bill. The Dems participated in the astroturf fake-comment war, so they can't act outraged that it hurt them.

It's all way too I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!
posted by rokusan at 8:51 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


"it is critical that the public discussion be informed by facts and the best analysis of the Intelligence Community and the FBI."

I like Wayden's letter because it's concise and calls to action, but that line there... is that a slap? Since when is the FBI not part of the Intelligence Community?
posted by rokusan at 8:54 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


The fact that the Correct the Record troops even exist(ed) makes it the wrong thing to complain about re Republicans

I wouldn't be so annoyed if the Republicans had been doing it on their own behalf; it was the fact that the Russians were doing it.
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 8:54 PM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


You're not wrong, BJE. I just mean with so many battles to fight, why not pick the ones where the ground is firmest and you're least susceptible to cries of hypocrisy or that whole "everyone was doing it" deflection?
posted by rokusan at 9:00 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


Since when is the FBI not part of the Intelligence Community?

Yeah, I noticed that too. I don't think it's intended as a slight. I saw today that the FBI evidently now agrees with the CIA/everybody-else assessment, and I think that Wyden is trying to point out that all intelligence agencies are now in agreement on motive.
posted by compartment at 9:01 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


Oh, it's been a long week chez Devonian and not just in the madness of politics. I'm looking forward to the Christmas break, just to gather my thoughts (and dissipate them in excess, but that's part of the process).

Meanwhile, potted comments:

1. I wish people would stop saying 'the popular vote' and just call it 'the vote'. Tautology irks me.

2. I've met the Oracle suits, formally and informally, They are truly evil, in that they know what they're doing and what they're doing is exactly as bad as the haters say. They told me this to my face, knowing I was a journalist and that nothing I could write would make any difference. In that, they are the perfect match to Trump. Pay attention. And, if you are an amoral fuck, buy the stock.

3. NC will go one of two ways - it will ignite an effective opposition to all things Trump, or it will be the template for red states over the next four years. Pray.

4. Don't blame Obama/Clinton/the Left/whoevs. Learn from what happened, but any atom of anger you have to spare needs to be directed forwards, not back. Discipline, y'all.

5. It's going to be a long fight. Do what you need to do for the next month, but come Jan 20th it's game on.
posted by Devonian at 9:09 PM on December 16, 2016 [52 favorites]


I never saw a Correct The Record trooper positively confirmed in the wild through that whole election season. I did get accused of being one, though
posted by prize bull octorok at 9:12 PM on December 16, 2016 [6 favorites]


God damn where was McMullin in May or April? I voted for him, but only after I was tired of hearing about having two choices and checking out who else was on my ballot.
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 9:27 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


This is neat! (and depressing.)

That is depressing
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 9:38 PM on December 16, 2016 [1 favorite]


The fact that the Correct the Record troops even exist(ed) makes it the wrong thing to complain about re Republicans, no matter who's footing the bill.

Correct the Record wasn't paid commenters, though. It was just a website people could go to for fact-checking. It's even more innocuous than Bernie, who's PR company ran and populated his subreddit.

Though like everything else about Clinton, I suppose it's not so much the truth that matters as whether it fits into people's preconceptions.
posted by Anonymous at 10:32 PM on December 16, 2016


Obama's betting on institutions and constitution. I hope it's enough.
posted by mazola at 10:35 PM on December 16, 2016


Obama has been betting on institutions for his entire career. He apparently hasn't noticed that he's lost nearly every bet since he became President (except his own re-election). If institutions were enough, ACORN would still be in business.
posted by oneswellfoop at 10:43 PM on December 16, 2016 [15 favorites]


Another day in whackadoodle conspiracy land.

Trump's Newest National Security Staffer Once Suggested Obama Lied About Being Black -- Meet Monica Crowley.


Based on her public statements, Crowley will fit right in with Flynn and Trump. In June 2008, while guest-hosting Laura Ingraham's radio show, Crowley cited a bizarre online "genealogy" (which she acknowledged she couldn't "verify") purporting to demonstrate that Obama is "not black African, he is Arab African." She added: "And yet, this guy is campaigning as black and painting anybody who dares to criticize him as a racist. I mean that is—it is the biggest con I think I've ever seen."
posted by futz at 10:45 PM on December 16, 2016 [4 favorites]


Obama is betting on institutions to resist facsism, when facisism bends institutions slowly to serve it. Case in point: A Sinclair journalist relayed to me during campaign they were told by corporate what questions to ask Trump

Of the signs of democratic weakening, the US is exhibiting nearly every one:

1. Media intimidation and restrictions
2. Identification of crises or political paralysis to justify emergency measures
3. Attacks on minorities; scapegoating foreigners
4. Closing of space for civil society (especially funding restrictions, legal cases, raids
and arrests, etc.)
5. Rhetorical rejection of current political system; discourse shift
6. Expanding the size of courts or other bodies to stack it with partisan judges/officials
7. Modifying rules to impose or eliminate term limits on officials, esp. election officials
8. Weakening of the legislature / intimidation of legislators
9. Silencing of political opposition
10. Significant increase in the internal security forces

posted by T.D. Strange at 10:53 PM on December 16, 2016 [54 favorites]


Weird still to think that - barring the even stranger - in five weeks time Donald Trump will be starting his first full day as President of the United States of America.
posted by Wordshore at 11:30 PM on December 16, 2016 [2 favorites]


I was hoping this press conference was going to be something. The hoping was the mistake.
posted by Anonymous at 11:37 PM on December 16, 2016


Yes, hope is now a mistake. If you don't hope, you can't be disappointed.
posted by Justinian at 11:38 PM on December 16, 2016 [7 favorites]


Remember the adage that if you throw enough mud/things at the wall something will stick? Yeah, everything seems to be extra sticky these days when thrown by a trumpmski supporter (or those looking to profit off of perpetuating Trumpscovite Propaganda). The Alt-Reich is free to say whatever they want and their minions lap it up.

You cannot imo, win this fight by being measured, reasonable, and factual. That shit as a strategy went out the window almost a decade ago. We are fucked unless we can get dirty too but trying to convince a ton of people who respect science, facts, working together, reality, fairness to get down and dirty is a monster of an obstacle.

I hope that the Obama that we saw today was the Obama who didn't let on (at the The White House Correspondents Dinner) that as he was yukking it up an operation was underway to take out Bin Laden. I hope (that pesky word again) that there are some machinations behind the scenes to stir something up. Maybe not...who knows.
posted by futz at 11:41 PM on December 16, 2016 [11 favorites]


Considering that the Oracle RDBMS was developed as a Department of Defense project, is it surprising that the company is heavily intertwined with those 3-letter agencies? Not excusing, just observing.
posted by Altomentis at 12:08 AM on December 17, 2016


Mod note: Earlier dumb "superior to Real Americans" derail deleted. Discussions in text form are difficult enough at the best of time; please don't clutter the thread with useless noise.
posted by taz (staff) at 12:16 AM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


Not sure which company I'd less rather see working on Trump's Registry of Not Real Americans: Oracle, which has been successfully evil for decades, or Palantir, which is only 12 years old, valued at one-tenth of Oracle, and part-owned by Peter Theil... considering Trump's own business record, I wish Pebble Watch had stayed in business a little longer just so it could get that contract before folding.
posted by oneswellfoop at 12:22 AM on December 17, 2016 [4 favorites]


If I had a dollar to spare I might buy Oracle and then funnel the money somewhere useful, like Planned Parenthood or the ACLU...
posted by en forme de poire at 3:33 AM on December 17, 2016 [3 favorites]


as someone who has used software developed by Oracle that was not their SQL database

Oracle is the best possible company to build tools for the Trump administration, because they will not work.
posted by murphy slaw at 4:25 AM on December 17, 2016 [48 favorites]


A marriage made in heaven - they also won't get paid.
posted by From Bklyn at 4:35 AM on December 17, 2016 [15 favorites]


Putin will pay them.
posted by ian1977 at 4:46 AM on December 17, 2016


Larry Ellison makes Trump look like chump change.
posted by adamvasco at 5:22 AM on December 17, 2016


Watching "Good Morning America" review the evidence that shows Russia's involvement and list options for how we should respond, and discuss "How long can the president elect continue to deny this?" is so amazing to me.

During the election it was so surreal to me that mainstream sources weren't talking about this. Finally. Finally. Finally.

I think this is a good sign that Republicans are acknowledging what has happened (now that they have won the election.) It seems like a sign that they are not going to go along with Trump's alternate reality. In our deeply polarized country, congressional Republicans are really the only ones who can save us. Half the country won't trust anything a Democrat says unless Republican leaders sign on. Good Morning America probably wouldn't report it as fact if the Republican party as a whole were disputing it. I mean, Good Morning America. I used to watch that with my Kanas Republican farmer Grandpa. I think that's a very good sign that Republicans and Republican leaders are going to agree this is a problem. Finally.
posted by OnceUponATime at 5:25 AM on December 17, 2016 [9 favorites]


If only Trump could be unpresidented.

@realDonaldTrump:
China steals United States Navy research drone in international waters - rips it out of water and takes it to China in unpresidented act.
posted by chris24 at 5:41 AM on December 17, 2016 [31 favorites]


unpresidented?????? Freudian slip? one hopes.
posted by ian1977 at 5:43 AM on December 17, 2016 [16 favorites]


If that guy has any sort of terminal condition while he is in office we are screwed. No way king baby is dying without taking the world with him.
posted by ian1977 at 5:57 AM on December 17, 2016


Now deleted and replaced with correct spelling by someone not using Android.
posted by chris24 at 6:12 AM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


IS ARE KIDS LERNIN?
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 6:14 AM on December 17, 2016 [8 favorites]


I'm gonna guess Trump doesn't use spellcheck because he can't stand anyone telling him he's wrong. Even a program.
posted by chris24 at 6:15 AM on December 17, 2016 [10 favorites]


I'm more fascinated by his retweet of @EazyMF_E, "Decorated Veteran of the Great Meme War". Trump retweeted a guy named Eazy Motherfucking-E.
posted by dis_integration at 6:16 AM on December 17, 2016 [6 favorites]


Hey, Eazy kicked it with the Republicans.
posted by box at 6:27 AM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


Bernie Sanders In A Candid Conversation With Sarah Silverman talk election aftermath at the Alex Theatre in Glendale, California on November 29, 2016 (YouTube approx 1 hr).

Also Jamin "Jamie" Raskin is going to be a bright light in the House. He said in his incoming interview (CSPAN video 9min23sec) he is best friends with John Sarbanes. Sarbanes is already a power house, these two could be a real dynamic duo. Maryland always seems to send really good fighters to Congress.
posted by phoque at 6:29 AM on December 17, 2016 [4 favorites]


The spelling is less an issue for me except that (a) this is a diplomatic message (b) it took 87 minutes for unknown hands to correct it (c) there is no process
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 6:36 AM on December 17, 2016 [22 favorites]


Hillary Clinton on Thursday night attributed her defeat to a convergence of two “unprecedented” events: the release of a letter by James B. Comey, the F.B.I. director, shortly before the election, and what she called an “attack against our country” by the Russian president, Vladimir V. Putin.

Obama's low-key, I'm not-angry-I'm-disappointed press conference would have sat with me a lot better if he'd announced Comey's firing or at least resignation.

Comey's intervention was unprecedented and must be punished. Fire him.
posted by Gelatin at 6:42 AM on December 17, 2016 [6 favorites]


The spelling error is a reminder that in addition to being a craven evil greedy piece of shit, our President Elect really is just an abysmally stupid person. "Unprecedented" is not an obscure word by any means, and people have been using it to refer to him and his actions on a daily basis. Is he hearing "unpresidented" when someone says it on CNN? What does he think it means?
posted by contraption at 6:49 AM on December 17, 2016 [33 favorites]


He's, like, a smart person.
posted by EarBucket at 6:55 AM on December 17, 2016 [3 favorites]


he really does have the best words
posted by localhuman at 6:57 AM on December 17, 2016 [17 favorites]


Now deleted and replaced with correct spelling by someone not using Android.

Fortunately for future historians, the original utterances are preserved on @RealRealDonaldTrump.
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 7:00 AM on December 17, 2016 [8 favorites]


As a knotted rope tossed from above to help us climb out of the pit of despair, let's remember that 2016 was also the year of a second Donald, the yang reflection of the yin of Donald J. Trump: the multitalented Donald Glover, whose series Atlanta is climbing to the top of 2016 "best of" lists; who as Childish Gambino has inspired us with the brilliant album Awaken, My Love (SLYT), recently appearing live on Fallon; who's the author of lyrics --"Little hands, little feet/Tiny heart, tiny beat"--which my brain incorrectly processes as a sly reference to Trump; and who, for the maraschino cherry on top, was cast a few months ago as Lando Calrissian in Star Wars.
posted by Gordion Knott at 7:00 AM on December 17, 2016 [5 favorites]


I'm more fascinated by his retweet of @EazyMF_E, "Decorated Veteran of the Great Meme War."

Eazy Motherfucking E is a punk-ass chump. I'm a decorated veteran of a thousand Psychic Wars.
posted by octobersurprise at 7:06 AM on December 17, 2016 [8 favorites]


The Guardian is also keeping track.
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 7:08 AM on December 17, 2016


Trump retweeted a guy named Eazy Motherfucking-E.

The problem is that every time he raises hell and gets caught he makes bail.
posted by Talez at 7:10 AM on December 17, 2016 [2 favorites]


On Friday, in a press conference at the White House, Barack Obama had cautioned Trump against allowing relations with China to slip into “full conflict mode”.

Politest way ever to say "Shut the fuck up, n00b."
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 7:11 AM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


245 new comments (I give up. I mean, good stuff, but I'm running out of time.)
posted by pjmoy at 7:13 AM on December 17, 2016 [3 favorites]


Eazy Motherfucking E is a punk-ass chump.

Child, disrespecting members of NWA who are curb-stomping LAPD in heaven is no way to go through life.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 7:23 AM on December 17, 2016 [6 favorites]


(I mean, I know you were speaking of the twitter account owner, not the actual Mr. E, but I'm pretty sure disrespect is transitive)
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 7:24 AM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


The spelling error is a reminder that in addition to being a craven evil greedy piece of shit, our President Elect really is just an abysmally stupid person. "Unprecedented" is not an obscure word by any means, and people have been using it to refer to him and his actions on a daily basis.

It's not even this, it's not just a typo. Having an error like that in what is now official presidential communications tells us he's still doing these things alone, without vetting through his own advisors, much less in consultation with any part of the security state. Not State, Defense, NSA, no one. He's just popping off at a nuclear power completely on his own.
posted by T.D. Strange at 7:26 AM on December 17, 2016 [66 favorites]


Dear America, Why Did You Let Us Down? I have embarrassment of grief for a government that is not mine and for a country that does not belong to me. It feels as if we’re mourning the death of an idea called America.
posted by T.D. Strange at 7:37 AM on December 17, 2016 [7 favorites]


Vox House conservatives will try to kill Michelle Obama’s surprisingly successful anti-obesity campaign

I'm embarrassed that in addition to working with public school lunchrooms, planting a White House Garden, and improving nutritional labels, I did not know she also did this:
The Partnership for a Healthier America, which launched in conjunction with (but independent from) the Let’s Move campaign, helped get food companies — such as PepsiCo, Coca-Cola, and General Mills — to commit to cutting calories from the food supply. At the latest count in April, it had already removed 6.4 trillion calories (or 78 calories per person) by reformulating products and shrinking serving sizes.
But naturally the Freedom Caucus wants to make sure that American companies are free to stuff their sugary, fat-laden food into the public schools so that American children will be free to be American-sized.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 7:50 AM on December 17, 2016 [20 favorites]


Politico ‘It Was My Primal Scream’

I could not even finish reading this because it is so enraging. It profiles a long time Democrat who chose to vote for DJT because Bernie did not win the primary so therefore the DNC had to be punished.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 7:54 AM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


Bernie, who's PR company ran and populated his subreddit.

Where can I read more about Bernie's PR company and the campaign they put together for him?
posted by Coventry at 8:02 AM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


Whatever good Bernie did by talking about economic issues was offset by the damage caused by his own personality cult.
posted by T.D. Strange at 8:05 AM on December 17, 2016 [26 favorites]


I could not even finish reading this because it is so enraging. It profiles a long time Democrat who chose to vote for DJT because Bernie did not win the primary so therefore the DNC had to be punished.

Oh my god, read to the end:
Cohen is sickened, too, by the hate-mongering she has seen surrounding the Trump campaign, but she doubts things will get much worse than they are already for people of color just because Trump is in the White House. Her biggest concern remains: How will her party reclaim its liberal mission?

“I hope I never have to vote for a Republican ever again,” Cohen said.
Hang on, I feel a scream of rage coming myself.
posted by Pope Guilty at 8:08 AM on December 17, 2016 [41 favorites]


Politico ‘It Was My Primal Scream’

From the article: "She is among the 10 percent of liberals, 8 percent of blacks and 42 percent of women who voted for Trump."

You know what? According to the same New York Times exit poll data for 2012, 11% of liberals, 6% of blacks and 44% of women voted for Romney. So other than not doing quite as well as the first black president with blacks, Clinton outperformed Obama with these demographics. But sure, go find someone to support your agenda Politico. You can always find someone who voted seemingly bizarrely if you look. But let's make drastic policy decisions as a party based on anecdata.
posted by chris24 at 8:12 AM on December 17, 2016 [43 favorites]


Atlantic Newt Gingrich Tries to Explain How Trump Will Remake America

In which Newt speaks to a crowd at a Heritage Foundation event. My favorite pull quote:
“I expect Trump to do what he says he’s gonna do … to make America great again,” Small chimed in. “If I have to tell somebody what that is, they don’t even know what I’m talking about.”
DJT really did an amazing job with that MAGA slogan because it can be interpreted any way you like, even if you can't explain it. I'm sure for the WWC voter in Wisconsin, the Oil man in Texas, and the farmer in Iowa MAGA means different things but no one will ever pin them down or force them to vocalize what exactly the slogan means to them.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 8:15 AM on December 17, 2016 [11 favorites]


It profiles a long time Democrat who chose to vote for DJT because Bernie did not win the primary

She threw a tantrum and she got President Tantrum. She got just what she wanted.
posted by octobersurprise at 8:19 AM on December 17, 2016 [26 favorites]


During Clinton’s campaign this year, Cohen was angrily reminded of a comment from the former first lady in 1996, when she called young black criminals “super predators.”

Remember when Trump took out full page ads in multiple papers calling for the execution of the Central Park 5? And then said in October he still thought they were guilty and he didn't regret that even though they'd been cleared by DNA evidence? Good times.
posted by chris24 at 8:38 AM on December 17, 2016 [25 favorites]


This headline from WaPo is so apt: "toddler tries to calm his ‘vicious, violent, screaming’ supporters"
posted by Dashy at 8:38 AM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


(I have the Firefox extension that places the term 'toddler' where it is appropriate)
posted by Dashy at 8:40 AM on December 17, 2016 [2 favorites]


The Rise of the Alt-Center
posted by adamvasco at 8:42 AM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


Look, maybe we've been overthinking it and diplomatic missives never needed more than 140 characters, and maybe a meme
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 8:47 AM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


Look, maybe we've been overthinking it and diplomatic missives never needed more than 140 characters, and maybe a meme

Welp, we're definitely about to find out if this theory is true.
posted by tivalasvegas at 8:57 AM on December 17, 2016 [3 favorites]


> You know what? According to the same New York Times exit poll data for 2012, 11% of liberals, 6% of blacks and 44% of women voted for Romney.

Sure, but Romney was manifestly more qualified than Trump for the office, so one would hope that Trump's vote share among those groups, particularly self-described liberals, would be a small fraction of Romney's. Of course Politico is cherry-picking for yet another click-baity "Democrats in disarray" story, but that doesn't mean there aren't lessons that can be learned.
posted by tonycpsu at 8:59 AM on December 17, 2016 [3 favorites]


Khrushchev's telegram to Kennedy should have been a tweetstorm ending with a mushrrom gif.
posted by Coventry at 9:03 AM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


@HeerJeet
If USA becomes embroiled in a conflict with China, Russia would have an ideal time to push for hegemony in Eastern Europe. Just saying.
posted by chris24 at 9:05 AM on December 17, 2016 [8 favorites]


Sure, but Romney was manifestly more qualified than Trump for the office

Only in traditional ways. If you want a racist demagogue, or someone to blow it all up to start again, not unheard of on the left, Trump is the better candidate.
posted by chris24 at 9:06 AM on December 17, 2016


I think that Eric Garland tweet storm is mostly ridiculous too, but come on, Slate:
The “leaked” CIA concerns over Russian meddling were quite clearly leaked deliberately by the CIA itself, an organization not exactly famed for its commitment to the truth; they’re the conclusions of an investigation that hasn’t even happened yet and on which there’s no consensus even among the gang of petty Caligulas that calls itself the intelligence community.
His bullshit doesn't justify yours. The upcoming investigation(s) are built on existing investigations for which, yes, there is consensus in the intelligence community, even ratfucking Comey got on board. This is garbage, you're spewing garbage.
posted by jason_steakums at 9:06 AM on December 17, 2016 [14 favorites]


> Only in traditional ways. If you want a racist demagogue, or someone to blow it all up to start again, not unheard of on the left, Trump is the better candidate.

Yeah, but wasn't the latter (blow it all up) precisely the point of the Politico piece?
Cohen doesn't regret her radical act of defiance. She feels that by helping take the Democrats to rock bottom, they’ve been “given a gift” to rebuild their party.
posted by tonycpsu at 9:08 AM on December 17, 2016


Politico is once again living up to their Tiger Beat on the Potomac moniker.
posted by hydropsyche at 9:09 AM on December 17, 2016 [4 favorites]


Yeah, but wasn't the latter (blow it all up) precisely the point of the Politico piece?

Yes, she got what she wanted. My point is that there are people like this in every election. There's nothing magical about Clinton, Trump and this year. When you're talking 8% and 10% of a demographic, there's always some wackos. Hell, those numbers are way below the 27% crazification factor
posted by chris24 at 9:11 AM on December 17, 2016 [8 favorites]


The 27% crazification factor is a fun concept, but it's not really a thing. "Politico is nutpicking" and "Democrats lost a lot of very gettable votes in a close election because of some combination of Clinton's negatives, the perception of a corrupt DNC, Bernie's refusal to gracefully concede after he'd lost, etc." can both be true.
posted by tonycpsu at 9:18 AM on December 17, 2016 [4 favorites]


We are actually at the point apparently where I am having nightmares about living imprisoned in camps with other people under vaguely Nazi-ish authority. My only comfort is even in the dreams I am trying to resist.

It occurs to me to remind that if anyone wants to brainstorm ways to peel Republicans away from the New Fascism of Trump, my memail is always open. Because fuck this bullshit.
posted by corb at 9:20 AM on December 17, 2016 [20 favorites]




The "blow it all up and rebuild" caucus has never made any sense. Where's the historical example where that worked? Where a right wing demagogue took power, only to be swiftly toppled and social democracy arise in his wake? Nazi Germany? Well, even setting aside the, let's call it, "collateral social costs", it took an invading army to execute the "blow it all up" portion after the dictator gained power. And there's no force on earth that can repeat that sequence of events against the US.

Dictators don't just get power, and everyone suddenly decide, "you know what, this is wrong, let's do liberal utopia instead" and the tyrant slinks away in disgrace.
posted by T.D. Strange at 9:29 AM on December 17, 2016 [40 favorites]


I know it's not a thing, just a reference we use here. And I agree that there's votes that were lost for a variety of reasons that would be great to know. But when you're dealing with such small percentages of pretty small demographics in notoriously inaccurate exit polls, saying Trump should've gotten say 1 in 12 liberals instead of 1 in 10 liberals since he was worse than Romney seems to be underestimating the margins of error and the reality that within such small subgroups, it's hard to say what elements makes a person go one way or another. He probably did do worse with some types of liberals, and better with others. All the things you listed could've made liberals go against Clinton. Or it could've been misogyny, Trump's authoritarianism, his racism, accelerationism, etc. all things that definitely exist in some corners of the left. Anyway, to make a long story longer, all I'm saying is that saying Trump should've done worse with some subgroups ignores that it's really hard to tell why people do things and pretty easy to make up that small of group.
posted by chris24 at 9:30 AM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


Well, a lot of the great welfare state policies in European nations were passed after WWII. Of course, a lot of that was because large portions of the European right wing had either been killed fighting for the Nazis or jailed for siding with them...
posted by Pope Guilty at 9:31 AM on December 17, 2016 [3 favorites]


It feels as if we’re mourning the death of an idea called America.

We ARE.
posted by yoga at 9:58 AM on December 17, 2016 [9 favorites]


Agh, this dumb-ass on my FB feed, this guy who is the "morning DJ" on a conservative FM radio station here in Athens, GA, just wrote that Obama said in his press conference that he wants to take away Wyoming's senators. All of his Trump-supporting followers are freaking out about it. "Oh no," they are saying, "Obama wants to take away Wyoming's senators!"

Obama's point was obviously that a populous state like California should not have the same number of senators as a sparsely populated state like Wyoming. But, whatever, radio man.

Obama: "Now, some of that is just the nature of our system, and geography. As long as Wyoming gets the same number of senators as California, there’s going to be some tilt towards Republicans when it comes to congressional races. The fact that a lot of Democratic voters are bunched up in big cities, and a lot of Republican voters are spread out across geography gives them an advantage when it comes to congressional races."
posted by staggering termagant at 9:58 AM on December 17, 2016 [5 favorites]


I think this is a good sign that Republicans are acknowledging what has happened (now that they have won the election.) It seems like a sign that they are not going to go along with Trump's alternate reality. In our deeply polarized country, congressional Republicans are really the only ones who can save us. Half the country won't trust anything a Democrat says unless Republican leaders sign on.

I'm coming off the tail end of two 1.25hr phone conversations with family members about why I'm acting so afraid, and... well, while I agree with you that congressional Republicans are the only ones who can save us, those conversations have primarily left me even more sure that those Republicans are going to hope everything is going to work out for the best and leave all the rest of us to hang in the goddamn wind.

So be it. Like I said the other day, like I have said to every Republican who might listen to me for five minutes, the things the Republican Party chooses to do now will write the way we remember them for the next fifty years. I'm so tired, but the responses I'm getting tell me that Republican partisans are--even the ones who trumpeted "honorable opposition" so hard in previous years--racing to lick the boots of the new boss in the hopes that if they try hard enough, the situation will magically become normal enough to keep us all alive. That's fine, I guess; if they want to become the party of traitors, by god I'll scream that into their faces for all the good it will do me. I keep asking "What do you stand for?" and I get uncomfortable backpedaling; well, if they're guilty, all the better.

I don't give a shit if I'm imprecise with my language right now. I have stopped caring about "just as bad." I have stopped caring about perfect arguments. All I think will work is a loud and purely driven scream of outrage, with no second-guessing or quiet well actuallys. I appreciate a good pedant as well as the next woman, but pedantry will only serve to derail us now. We need to move, and if we don't go in the most perfect of all directions, at least we'll have gotten somewhere.
posted by sciatrix at 10:01 AM on December 17, 2016 [33 favorites]




And by everything I hold dear, I will cloak myself in the colors of the American flag--not the flag itself, I know my goddamn flag code unlike too many of these assholes--and every bit of the faith I was raised with and cherished about the ideals I thought my country stood for to do it. Because that's why we're worth fucking fighting for. Like Blue Jello Elf said upthread--we need people who will see Trump wail and grin, because they're not afraid of a fight. That's the spirit I'm trying to foster in the people around me who are scared. As long as there are enough of us who say "Oh yeah? Well fuck you too, pal," it's harder for Trump and his thugs to pick us off one by one. But there have to be enough of us supporting that spirit to normalize it, and we have to throw ourselves behind it.

Millions for war, not one red cent for tribute, right? Well, then, if it's a war these fascists want it's a war they'll get--as long as they rely on our institutions for the legitimacy required to run the nation, they can be attacked using those institutions. If they try to bend the institutions to give them legitimacy for evil, we can watch them and take action to penalize them. Stubbornness and patriotism are for all of us, and this is my home, I won't be ashamed of it when it's being threatened.
posted by sciatrix at 10:13 AM on December 17, 2016 [56 favorites]


I wish I could compose a "fuck yeah sciatrix" song.
posted by corb at 10:16 AM on December 17, 2016 [16 favorites]


I'm going to go watch the first Captain America movie again now. That's the kind of American I want to be; that's what I stand for. And I need the reminder that that's still a symbol I can celebrate.
posted by sciatrix at 10:21 AM on December 17, 2016 [9 favorites]


China has agreed to return the drone. I assume Trump will claim credit on account of his unpresidented tweet?
posted by zachlipton at 10:23 AM on December 17, 2016 [8 favorites]


Whatever good Bernie did by talking about economic issues was offset by the damage caused by his own personality cult.

A. there was never a good personality cult
B. if the Democrats (the left, progressives, whatever) manage to revitalize in a potent way by, at least in part, working from aspects of Bernie's playbook, that will mitigate a lot.
posted by philip-random at 10:28 AM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


Hamilton Nolan, The Concourse (Deadspin): The Government Is Out Of The Equality Business
Yesterday, the White House Council of Economic Advisers released its annual economic report, showcasing the administration’s economic achievements over the past eight years. The chapter titled “Progress Reducing Inequality” notes that if our level of inequality was the same as it was 40 years ago, the average American household would be earning $9,000 more per year. (If the average American household earned $9,000 more per year, Donald Trump would not be president, I wager.)

This report is a political document, but it contains inarguable facts: Obamacare has given health insurance to 20 million new people; his tax policies have taken 9% out of the incomes of the top 0.1%, and slightly raised the after-tax incomes of the poorest fifth of Americans; and the minimum wage increases that Obama advocates would help also, if he could ever get them through Congress. Still, the modest nature of our current administration’s accomplishments in stemming the ever-increasing flow of wealth to the richest Americans is well summed up by this: “From the business cycle peak in 1979 to the business cycle peak in 2007, the after-tax income share of the top 1 percent more than doubled. Changes in tax policy and the coverage provisions of the ACA have rolled back one-third of the decline in the share of after-tax income accruing to the bottom quintile of households over this period and one-tenth of the increase in the share accruing to the top 1 percent of households.”

Obama, in other words, has pushed the enormous boulder a few feet up the hill. What can we expect from our president-elect on this front? We can expect the exact opposite.
posted by tonycpsu at 10:29 AM on December 17, 2016 [24 favorites]


I have embarrassment of grief for a government that is not mine and for a country that does not belong to me. It feels as if we’re mourning the death of an idea called America.

get in line. I've been doing that since at least 1972 when Richard Nixon got re-elected with one of the biggest majorities ever. I would've been thirteen at the time.
posted by philip-random at 10:31 AM on December 17, 2016 [5 favorites]


That's the spirit I'm trying to foster in the people around me who are scared. As long as there are enough of us who say "Oh yeah? Well fuck you too, pal," it's harder for Trump and his thugs to pick us off one by one.

This is why I think things like SNL political sketches are going to be incredibly important over the next few years. Witnessing other people resist, whether that means fighting politically or lampooning on a sketch show, is going to be critical to reducing regular people's fear. And if he's tweeting @ everyone, his MAGA squad can't focus their attacks.
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 10:41 AM on December 17, 2016 [15 favorites]


Obama, in other words, has pushed the enormous boulder a few feet up the hill. What can we expect from our president-elect on this front? We can expect the exact opposite.

The exact opposite would be a few feet back. PEOTUS is going to let go of the boulder completely.
posted by Gaz Errant at 10:43 AM on December 17, 2016 [3 favorites]


Commenting from outside the US here, I've been appalled at seeing the normalisation of profoundly unacceptable language and concepts throughout the campaign, and am fearful for the whole world as a result of the outcome. I'm hanging on these threads, because it is hard to find a well moderated voice of reasonableness anywhere, and MF is really coming through. I find the language of bipartisanship to be failing though. The US was founded on the assumption that there would be two major parties, roughly evenly matched, with no particular moral difference. The differences were meant to be technical, no matter how passionate. That has not been the case at least since the snarling venom of the attempt to impeach Clinton, and the spread of "conservative" talk radio pundits.

Given that it is broken, the framing of political discourse as R vs D, as conservatives vs liberals, seems to pretend that things are as they used to be. Of course they aren't, and that ain't coming back. From over here, it looks like decency itself is broken, so identifying the side that insists on decency as the "liberals" or the "democrats" doesn't help. I don't know how you change that framing without complete change of the institutional basis.
posted by stonepharisee at 11:05 AM on December 17, 2016 [8 favorites]


Correct the Record wasn't paid commenters, though. It was just a website people could go to for fact-checking.

You're kidding, right? I don't want to digress way over the line of re-litigating anything, but CTR used/uses its budget to influence social media websites. That means astroturfing, and it's not robots doing it, it's commenters on social media websites.

There's a bushel of information on this in the The Google, including stories from all manner of mainstream reports, so there should be a source or two anyone can trust. Heck, almost all my print and web media is left-leaning unless I make a specific effort to go outside of that once and awhile, and during the campaign it was almost impossible to not read about their efforts, which go way beyond just a passive "website for fact-checking."

(I didn't realize this was actually debatable/denied. Yes, the Clinton campaign had/has its own army of commenters/trolls/correctors... whatever. I don't even necessarily think this is a bad thing, really, in that it's a necessary evil these days -- many/most big corporations do it, too, after all, and I'm confident we will never again see a campaign without them, from anyone. But to deny they even exist? What's the point of that? I only brought it up to say that if we choose to attack Trump or Republicans for having paid trolls, we'd best be very ready for blowback, so it's probably wiser to pick another topic to be outraged about. There are so many, after all.)
posted by rokusan at 11:09 AM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


Obama, in other words, has pushed the enormous boulder a few feet up the hill...

PEOTUS is going to let go of the boulder completely.


There's an easy joke here about hand-size, if anyone's feeling cheap today.
posted by rokusan at 11:10 AM on December 17, 2016 [5 favorites]


rokusan, I'd actually love to see any reputable source confirming that CTR employees were paid to pose as "normal" commenters and astroturf websites.
posted by a box and a stick and a string and a bear at 11:16 AM on December 17, 2016 [3 favorites]


Correct The Record wasn't even ran by Clinton.
posted by Yowser at 11:18 AM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


Trump Supporter and [black] Man He Sucker Punched at a Rally Embraced in a Forgiving Hug

The assailant's non-apology is despicable. His victim is more forgiving than I would be.
posted by Coventry at 11:23 AM on December 17, 2016


In silly resistance news, the dictionary is making fun of "unpresidented".
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 11:26 AM on December 17, 2016 [14 favorites]


The US was founded on the assumption that there would be two major parties, roughly evenly matched, with no particular moral difference.

That's not really accurate. The Federalists and anti-Federalist Democratic-Republicans evolved out of the debate over the framing and ratification of the Constitution; there was no widespread assumption in the initial move for independence or founding of the nation that parties ("factions," as Washington disapprovingly called them), whether two or five or twelve of them, would be part of the deal, necessarily.
posted by FelliniBlank at 11:31 AM on December 17, 2016 [16 favorites]


> I never saw a Correct The Record trooper positively confirmed in the wild through that whole election season. I did get accused of being one, though

They were fairly easy to spot because hundreds of them would pop up repeating identical talking points within a couple hours of each other. We didn't see much of that here, because we have really good human moderators, but they were all over the place on poorly moderated sites like Daily Kos.

Their main focus seemed to be trying to drive progressive and working-class Democrats out of the Party through constant harassment and telling them they were not welcome in the Party, and trying to discredit progressive policies. Their anti-progressive talking points were often very much at odds with Hilary Clinton's actual policy positions and track record.

I don't think there's any doubt about the existence Correct The Record's internet warriors. They publicly recruited volunteers and later bragged about their success. Coordinated attacks using the same talking points are easy to recognize. That doesn't mean they were paid internet warriors, though. I think they were mostly volunteers. This doesn't have any bearing on how we should feel about the Russian government engaging in similar tactics to support Trump. We need to think about how combat this type of thing, since it's going to a part of any political campaign that attracts a lot of attention, whether or not foreign actors are involved.
posted by nangar at 11:36 AM on December 17, 2016 [3 favorites]


I'm sure there'll be no shortage of books about the online astroturf wars in six months or so. In addition to the Russian troll factories and David Brooks's army of nerd virgins, I imagine there are a half-dozen other groups we don't already know about, really. It's new-normal.

Again, not admonishing Clinton or her campaign or her PACs for this, only saying we probably shouldn't pretend that only those other guys do it. It's like complaining that they take big-money donations from Wall Street: true, but makes no strategic sense. It's now very common and probably outright necessary, in an arms-race sort of way, to employ astroturfing trolls, robots and other trickery. You can't unilaterally disarm, or you lose.

Heck, just watching the internet the last couple of decades (and I remember the breakthrough when this weird web thing started up, not to mention the first time a video moved!), it definitely seems the number of real people has stayed about the same over the years, only to be drowned in a sea of new "users", bots and software-assisted agents. The actual people won't even be needed for much longer: I imagine it all ends with half of the robots arguing with the other half, forever.
posted by rokusan at 11:36 AM on December 17, 2016 [2 favorites]


In CTR's own words:
Lessons learned from online engagement with Bernie Bros during the Democratic Primary will be applied to the rest of the primary season and general electionresponding quickly and forcefully to negative attacks and false narratives. Additionally, as the general election approaches, the task force will begin to push out information to Sanders supporters online, encouraging them to support Hillary Clinton.

The task force currently combats online political harassment, having already addressed more than 5,000 individuals who have personally attacked Secretary Clinton on Twitter.
posted by Coventry at 11:39 AM on December 17, 2016 [2 favorites]


Their main focus seemed to be trying to drive progressive and working-class Democrats out of the Party through constant harassment and telling them they were not welcome in the Party, and trying to discredit progressive policies. Their anti-progressive talking points were often very much at odds with Hilary Clinton's actual policy positions and track record.

Can you cite some evidence for this claim and that it was Correct The Record? I'm not defending them, but it seems like the kind of thing that should have some evidence attached.
posted by zachlipton at 11:42 AM on December 17, 2016 [2 favorites]


Correct The Record wasn't even ran by Clinton.

Maybe not, but when it came to online astroturfing they thought they could coordinate.
SuperPACs aren’t supposed to coordinate with candidates. The whole reasoning behind (Supreme Court decision) Citizens United rests on (PACs) being independent, but Correct the Record claims it can coordinate,” Watson told The Daily Beast. “It’s not totally clear what their reasoning is, but it seems to be that material posted on the Internet for free—like, blogs—doesn’t count as an ‘independent expenditure.’”
posted by Coventry at 11:43 AM on December 17, 2016


That's kind of brilliant.

It's the same as how 'Trumpism' doesn't benefit all men, only Donald and his type.
posted by rokusan at 11:47 AM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


I don't know how I feel about that, because I do think that Ivanka is probably the only person who can influence Trump, and I don't think her policy ideas are nearly as horrible. So at this point, if it takes a princess to save us, I'm not going to complain that loud.
posted by corb at 11:48 AM on December 17, 2016 [3 favorites]


I also have a hard time hating on Ivanka yet, because she does seem to be the adult in the room a lot of the time -- and how funny is that? -- but it's soooo easy to imagine her upbringing leading us to our own let them eat cake moment, that I worry anytime she's near a microphone.
posted by rokusan at 11:51 AM on December 17, 2016


Ivanka's superpower is some how making people think she's not as bad as her dad and brothers.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 11:52 AM on December 17, 2016 [51 favorites]


What evidence has Ivanka offered that suggests she's going to lift a finger to save us? Aside from Sheryl Sanberg-level feminism, has she ever expressed an ideological commitment to anything, like, ever?
posted by tonycpsu at 11:54 AM on December 17, 2016 [12 favorites]


Probably true, Ray. Probably true. I suppose that'll make her the most dangerous in Act 3.
posted by rokusan at 11:54 AM on December 17, 2016


The US was founded on the assumption that there would be two major parties, roughly evenly matched, with no particular moral difference.

No, this is completely untrue. It was founded on the assumption there would be *no* parties and that we'd all be motivated to work together to perfect the union in line with enlightenment ideals.
posted by saulgoodman at 11:56 AM on December 17, 2016 [8 favorites]


What evidence has Ivanka offered that suggests she's going to lift a finger to save us? Aside from Sheryl Sanberg-level feminism, has she ever expressed an ideological commitment to anything, like, ever?

I say this not in defense of Ivanka, since I have little faith in her being all that different than the others of her family, but she is alleged to be the one who had Gore and, heh, DiCaprio meet with Trump on global warming issues, and has at least made some show of concern over LGBTQ and women's rights in some limited areas in addition to having been at least a nominal Democrat for a while, so I won't completely rule out some mitigating influence from her in some areas, which would be a plus, but as I say, I won't count on it either.
posted by gusottertrout at 12:00 PM on December 17, 2016 [4 favorites]


It was founded on the assumption there would be *no* parties and that we'd all be motivated to work together to perfect the union in line with enlightenment ideals.
Because land-owning white males were the only human beings capable of enlightenment ideals.
posted by oneswellfoop at 12:01 PM on December 17, 2016 [2 favorites]


My favorite line from the Sadie Doyle essay was, "The overall effect is both soothing and dystopian, like watching a ladies' yogurt ad directed by Leni Riefenstahl."
posted by ChuraChura at 12:02 PM on December 17, 2016 [31 favorites]


The US was founded on the assumption that there would be two major parties, roughly evenly matched

Dude, no. You may not enter Election Thread before seeing Hamilton.

It's like Rule One of Thread.
posted by rokusan at 12:02 PM on December 17, 2016 [9 favorites]


Ivanka doesn't even offer parental leave to her employees.

She steals designs from other companies.

She outsources manufacturing to China despite full-throated support of a campaign to bring manufacturing jobs to America.

You think she gives a shit about anyone but herself? Who are you going to believe, her or your lying eyes?
posted by Yowser at 12:03 PM on December 17, 2016 [47 favorites]


I like the disclosure at the end of the Elle article: The opinions expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect those of Hearst Magazines
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:05 PM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


You may not enter Election Thread before seeing Hamilton.

Speaking of privileges afforded largely* to wealthy white people....

Oh, you mean *listened* to Hamilton? Carry on, then.

* As with early suffrage, some exceptions apply.
posted by steady-state strawberry at 12:09 PM on December 17, 2016 [8 favorites]


Zadie Smith On Optimism and Despair: On November 10 The New York Times reported that nearly seven in ten Republicans prefer America as it was in the 1950s, a nostalgia of course entirely unavailable to a person like me, for in that period I could not vote, marry my husband, have my children, work in the university I work in, or live in my neighborhood. Time travel is a discretionary art: a pleasure trip for some and a horror story for others. Meanwhile some on the left have time travel fancies of their own, imagining that the same rigid ideological principles once applied to the matters of workers’ rights, welfare, and trade can be applied unchanged to a globalized world of fluid capital.
posted by TwoStride at 12:09 PM on December 17, 2016 [16 favorites]


Dude, no. You may not enter Election Thread before seeing Hamilton

That's expensive and thousands of miles away from many Mefites. Listening to the album is free, however.

Anyway, the nation was not founded on having a two party system, but it's a fairly inevitable consequence of the Constitution structure.
posted by zachlipton at 12:17 PM on December 17, 2016 [2 favorites]


I say this not in defense of Ivanka, since I have little faith in her being all that different than the others of her family, but she is alleged to be the one who had Gore and, heh, DiCaprio meet with Trump on global warming issues, and has at least made some show of concern over LGBTQ and women's rights

The cynic in me believes she is making a show of being a liberal woman because of her line of clothing and jewelry-- she doesn't want to taint her own brand.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 12:21 PM on December 17, 2016 [8 favorites]


I guess I am cranky today but I am perfectly capable of understanding, and sometimes contributing to, the election thread while only having listened to Hamilton once halfheartedly. I read the Federalist Papers long before Hamilton was a thing and am a little tired of treating a musical as some sort of standard for political discourse.
posted by ferret branca at 12:23 PM on December 17, 2016 [26 favorites]


nearly seven in ten Republicans prefer America as it was in the 1950s
This is highly tangential relative to Smith's moving and incisive commentary here, but I am frequently comforted these days by reminders such as this one that Republicans are old.
posted by marlys at 12:24 PM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


I guess I am cranky today but I am perfectly capable of understanding, and sometimes contributing to, the election thread while only having listened to Hamilton once halfheartedly. I read the Federalist Papers long before Hamilton was a thing and am a little tired of treating a musical as some sort of standard for political discourse.

I don't think that seeing Hamilton is any entry to discourse, but it has certainly opened a lot of discourse for many people who have never encountered the Federalist Papers before now, and many of those people are low-income kids of color. So it's not so easy to draw a line.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:26 PM on December 17, 2016 [5 favorites]


Fair enough, roomthreeseventeen. I don't deny that it's benefited many people tremendously, but I don't think that's the same thing as even jokingly saying that someone has to have seen it to participate in political conversation.
posted by ferret branca at 12:28 PM on December 17, 2016 [2 favorites]


You think she gives a shit about anyone but herself? Who are you going to believe, her or your lying eyes?

I don't have to believe anyone really. A question was asked, and I answered with the minimal evidence there is.

As far as I'm concerned, the best strategy for dealing with a Trump presidency is still to primarily focus on distrust between Trump and his advisers as Trump himself has claimed as a motto not to trust anyone, and he's shown no conviction at all about virtually any other ideals he's claimed on the campaign trail, constantly contradicting his own statements whenever it would look better to do so than to hold to them. (Other than perhaps in policy surrounding Putin, China, and Muslims.)

His campaign was indeed based on hate, so it isn't a suggestion to rest easy on any aspect, but the hate was largely pliable, able to be shifted to whatever target was most convenient. Which suggests he may be more susceptible to maneuvering that could create some distance between himself and his advisers if there was felt to be a choice between taking the pressure himself or putting it on a scapegoat within his administration. If the opposition can rile up people enough to focus on specific areas of discontent, Trump may be able to be moved in ways that facilitate discontent within the administration and within the planned dismantlement of our social welfare networks by GOP leadership.

If that can happen, which is a big if no doubt, then Trump would start to feel more isolated and the only people who he'll be able to completely rely on would be his family and particularly Ivanka and her husband. If those two show any moderating influence at all on the otherwise awful policies being discussed, then, it would be a win, if they don't go in that direction, fine, they too then ride with Trump as a part of his inner circle and will face whatever we and the actions of his presidency can show as harms to the US and world systems of government. The GOP won't stand with Trump and his family if things get ugly, so working to try and create divisions seems one of the best options going forward.

The Democrats need to oppose Trump on everything barring any miraculous positive efforts on global warming, civil rights or in the need for continuation of government function. Those are necessities that are continually needed, so for the protection of all they need to be defended any way they can. More likely, Trump won't offer any positive efforts in those areas, so in that case constant opposition would be the best plan.
posted by gusottertrout at 12:32 PM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


It's been commented on before, that this is an unusually close family. To the point of eating lunch together every day into their 30s.

Your "plan" is pure fabulousness.
posted by Yowser at 12:35 PM on December 17, 2016


To be fair, though, a basic study of American history reveals really quickly that no one has ever designed a political party a priori that then took off without some significant other factors happening. I had pretty decent US history teachers in high school, which was really not too long ago for me, and I was well aware of some of the interpersonal issues among the Founding Fathers. I.... don't think it's unreasonable to check stuff before making basic claims about why they chose to do certain things.

And I also think that it's not unreasonable to say "wow, that is not how politics/early US history works" in this discussion--particularly when we really have just had a wildly successful album/musical detailing the story of that history in a very accessible way. I'm pretty firmly of the belief that history is incredibly important to understanding where we are now, and US history in particular. If you're sort of hazy and confused about how US history has gone down, lemme know and I bet I can help find some good stuff tailored to your specific interests that will refresh things and put them in context.

(That's a general you, not a specific you. I enjoy American history and in particular civil rights history/the history of industrialization/queer history, but my family includes people who really have a huge hard-on for the Founding Fathers, among other things, and--oh, my point is just that I bet I can help think of some pretty good books about that stuff, if you need and want a refresher. Goodness knows I could use one myself; I had to fact-check that millions for defense quote right before I used it, because I needed to make sure the context hit the right notes no matter how much you knew about it going in. And that period of US history, encompassing the Federalist party's quick ascendence and even-faster collapse into ignominy, is not my wheelhouse.)
posted by sciatrix at 12:37 PM on December 17, 2016 [5 favorites]


You may not enter Election Thread before seeing Hamilton.

Speaking of privileges afforded largely* to wealthy white people.... Oh, you mean *listened* to Hamilton? Carry on, then.


Meh. Verb-ado, verb-atto.

There's no shortage of video out there, too, but sure, listening is also strongly encouraged. Basically find any way you wish to learn enough about Hamilton to remember that someone from France came along to resist him, and pissed him off until we had a two-party system.

(In other words, maybe you haven't met him yet, but you had the chance.)
posted by rokusan at 12:38 PM on December 17, 2016 [2 favorites]


I guess I am cranky today but I am perfectly capable of understanding, and sometimes contributing to, the election thread while only having listened to Hamilton once halfheartedly.

Just a joke, Ferret. I love you.
posted by rokusan at 12:40 PM on December 17, 2016 [4 favorites]


we're the peasant chorus members who watch, and serve, and sigh at her pretty hair. Hell, maybe we'll even pitch in some background vocals on a few of the big musical numbers. Peasants always do, in those movies, even though they're probably all starving.

This does not really happen in Disney Princess movies. The Disney princesses are a pretty progressive group, actually. I just watched Aladdin and had forgotten how awesomely feminist Jasmine is. She runs away from the castle and marries a peasant, in fact. Cinderella is herself a floor-scrubbing peasant, Belle is the daughter of the village eccentric, and Tiana is a waitress.

What I'm saying is, I know Disney Princesses. And Ivanka, you, madam, are no Disney Princess.

Okay, carry on.
posted by OnceUponATime at 12:41 PM on December 17, 2016 [14 favorites]


ugh maybe for context I should try and bring up more of those little pockets of US history here, like that fpp I did on the Mississippi Chinese a while back... we could talk about the Choctaw's donation to the Irish Famine, maybe, or Jane Addams and Hull House, or the St Patrick's Battalion, or....

....probably that should go to metatalk.
posted by sciatrix at 12:43 PM on December 17, 2016 [3 favorites]


Anyway, the nation was not founded on having a two party system, but it's a fairly inevitable consequence of the Constitution structure.
Ever since my 7th grade Civics class (the year of Nixon's first election, taught by an also-football-coach whose lectures were more like political pep talks, motivating me to seek out better sources of information), I have considered the election of a Cartoon Supervillain as President as a distinctly possible consequence if we didn't eliminate the Electoral College AND the Senate in favor of something actually small-d democratic (and since then, I considered the DC comics arc with President Lex Luthor not nearly extreme enough... I expected more of a Fake Wrestling Heel, and, well, it turns out I was right - the continued existence of Fake Wrestling as 'popular entertainment' is another sign of our societal moral bankruptcy, along with its direct offspring: Fake Reality TV).
posted by oneswellfoop at 12:44 PM on December 17, 2016 [4 favorites]


But basically, history's got all this delicious context for what's worked in resistance before, lessons about successful politics, and also things you can absolutely use as political arguments. As an Irish-American, for example, I wish I'd remembered about the Choctaw donation and been more effective at using it to remind other Irish-Americans about the debt we owe them, and about how we should maybe channel repaying some of that debt into repaying Standing Rock. That kind of thing.
posted by sciatrix at 12:45 PM on December 17, 2016 [10 favorites]


History lessons on surviving the present while also better-equipping your side to fight better in future battles would be very welcome and on-topic, sciatrix!
posted by rokusan at 12:58 PM on December 17, 2016 [5 favorites]


she is alleged to be the one who had Gore and, heh, DiCaprio meet with Trump on global warming issues,

She's the shiny object to distract us - oh look, Ivanka cares and will make him care- while Trump nominates someone who doesn't believe climate change is manmade. Which is exactly what happened.
posted by chris24 at 1:03 PM on December 17, 2016 [28 favorites]


Just got back from vacation. So! All that little "President" Trump mess sorted out yet? Who's getting sworn in?
posted by petebest at 1:05 PM on December 17, 2016 [5 favorites]


petebest, they're not pulling anything from the Sorting Hat until Monday... unfortunately the Sorting Hat looks like a red trucker's cap.
posted by oneswellfoop at 1:14 PM on December 17, 2016 [5 favorites]


Dude, no. You may not enter Election Thread before seeing Hamilton.

It's like Rule One of Thread.


Haven't seen it, read a few lyrics and listened to the first ten minutes of it then had the sudden urge to listen to some Eminem (sort of) instead and did that. So I've broken "Rule One of Thread". Still doing election thread posts, though.
posted by Wordshore at 1:17 PM on December 17, 2016 [9 favorites]


It's okay if you're a foreigner, Wordshore.
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 1:21 PM on December 17, 2016 [3 favorites]


chris24: She's the shiny object to distract us - oh look, Ivanka cares and will make him care- while Trump nominates someone who doesn't believe climate change is manmade. Which is exactly what happened.

We underestimate her at our own peril. I keep saying in these threads and I'll repeat it here - I think there's a good chance Ivanka runs in 2020. Autocrats like to keep power in the family, plus Donald will probably be sick of pretending to work by then, plus she'll have built up international relations "experience" by sitting in on meetings, plus Donald (and by extension his followers) will get to steal the prize of being the first female President from Hillary Clinton and give it to his favorite daughter. Look at how she's the one moving to DC, not her dad. Like the expensive item on a menu, Donald's brashness will serve to anchor her as the sane, calm one that held the country together (in the eyes of moderates and fence-sitters.) All packaged in the young, blonde good looks that Fox News viewers have been trained to see as the only acceptable way for a woman to look.
posted by bluecore at 1:23 PM on December 17, 2016 [36 favorites]


Justfor comparison, for a keepsake, and to keep those fires of indignation fuelled - here's another unpresidented thing that happened in July.

When everything implodes in an enormous inferno of burning shit, it'll be good to say "We chose someone like that. Your arguments are invalid".
posted by Devonian at 1:23 PM on December 17, 2016 [2 favorites]


We underestimate her at our own peril.

Oh I'm not underestimating. I think she's as evil as the rest. But being female and pretty lets her get away with it for many. My point wasn't to diminish her, but to highlight one destructive role she's currently playing.
posted by chris24 at 1:29 PM on December 17, 2016 [3 favorites]


It's okay if you're a foreigner, Wordshore.

Several of my American friends say I'm more American than them, which is utterly ridiculous and completely wrong.
posted by Wordshore at 1:29 PM on December 17, 2016 [9 favorites]


bluecore, I'm afraid that you're completely right.
posted by Too-Ticky at 1:32 PM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


It comes to something when you can't work out whether the director of the FBI was just working on behalf of a presidential candidate or taking his orders straight from the Kremlin.
posted by Grangousier at 1:32 PM on December 17, 2016 [7 favorites]


zachlipton: China has agreed to return the drone. I assume Trump will claim credit on account of his unpresidented tweet?

Aaaaand they did:

Jason Miller [Trump's spokeperson]
@realdonaldtrump gets it done: "China says it will return US drone it seized


Christ, these dipshits.
posted by bluecore at 1:33 PM on December 17, 2016 [7 favorites]


It's okay if you're a foreigner, Wordshore.

Oh, good. That's my excuse.
posted by Coventry at 1:36 PM on December 17, 2016


No doubt the Obama administration got our drone back, but there definitely has to be some Chinese officials who saw the "unpresidented" tweet and felt incredibly embarrassed for us.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 1:38 PM on December 17, 2016 [19 favorites]


localhuman: “None of us deserves what’s coming”
This piece was excellent. Thank you, localhuman. I don't fear that I won't survive what is to come, but rather that I'll blanch when the time comes and not face the firing squad with dignity.
posted by ob1quixote at 1:40 PM on December 17, 2016 [2 favorites]


"Heh, sorry, we thought this was our drone being pulled behind your ship."
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 1:41 PM on December 17, 2016


"But our drone has a racing stripe! Easy mistake."
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 1:46 PM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


“War Culture, Militarism and Racist Violence Under Trump,” Henry Giroux, Truthout, 14 December 2016
posted by ob1quixote at 1:48 PM on December 17, 2016 [4 favorites]


What I'm saying is, I know Disney Princesses. And Ivanka, you, madam, are no Disney Princess.

posted by OnceUponATime at 12:41 PM on December 17 [8 favorites +] [!]


Eponysterical.
posted by TwoStride at 1:48 PM on December 17, 2016 [11 favorites]


It's okay if you're a foreigner, Wordshore.

For now.
posted by rokusan at 1:52 PM on December 17, 2016 [2 favorites]


It's okay if you're a foreigner, Wordshore.
For now.


For US.
posted by oneswellfoop at 1:55 PM on December 17, 2016


This does not really happen in Disney Princess movies. The Disney princesses are a pretty progressive group, actually. I just watched Aladdin and had forgotten how awesomely feminist Jasmine is.

Middle of the pack, by most measures.

Many such lists exist, though I expect most need to be updated drastically for Moana, who must be the new number one, right? I mean, forget Bechdel, the Moana movie doesn't even have a romantic subplot. I was impressed.

BBC, bless them, wonders out loud what a Disney princess will look like post-Moana, and post-Trump.
posted by rokusan at 2:00 PM on December 17, 2016 [4 favorites]


Because land-owning white males were the only human beings capable of enlightenment ideals.

Well, sure, I didn't say the founders weren't deluded hypocrites, but if you read their letters to each other, it's obvious they really did believe they were trying to build a system in accordance with those ideals. They were just as deluded by the cultural background of their time as anyone is. Point is, it wasn't engineered to be an adversarial system, as it's broadly perceived today. They at least honestly seemed to believe debating and using rational argument would lead to the best ideas about policy. And there was the idea the goal of the process was to collaboratively figure out the best policies, not just fighting endlessly for control of the steering wheel.
posted by saulgoodman at 2:01 PM on December 17, 2016 [6 favorites]




Bernie, who's PR company ran and populated his subreddit.

Where can I read more about Bernie's PR company and the campaign they put together for him?


I assume the reference was to Revolution Messaging which was formed by former Obama For America folks in 2009, without at the time any connection to Sanders as far as I know, but was central to the Sanders campaign.
posted by dis_integration at 2:20 PM on December 17, 2016 [3 favorites]


“I will never forget the people who turned their backs on me when all I was trying to do was help the black community." -- Omarosa Manigault

Well, she's got the whole Enemies List thing figured out already.
posted by rokusan at 2:26 PM on December 17, 2016 [3 favorites]


That full quote should say "“I will never forget the people who turned their backs on me when all I was trying to do was help the black community by deciding everything for them."

The Black Woman Bitch was always a phony stereotype... but The Apprentice always cast its "contestants" with phony stereotypes... it was a conscious (and slightly desperate) attempt to make The Donald look more like a Real Person.
posted by oneswellfoop at 2:38 PM on December 17, 2016 [2 favorites]


CSPAN scheduling on Twitter ... has been delivering interesting juxtapositions today.

1-*President-Elect Donald Trump Victory Ral.. | 2-[The Word Detective] | 3-Protecting America's Historical Documents

1-*President-Elect Donald Trump Victory .. | 2-[Thank You for Being Late] | 3-[When General Grant Expelled the Jews]

1-U.S.-Afghanistan Relations in the Trump Administration | 2-Alcuin Books | 3-[The World at War]

1-Trump Administration National Security a.. | 2-After Words with Steve Coll | 3-American Resistance in Nazi Germany

1-Homeland Security Policy | 2-[Troubled Refuge] | 3-The FBI and a Nazi Spy Ring

1-*Open Phones | 2-Presidential Transition | 3-Physician Assisted Deaths

posted by phoque at 2:44 PM on December 17, 2016 [14 favorites]


ariel dorfman drawing the obvious parallels (spanish language).
posted by andrewcooke at 3:03 PM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


And there was the idea the goal of the process was to collaboratively figure out the best policies, not just fighting endlessly for control of the steering wheel.

Right, and this was an idea that took root among a narrow colonial elite which had broadly similar cultural perspectives and a shared class interest (although they of course wouldn't have articulated things in that way).

I'm going to go ahead and retrospectively diagnose at least Thomas Jefferson and Ben Franklin with an early variant of Engineer's Disease. Visionaries for their time, to be sure: but the founders set up a system that's shown itself to be unwieldy, and loaded with racist and classist assumptions. They basically adopted a progressive version of 18th-century Whig political ideals, replacing the hereditary monarch with an elected, term-limited president -- which is not too bad for the time -- but in their hubris they so set the system in stone that there has to be a violent upheaval (1860-1876) or a major judicial reinterpretation (1933-1938; 1954-1968) of the Constitution to achieve democratic reform.
posted by tivalasvegas at 3:11 PM on December 17, 2016 [5 favorites]


What I mean is: rational argument is great, but it assumes equal standing among genders, classes and races. And it's easy for wealthy straight white male elites to set up a system where their voices get amplified and everyone else's is hushed or silenced.

That is the America which the Founding Fathers gave to us.
posted by tivalasvegas at 3:17 PM on December 17, 2016 [10 favorites]


ariel dorfman drawing the obvious parallels (spanish language).

The English version is at: Now, America, You Know How Chileans Felt.

Interestingly, it's a pretty close translation, but not super-exact in some places, though that may be a product of one version having gone through a different editing process. For example, the final paragraph of the Spanish version invokes the country of Lincoln, while the English one does not:
If ever there was a time for America to look at itself in the mirror, if ever there was a time of reckoning and accountability, it is now.

¿Qué mejor ocasión para que América se mire en el espejo, qué mejor momento que este para que el país de Abraham Lincoln enfrente su propia y auténtica responsabilidad?
posted by zachlipton at 3:21 PM on December 17, 2016 [3 favorites]


Holy fuck, Trump, at his Florida event, just said 'Evan McMuffin.'

He's now been downgraded back to "that guy" status.

And Josh Marshall responds: "Lord, thin skin is like the thermal exhaust port of the Trump Death Star"
posted by zachlipton at 3:23 PM on December 17, 2016 [12 favorites]


@frankrichny
By holding back RNC emails, Putin didn't just help install Trump in White House but has means to blackmail GOP to do his bidding post-1/20.
posted by chris24 at 3:29 PM on December 17, 2016 [11 favorites]


Ironically, a year or so ago, the notion that foreign powers had nearly-free access to Clinton's private State Dept e-mail server led a lot of people to suggest that those powers were holding near-unlimited potential to blackmail her later, should she win office. Assuming they contained more than risotto or yoga-related info, anyway.

Now it's the RNC info that will be used to blackmail Trump's office.

Sun comes up; world still spins.
posted by rokusan at 3:39 PM on December 17, 2016 [4 favorites]


I get all that, tivalasvegas, and agree, but my point is there's this misconception that's taken hold that our system has always been about competition. The Randians helped spread a lot of misinformation during the Cold War as an inoculation against the spread of communist sentiment in the U.S. and that was one of their main lines of BS. In reality, we started out with a schism between those elites who embraced a more egalitarian democratic vision and viewed the French Revolution and peasant uprisings elsewhere as a sort of natural progression from their own revolutionary cause versus a sort of counter-revolutionary movement that was too horrified by the thought of peasants killing elites to go along with that. America's was the model for the other socialist revolutions around the world, but started dividing early into factions over how far to go in the direction of democracy and egalitarianism. So really, we've always had this split in our national character.
posted by saulgoodman at 3:43 PM on December 17, 2016 [2 favorites]


I agree with you that they weren't envisioning a partisan system -- but that goes to the deeper critique of engineer's disease-ism: not only did they not think that the legislature would become dominated by factions, they couldn't envision the possibility of class warfare happening in the US because they couldn't even conceive of the underclasses of North America (i.e., blacks and Native Americans) having the political power to rebel against them.

Sure, Thomas Jefferson was pro-French and committed to Republican ideals -- but that's because he saw himself as a leader of the revolution against the elites, not as a local elite himself.

My intuition is that it's anachronistic to call the Revolutionary-era leaders of the US as anything like a proto-socialist movement. Certainly they were aware of the tension between 'republicanism' and egalitarian 'democracy', but I think they came down pretty solidly on the side of 'republicanism' -- and even their conception of democracy, of course, was highly exclusionary at best. The sublime tragedy of the soaring prose of the American founding documents: "we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal"-- is that they speak far louder than the man who put quill to parchment imagined.
posted by tivalasvegas at 4:05 PM on December 17, 2016 [4 favorites]


Josh Marshall responds: "Lord, thin skin is like the thermal exhaust port of the Trump Death Star"

Spoilers, people! SPOILERS!
posted by rokusan at 4:13 PM on December 17, 2016 [2 favorites]


Mod note: I can't believe I'm saying this, but enough with the Hamilton derail.
posted by Eyebrows McGee (staff) at 4:15 PM on December 17, 2016 [19 favorites]


Spoilers, people! SPOILERS!

Dude, Lord Vader and the Chocolate Factory came out in 1977. Everyone knows how it ends.
posted by Bringer Tom at 4:16 PM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


(Talk less?)
posted by rokusan at 4:16 PM on December 17, 2016 [5 favorites]


Dude, Lord Vader and the Chocolate Factory came out in 1977. Everyone knows how it ends.

Yeah, but then they re-released it and changed a key scene so an Oompa Loompa shoots first instead, and all the fans have been arguing about it ever since.
posted by zachlipton at 4:23 PM on December 17, 2016 [4 favorites]


He's now been downgraded back to "that guy" status.

@Evan_McMullin Retweeted Sopan Deb
Come now, Donald. Every madman needs a nemesis. Someday we'll laugh about this. @realDonaldTrump
posted by chris24 at 4:35 PM on December 17, 2016 [18 favorites]




but then they re-released it and changed a key scene so an Oompa Loompa shoots first instead

IF THERE IS A HELL George Lucas will spend it on the top floor of the San Francisco Armory watching the Oompa Loompa shoot Harrison Ford over and over with his eyelids taped open like Malcolm McDowell's in A Clockwork Orange while Peter Ackworth's people do, well, that stuff they do around him.
posted by Bringer Tom at 4:50 PM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


That article seems to be a month old, EarBucket.
posted by a box and a stick and a string and a bear at 4:54 PM on December 17, 2016


Doesn't make it wrong.
posted by porpoise at 4:56 PM on December 17, 2016 [5 favorites]


We should tell China that we don't want the drone they stole back.- let them keep it! -@realDonaldTrump

Seriously, WTF?
posted by Gaz Errant at 5:02 PM on December 17, 2016 [9 favorites]


the deeper critique of engineer's disease-ism: not only did they not think that the legislature would become dominated by factions, they couldn't envision the possibility of class warfare happening in the US because they couldn't even conceive of the underclasses of North America (i.e., blacks and Native Americans) having the political power to rebel against them

I don't want to continue the derail, but I would be curious to read more about this critique.
posted by Coventry at 5:02 PM on December 17, 2016


It's not wrong, porpoise, but I wasn't suggesting that it was. What I was suggesting is that it's not noteworthy in any meaningful fashion.
posted by a box and a stick and a string and a bear at 5:04 PM on December 17, 2016


Seriously, WTF?

Petulant toddler is petulant.
posted by Talez at 5:04 PM on December 17, 2016 [5 favorites]


>He basically just dodged the Comey question. Pathetic.

What else could he say but "Sorry. I fucked up. I knew he was a Republican but I trusted him anyway."
Obama should have listened to Trump's parable. He knew Comey was a snake when he brought him in.

>He [Obama] doesn't put faith in the Republicans, he puts it in the American people.

He put his faith in Republican Comey and look where it got him. Trump is going to be President and Obamacare is going to disappear.

What the last eight years should have taught Obama is that there is no such thing as reasonable, moderate Republicans. They will all stab you in the back at the first opportunity. Obama made the mistake of thinking that Comey would put country above party, but he should have known that Republicans make no such distinction. To them, what is good for the party is good for the country.
posted by JackFlash at 5:05 PM on December 17, 2016 [24 favorites]


We should tell China that we don't want the drone they stole back.- let them keep it!

I'm not sure what's worse, the completely incoherent diplomatic strategy or the hyphen immediately following the period
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 5:12 PM on December 17, 2016 [26 favorites]


Every “Unified Republican Government” Ever Has Led to a Financial Crash

And the three worst in US history. The Panic of 1907, the Great Depression and the Great Recession.
posted by chris24 at 5:13 PM on December 17, 2016 [43 favorites]


> And Josh Marshall responds: "Lord, thin skin is like the thermal exhaust port of the Trump Death Star"

Perfect.
posted by homunculus at 5:16 PM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


He apparently wrote the tweet in the car on his way back to Mar-a-Lago, which in a sane world ought to shut up everybody who thinks he has some great master plan and is getting all kinds of good advice instead of publicly posting random ramblings to the leaders of nuclear-armed nations.
posted by zachlipton at 5:25 PM on December 17, 2016 [12 favorites]


White men in the rust-belt have been dying in droves, in numbers not seen since the early days of Aids. And not the kinds of white men certain segments of left-leaning voters would prefer to die. The ones who voted for Obama by double digits were absent.

I'm not sure what alternate universe you are from but they've been absent for a long time. Obama lost the white male vote by 27 points in 2012. White men haven't voted majority for Democrats since the Civil Rights Act in the 1960s. They picked their side a long time ago. You aren't going to win them over by pandering to their prejudices.
posted by JackFlash at 5:33 PM on December 17, 2016 [13 favorites]


Here's a thought. Someday Trump will figure out how to do Twitter polls
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 5:35 PM on December 17, 2016 [4 favorites]


About those white men and what they want and why. Not saying it's necessarily right, just an interesting point.
posted by dilettante at 5:39 PM on December 17, 2016 [3 favorites]


White men haven't voted majority for Democrats since the Civil Rights Act in the 1960s. They picked their side a long time ago. You aren't going to win them over by pandering to their prejudices.

White male in the South here. For the record, we did not vote for Trump, we voted Clinton if I'm representative. But then, I've acknowledged having mental illness, a formerly fluid sexual identity, and an addiction in public, so I'm probably more of what the alt-Right would call a "degenerate."
posted by saulgoodman at 5:48 PM on December 17, 2016 [10 favorites]


Re: Keep it

@ChuBailiang:
Go back to the U.S. EP-3 spy plane standoff with China in 2001, imagine it happens again, and factor in this kind of rhetoric.
posted by chris24 at 5:50 PM on December 17, 2016 [4 favorites]


Just finished watching The Mask with Jim Carrey. Maybe it's because every villain reminds me of Trump lately, but I was wondering whether Dorian Tyrell was based on Trump. Same initials, ran a casino, big league ego. Mike Werb, the screenplay writer seems to still be in the biz if someone can contact him for comment.

Dorian Tyrell plus the mask equals Donald Trump plus the presidency.

Looking things up, I found this villain was created for the '94 movie, so he was not from the comic book. Here's something that compares Tyrell to Rick Perry.

I read Biff from Back to the Future was based on Trump, so it's not unprecedented.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 6:00 PM on December 17, 2016 [3 favorites]


There was a weird conspiracy-theory narrative on /r/the_donald yesterday about the 2001 spy plane, the airborne drone stolen by Iran, and the submarine drone the Chinese just took all having been given up as some kind of self-destructive reverse espionage.
posted by Coventry at 6:03 PM on December 17, 2016


@ChuBailiang:
Go back to the U.S. EP-3 spy plane standoff with China in 2001, imagine it happens again, and factor in this kind of rhetoric.
Jesus Christ. The Chinese ambassador could not be recalled fast enough.
posted by Talez at 6:04 PM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


White male in the South here. For the record, we did not vote for Trump, we voted Clinton if I'm representative.

Unfortunately you aren't representative, hence the reason I used the word majority in the comment above. The trend has been steady -- Democrats lost white men by 20% in 2008, then 27% in 2012 and then 32% in 2016. In fact there is no other single demographic more solidly Republican except for white evangelicals.
posted by JackFlash at 6:07 PM on December 17, 2016 [9 favorites]


And Josh Marshall responds: "Lord, thin skin is like the thermal exhaust port of the Trump Death Star"
comic relief
posted by j_curiouser at 6:14 PM on December 17, 2016


I keep thinking about this. I think the problem is not, as some Democrats would have it, "Republicans are evil," so much it is "Republicans are convinced that Democrats are evil."

They think all their desperate measures (North Carolina, Supreme Court, etc) are justified because we are evil. They think they are doing what is necessary to save their country from baby-killing, Christian-hating, orgy-having, one-world-government-planning villains, sneering from our ivory towers as we sip our lattes and plan how to steal the money of hard earned small business owner and give it to immigrants to buy their votes so that we elites can stay in power.

I mean, that sounds like a parody, but I know a lot of people who would agree with all of those descriptions with a straight face.

Because they think we're evil, they'll do anything to stop us. Because they think we're evil, they'll vote for whoever promises to oppose us in the strongest terms and refuses to come to any accommodation with us... Which would, again, be an accommodation with evil, in their minds. This is how Trump won, by using those strongest terms. This is why even the "sane" Republicans can't be seen to compromise, lest they lose their seats.

Because they think we're evil, they'll believe any terrible story they hear about us, which makes them very susceptible to fake news.

And of course many Democrats think all Republicans are evil too (especially now, in the age of Trump. 'Cause he really is evil, and they elected him to be their evil bastard -- though he's not. Theirs I mean.)

But in general and up until now, I'd say there's a lot more benefit of the doubt given by Democrats to Republicans. A lot more assumption of good faith. But that's not rewarded, because they think we're evil and they'll do ANYTHING to stop us.

How can we make them believe that we sincerely disagree, but we don't hate them or sneer at them, and we don't hate Christians or babies or stay at home moms or America? What will it take for them to believe us that we share the same goals as them (a prosperous and peaceful country) and just disagree on the best means for achieving that, so that we can debate policy again instead of just calling each other names? (Their policy repertoire has become so impoverished by this whole "If a Democrat is for it, it must be evil" paradigm. Every time we suggest an approach to solving our problems it comes off the list of acceptable approaches for Republicans. We should start suggesting terrible ideas just so they'll say "NUH UH" and do the opposite instead.)

How did this happen? I mean, I know... Phyllis Schafly and Barry Goldwater and Lee Atwater and the Southern Strategy and Reagan's "Welfare Queens" and Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh and Fox News and fake news.

And all Fred Clark's stuff about political "fantasy role playing" and how satisfying it is to defeat the "satanic baby killers" and good Jackie and all that.

And Ta Nahesi Coates and how "white" became an identity because it was a passport out of the lowest class...

And how abortion replaced segregation as the unifying issue for white people because it allowed them to feel they had regained the moral high ground.

And Jonathan Haidt and the differing moral "tastebuds" that attract people to conservatism (a taste for "authority" and "sanctity" and "in-group loyalty")... And about the Just World Fallacy.

Actually, I feel like I know a lot about how it happened. Because I've been kind of obsessed with trying to understand it ever since I wrenchingly abandoned both my faith and my Republican politics as a young adult, leaving my whole family behind in that world, mourning for me.

I guess my question isn't really "How did this happen..." I guess it's "how can we fix it?" How can we "humanize ourselves" as Corb said? How can we convince them we're not devils when they don't believe anything we say, because devils lie?

Democracy cannot work without some basic assumption of good faith on both sides. We can't deliberate and then accept the decision of the majority without that. But Republicans grant us NO benefit of the doubt, NO assumption of good faith, EVER. Whatever we say is instantly assumed to be false because we are the ones who said it, so what can we possibly say that will matter?

Is there any way out of this trap? I'm starting to, depressingly, believe that there is nothing we as Democrats can do about it... except try very hard not to get caught sneering. But that won't fix it, it just won't make it worse. Is there anything that will?
posted by OnceUponATime at 6:16 PM on December 17, 2016 [94 favorites]


The article which discusses every Republican controlled Congress/President for four years leading to a major recession or depression says that the Republicans were in control two years in 1953 to 1955. Not really. The Republicans had control 48 to 47 with one independent at the start of 1953. The next two years included nine deaths, one resignation and several reversals.

Following Morse's defection [to Independent], Republicans had a 48–47 majority; the deaths of nine other senators, and the resignation of another, caused many reversals in control of the Senate during that session. [Wikipedia]
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 6:28 PM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


About those white men and what they want and why. Not saying it's necessarily right, just an interesting point.

That author may have spent too long talking to Trump supporters online, and not enough time talking to them in real life. You see that kind of mentality a lot on, say, /r/the_donald, but not in people you meet canvassing.
posted by Coventry at 6:31 PM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


WaPo: In the Chappaqua woods, a search for Hillary Clinton. Come for the last two sentences.
posted by zachlipton at 6:36 PM on December 17, 2016 [4 favorites]


That author may have spent too long talking to Trump supporters online, and not enough time talking to them in real life.

This whole election year, I've noticed the gaping differences between between online versions of all camps, and people who subscribe to the same camps in the actual world.

I can think of experiences among camps Republican, Trumpian, Clinton-Democrat, Sanders-Democrat, Green, and Libertarian. The online voices of each group were so different in both number and tenor than what I encountered in regular life. (In almost every case, the online versions were so much more rude and just generally worse, too.)

I don't know what this means. But it wasn't limited to any party or faction, in my experience.
posted by rokusan at 6:42 PM on December 17, 2016 [7 favorites]


The women carried on deeper into the woods, bending back twigs, heading up a slope they called “Secret Service Hill” after a time years ago when the path was frozen and they had helped the Clintons’ agents, who were wearing loafers, navigate the incline.

Sounds like the USSS needs to spend a little more time in the Winter Boots Thread.
posted by rokusan at 6:47 PM on December 17, 2016 [2 favorites]


I'm not sure what alternate universe you are from but they've been absent for a long time. Obama lost the white male vote by 27 points in 2012. White men haven't voted majority for Democrats since the Civil Rights Act in the 1960s. They picked their side a long time ago. You aren't going to win them over by pandering to their prejudices

I don't think he meant to imply that a majority of white men voted for Obama nationally - he meant to imply that some of those votes, in places of electoral significance, are gettable. And not just through Trump-alike racial pandering.
posted by atoxyl at 6:48 PM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


In Hell’s Angels Hunter S Thompson wrote about left-behind people motivated only by “an ethic of total retaliation.” Sound familiar?
posted by adamvasco at 6:49 PM on December 17, 2016 [7 favorites]


(Also that the system is set up so that some of them have to be gotten to win.)
posted by atoxyl at 6:49 PM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


Obligatory: Greater Internet Fuckwad Theory
posted by petebest at 6:52 PM on December 17, 2016 [3 favorites]


the deeper critique of engineer's disease-ism: not only did they not think that the legislature would become dominated by factions, they couldn't envision the possibility of class warfare happening in the US because they couldn't even conceive of the underclasses of North America (i.e., blacks and Native Americans) having the political power to rebel against them
I don't want to continue the derail, but I would be curious to read more about this critique.

I meant that it's interesting to me that people like Thomas Jefferson seem to have seen themselves as Republican allies of the French revolutionaries -- while there are of course ideological connections, it seems to me (not an expert in this era by any means) that the French Revolution was much more genuinely a modern, ideological and class-driven civil war than the American Revolution, which I understand as essentially a war between the local colonial elites and the metropolitan (British) government.

Even by the late 18th century, as I understand it, class difference had been mapped onto race in British North America so that the structure of American society was quite different to European society -- and so although there wasn't a strong tradition of hereditary nobility here, in another way people like Thomas Jefferson and George Washington were feudal lords of vast estates who controlled the bodies of the people who provided their labor: hardly the kind of people one would expect to support a revolutionary, anti-feudal state. But they were able to make this move because they rendered their black and native serfs politically 'invisible'.

To re-rail, my point is that from the very beginning, American political culture has cloaked a feudalist body with republican clothing, and the Emperor's clothes are (once again) coming off.
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:08 PM on December 17, 2016 [12 favorites]


He never learned the lesson that was obvious from the beginning. Republicans don't believe in democracy.

The way I've come to think of it is, Democrats are interested in governance, and Republicans are interested in power.
posted by krinklyfig at 7:12 PM on December 17, 2016 [28 favorites]


Democrats are interested in governance

Completely agree with that. And it's an almost fatal flaw in the years when they're in the minority. Wanting to govern leads to terrible compromises and playing the game badly. As opposed to the naked demand for dominance, which leads to Republicans being fine with getting 0% of their goals, when they're in the minority, so long as they can block everything.
posted by honestcoyote at 7:19 PM on December 17, 2016 [14 favorites]


WaPo: In the Chappaqua woods, a search for Hillary Clinton. Come for the last two sentences.

That article keeps using the word Chappaquaian when everyone knows it's Chappaquack.
posted by maggiemaggie at 7:21 PM on December 17, 2016 [2 favorites]


I think the Founding generation would probably be astounded that so little change has been made to American governance, and that the model of their republic is used as a platonic ideal that prevents necessary changes being made through a sort of originalist fetish.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 7:24 PM on December 17, 2016 [45 favorites]


I just came across this quote from Truman's memoirs:
It was perfectly clear to us that if we told the Japanese to lay down their arms immediately and march to the seaboard, the entire country would be taken over by the Communists. We therefore had to take the unusual step of using the enemy as a garrison until we could airlift Chinese National troops to South China and send [U.S.] Marines to guard the seaports.
So not only did we directly intervene in the Chinese Civil War, we actually used the Imperial Japanese troops who had been invading and occupying the country for the preceding decade and a half and testing out biological and chemical weapons on the population and all sorts of other stuff, to carry out that intervention.

And then we granted the guy who coordinated the weapons testing on the populace an immunity from prosecution at the Tokyo war crimes tribunals so our military could bring him to the U.S. and benefit from the expertise he'd gained. And when our side didn't win the war in China we leveraged our military power and nuclear threat to set up Taiwan as a consolation prize for the Nationalists.

Somebody more conversant in 20th-century Chinese history or geopolitics can perhaps correct me, but it seems to me that a key function of the One China Policy is to allow the PRC the doublethink to pretend that the civil war ended in the last century, when in fact the war is simply paused like on the Korean peninsula. I mean, all of the oldest people in China were actually around for these events.

Trump appears to be doing exactly what you'd do if you wanted to re-ignite the Chinese Civil War, which we were already on the losing side of, except that the imminent victors now literally have a thousand times the GDP from the point when we hit pause. And also nuclear weapons.

If he's tired of winning he has definitely picked the right geopolitical circumstance to poke with a stick.
posted by XMLicious at 7:25 PM on December 17, 2016 [12 favorites]


So not only did we directly intervene in the Chinese Civil War, we actually used the Imperial Japanese troops who had been invading and occupying the country for the preceding decade and a half and testing out biological and chemical weapons on the population and all sorts of other stuff, to carry out that intervention.

The same thing was done throughout Asia. There are examples of Western military forces cooperating with Japanese soldiers in combating the Viet Minh in the immediate aftermath of the war.

Operation Beleaguer
Operation Masterdom
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 7:37 PM on December 17, 2016 [5 favorites]


None of which is relevant to anything here, but is just nifty I guess
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 7:42 PM on December 17, 2016


Trump appears to be doing exactly what you'd do if you wanted to re-ignite the Chinese Civil War, which we were already on the losing side of, except that the imminent victors now literally have a thousand times the GDP from the point when we hit pause. And also nuclear weapons.

If he's tired of winning he has definitely picked the right geopolitical circumstance to poke with a stick.


Except that on this issue (as on many foreign policy issues), he's just a dumbass who inherited a lot of money, fell into the Oval Office due to a series of highly unfortunate events, and then had someone wind him up and set him tottering in the direction of the Strait of Taiwan.

This is not normal, this is not okay.
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:44 PM on December 17, 2016 [13 favorites]


he's just a dumbass who inherited a lot of money, fell into the Oval Office due to a series of highly unfortunate events, and then had someone wind him up and set him tottering in the direction of the Strait of Taiwan.

What if you got a coked up Orangutan and put them in the driver seat of a bus
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 7:50 PM on December 17, 2016 [12 favorites]


Can someone explain that Chappaqua Quaker sign to me? What are those figures... doing?
posted by rokusan at 7:59 PM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


Even by the late 18th century, as I understand it, class difference had been mapped onto race in British North America so that the structure of American society was quite different to European society

Oh, this is really complicated, but yes, sort of. Think of the Glorious Revolution as a triumph of Whiggism: mercantile interests, newish money, social mobility (within a very very narrow range). A vulgar but not that inaccurate way to assess the British Americans who rebel is that cheap land and slavery lets them think like Whigs but live like old Tories. (Hence the barbed attack of Samuel Johnson's "Taxation No Tyranny", which in passing blames "European intelligence" -- the French -- for inciting the rebellion.)
posted by holgate at 8:14 PM on December 17, 2016 [4 favorites]


I don't get the Trump as role model thing. Even if I ignore the politics somehow, he's too fake, too rude, has awful taste and style, complains too much...

Then again, I am a failure as a straight white male.
posted by rokusan at 8:20 PM on December 17, 2016 [2 favorites]


He's a role model for arseholes. And there are a lot of arseholes among us.
posted by holgate at 8:26 PM on December 17, 2016 [4 favorites]


Trump SNL tweet incoming
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 8:36 PM on December 17, 2016 [2 favorites]


Trump SNL tweet incoming

Alec Baldwin is starring in a movie called "The Boss Baby" this spring, as the CGI baby. It looks terrible (to be fair, I assume that I am not the target audience), but I hope they have him host SNL to promote it, just so they can do a Trump-as-baby mashup sketch.
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 8:39 PM on December 17, 2016 [5 favorites]


Kellyanne Conway deletes tweet: "More hyper-partisan trolls coming out to play on twitter. I can't wait for you bitches to get over it."
posted by T.D. Strange at 8:54 PM on December 17, 2016 [7 favorites]


That Last Xmas with Obama song was goooood.
posted by ian1977 at 8:55 PM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


Kellyanne Conway deletes tweet:

The amount of projection is fucking astounding with these people. What 'triggered' her to post that? How quickly was it deleted? Lol.
posted by futz at 9:13 PM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


Kellyanne Conway deletes tweet: "More hyper-partisan trolls coming out to play on twitter. I can't wait for you bitches to get over it."

Is there any evidence that's real? It's super easy to fake a tweet now.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 9:16 PM on December 17, 2016 [2 favorites]


That was my next question. Real or fake? Because that is out of character for her character.
posted by futz at 9:18 PM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


We should tell China that we don't want the drone they stole back.- let them keep it! -@realDonaldTrump

Seriously, WTF?


On a lighter note, after browsing his twitter thanks to your comment above, it occurred to me that rump needs a specific URL shortener

big.ly
posted by sylvanshine at 9:18 PM on December 17, 2016 [9 favorites]


I'd never thought about how that saying that "the power in the relationship goes to whoever cares less" really applies here. The republicans just don't care about shutting down the government, about a possible Manchurian candidate and therefore get whatever they want.
posted by Brainy at 9:21 PM on December 17, 2016 [16 favorites]




Re Conway's odd tweet, she is claiming it was a fake tweet: Conway. I can't tell, but as others have said, it's becoming fairly easy to fake one, even with the verified symbol, for the purposes of posting on the internet. Shrug.
posted by Silverstone at 9:25 PM on December 17, 2016


Make her deny it.
posted by holgate at 9:34 PM on December 17, 2016 [10 favorites]


Washington Post has created a Chrome extension that adds commentary to Trump's tweets: Now you can fact-check Trump’s tweets — in the tweets themselves.
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 9:38 PM on December 17, 2016 [8 favorites]


Unfortunately Johnny Wallflower, no one who needs extension will ever install it. It's a nice idea with no legs in this political climate.

Although, if I had trumpski supporters in reach over the holidays I might be inclined to install the extension on the DL...maybe. Also a huge swath of people never even peek at twitter and could give a shit about it at all beyond reading a headline about a twitter comment. SAD but true.
posted by futz at 9:53 PM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


Nobody reads the failing Twitter anyway! No credibility! Sad! #ThankYouTwitter
posted by rokusan at 9:59 PM on December 17, 2016


@DepressedDarth:
We should tell the Rebel Alliance that we don't want the Death Star plans they stole back.- let them keep them!
posted by chris24 at 9:59 PM on December 17, 2016 [5 favorites]


"In Hell’s Angels Hunter S Thompson wrote about left-behind people motivated only by “an ethic of total retaliation.”

Misread as left-handed people. Everything seemed extra-sinister for a moment there.
posted by rokusan at 10:01 PM on December 17, 2016 [19 favorites]


@realDonaldTrump: Are we talking about the same cyberattack where it was revealed that head of the DNC illegally gave Hillary the questions to the debate?

That's way too pointed to be Trump. Who's manning his Twitter today?
posted by rokusan at 10:07 PM on December 17, 2016


rokusan: Misread as left-handed people. Everything seemed extra-sinister for a moment there.

ಠ_ಠ
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 10:09 PM on December 17, 2016 [9 favorites]


That's way too pointed to be Trump.

It came from his phone, but you're right—it's much more coherent than usual.
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 10:14 PM on December 17, 2016 [1 favorite]


Two days until Trump officially becomes the President-Elect. It's not too late for Giant Meteor to make a surprise comeback victory.
posted by Justinian at 11:57 PM on December 17, 2016 [13 favorites]


I've heard that State are pulling for Giant Meteor as it's less likely to directly insult other countries.
posted by jaduncan at 12:22 AM on December 18, 2016 [4 favorites]


I laugh, because otherwise I'd cry.
posted by jaduncan at 12:27 AM on December 18, 2016 [1 favorite]




@lisang A Nazi newspaper in the US publishes a call to "take action" against Jews in a Montana town. Names are named.

Missoulian White supremacist website calls for action in Montana
The story[published on the website The Daily Stormer] claims the "vicious, evil race" has harmed the Whitefish business of Richard Spencer's mother. It quotes a story from the British newspaper Daily Mail that said Sherry Spencer "said she is being forced to sell a building she owns in the small town because residents are rebelling against her son."

The site posted phone numbers, email addresses, and Twitter handles for the Whitefish residents it alleges are harassing Sherry Spencer, along with a disclaimer that it opposes violence.[...]

Some of those targeted by Thursday's post are involved in Love Lives Here, a group that fights discrimination – racial, ethnic, religious and gender – in the Flathead. It was founded in 2009 in response to screenings of pro-Hitler films by a white separatist group called Kalispell Pioneer Little Europe. Daily Stormer calls Love Lives Here a "Jew terrorist group."[...]The Stormer posted pictures of several Whitefish residents, including a child, with a yellow Star of David with the word "Jude" – German for Jew – added to each photo.
When these guys watch WWII movies do they root for the Nazis to win? I can't understand how this can be happening in America today. All of those American boys who died fighting the Nazis deserve better than this; it is too bad we cannot revive the dead and have them sit down for a heart to heart with Americans imitating German Stormtroopers.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:23 AM on December 18, 2016 [35 favorites]


WaPo A new poll shows an astonishing 52% of Republicans incorrectly think Trump won the popular vote
Respondents’ correct understanding of the popular vote depended a great deal on partisanship. A large fraction of Republicans — 52 percent — said Trump won the popular vote, compared with only 7 percent of Democrats and 24 percent of independents. Among Republicans without any college education, the share was even larger: 60 percent, compared with 37 percent of Republicans with a college degree.

This same pattern of partisan bias didn’t emerge on other factual questions in our survey. For example, we asked respondents to estimate the size of the country’s African American and Latino populations. As is typical, people tended to overestimate the size of these groups: On average, respondents think 27 percent of Americans are black and 28 percent are Latino. (The correct answers as of 2015 are 13.3 percent and 17.6 percent.)

But these numbers do not vary by party affiliation. Democrats and Republicans make similar guesses, on average.
This reminds me of the graph floating around a few days ago comparing countries in which citizens were asked "What percent of the population is Muslim?" The US and France had wildly discrepant numbers.

What is really lacking in our nation today is a source trusted by everyone, a Walter Cronkite figure who could make pronouncements that were a) believed and b) widely disseminated.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:46 AM on December 18, 2016 [21 favorites]


Agreed. But we are in such a sorry state that a trusted source would be untrusted as soon as they said anything that disagreed with their worldview.
posted by ian1977 at 6:56 AM on December 18, 2016 [6 favorites]


Dan Rather and Dick Cavett both auditioned for that part. They didn't get it.
posted by box at 7:16 AM on December 18, 2016 [3 favorites]




MTP: "Up next, how Democrats lost to Trump the working class -- a visit to West Virginia".

chyron: "CHUCK TODD VISITS WEST VIRGINIA".

stock footage: *heavy machinery pushing piles of coal around.*

sigh
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:41 AM on December 18, 2016 [10 favorites]


So one time I remember reading a decade or so ago that there was enough coal to power America for hundreds of years.

Was I fooled by right-wing propaganda?
posted by Yowser at 7:48 AM on December 18, 2016


If Democrats were smart, they wouldn't just push policies that discourage coal, they would push for massive subsidies for coal worker communities to help them transition to a new way of making a dignified living. We wouldn't just force down disruptions to people's ability to care for themselves and their families. But Republican pols are too stingy and sink or swim obsessed to make that politically practical.
posted by saulgoodman at 7:49 AM on December 18, 2016 [8 favorites]


WaPo A new poll shows an astonishing 52% of Republicans incorrectly think Trump won the popular vote

I do wonder with this sort of partisan effect how much is really people mis-knowing things because cognitive bias or whatever and how much is just people offering the answer that is partisan-ly useful. I mean, what I actually think about Putin and Turmp is that Trump is just a useful idiot [mostly because he's not smart or reliable enough to be tapped as an actual conspirator], but if you poll me I will absolutely pick "Trump is an intentional and willing participant in selling out the US" if that option is available, even though I don't believe that, just because it's not utterly implausible and is more damaging. The perverse association with education gives me pause.

You couldn't do it with this specific question, but in some areas where partisan effects are common, like the state of the economy, it might be possible to check whether partisans' economic decisions backed up their survey responses, or at least whether the observable patterns lined up with how that would aggregate. Like, if the effect is real, you should be able to see a deflection in how Ds and Rs choose retirement investments or levels of consumer spending right around the 2008 and 2016 elections or inaugurations that matches their changing predictions about the economy. People may well have done this; I don't follow the public opinion literature.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 7:55 AM on December 18, 2016 [7 favorites]


If Democrats were smart, they wouldn't just push policies that discourage coal, they would push for massive subsidies for coal worker communities to help them transition to a new way of making a dignified living.

We can quibble endlessly about what constitutes "massive" but help for coal communities to transition was one of the gazillion things that was in the Clinton plan and that she raised in public at least once but that the media didn't pick up on because email bullshit.

Also the people in the coal areas didn't give a shit because the other guy was promising to put America's boot on the necks of all the queers and @RACIALEPITHET.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 8:02 AM on December 18, 2016 [51 favorites]


Incoming White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus asserted over the weekend that “every single thing” President-elect Donald Trump has done “has been factual”

What does this even mean? Yeah, Trump, he sure did do those things he did!
posted by dinty_moore at 8:08 AM on December 18, 2016 [5 favorites]


I do wonder with this sort of partisan effect how much is really people mis-knowing things because cognitive bias or whatever and how much is just people offering the answer that is partisan-ly useful.

Read the fifth tweet in this chain and realize that it explains 90% of the fact-claims the Republicans make and have made for years.
posted by Pope Guilty at 8:08 AM on December 18, 2016 [17 favorites]


Donald Trump: Master Negotiator - Can't negotiate a truce with Saturday Night Live. And he's fucking with goddamn China.

Just a few, brief years from now parents will want their children to grow up knowing that at one time, humanity was optimistic for itself. So they'll have their toddlers watch They Live, where it was imagined that tent cities would merely be trampled by cops rather than bombarded with sound-cannons, mace, and rubber bullets. And Robocop, the fantasy where Detroit, Michigan has functioning street lights, a police force with a robot budget, and manufacturing jobs. There's even a cocaine factory employing dozens of people that's central to the plot! And they'll be showing the kids Idiocracy, for sure. "Mommy, read us some more Margaret Atwood!" the kids will beg. "I'm tired of Lord of the Flies."
posted by Cookiebastard at 8:31 AM on December 18, 2016 [13 favorites]


@katewillett:
Donald Trump is such a Russian toy that I'm starting to wonder if inside of him is a series of progressively smaller white nationalists
posted by chris24 at 8:38 AM on December 18, 2016 [68 favorites]


I think Donald Trump is more likely to be an inverted matryoshka, and opening him up will reveal a neverending series of progressively huger monstrosities.
posted by dng at 8:46 AM on December 18, 2016 [10 favorites]


No matter which version of a matryoshka he is, he's certainly full of himself.
posted by Too-Ticky at 8:48 AM on December 18, 2016 [43 favorites]


And the two worse popular votes were when the Electoral College made backroom deals, not when the person had earned the electors votes. They were also 140 and 192 years ago.

@markmobility:
Massive landslide? No way.
Electoral College: 46th out of 58
Popular Vote: 47th out of 49
http://nyti.ms/2hV2tNN [chart]
posted by chris24 at 8:50 AM on December 18, 2016 [6 favorites]


o one time I remember reading a decade or so ago that there was enough coal to power America for hundreds of years.

Was I fooled by right-wing propaganda?


Coal is just like oil, there's the easy stuff in plain sight, pretty easy stuff in the mountain, more if you level the entire damn mountain or strip mine, still some more if you dig deep into the bed rock, and probably some more if you start strip mining everything in sight. "enough coal left" is not equal to "easily extracted coal that can remain competitive with natural gas and decreasing costs of renewable energy". Which is the kind needed for blue collar coal jobs. And estimates of "total reserves" include just that, estimates, including extrapolation to what's called "undiscovered resources". They're counting all the coal that could potentially be mined, including that which would require undeveloped technology or is not current profitable, and assuming that there's more out there to find that we haven't discovered yet.
posted by T.D. Strange at 9:02 AM on December 18, 2016 [4 favorites]


Secret Life of Gravy: “WaPo A new poll shows an astonishing 52% of Republicans incorrectly think Trump won the popular vote”
Trump’s lying about the popular vote has dangerous real-world consequences— David Frum (@davidfrum) December 18, 2016, etc.
posted by ob1quixote at 9:07 AM on December 18, 2016 [2 favorites]


Just a few, brief years from now parents will want their children to grow up knowing that at one time, humanity was optimistic for itself.

And Brazil, where at least the government apologizes for torturing the wrong suspected terrorist. Or Dr. Strangelove, where there are only a couple of crazy generals trying to destroy the world.
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 9:11 AM on December 18, 2016 [2 favorites]


Voting Against the Grandkids: My dad is a white Trump supporter. My husband is black. This is what I know about race and power in this country.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 9:12 AM on December 18, 2016 [15 favorites]


We can quibble endlessly about what constitutes "massive" but help for coal communities to transition was one of the gazillion things that was in the Clinton plan

Sure but what happens all too often is that part of the policy gets negotiated away in the process, and we're so used to seeing that, we just expect it now.

Also, the aid needs to be excessive, direct transfers--outright bribes, practically--a spoonful of sugar to make the medicine go down, not the bare minimum of aid that might help 20 years from now if we can count on state and local officials to administer the programs competently or fairly, I think...
posted by saulgoodman at 9:12 AM on December 18, 2016 [1 favorite]


Coal is just like oil, there's the easy stuff in plain sight, pretty easy stuff in the mountain, more if you level the entire damn mountain or strip mine, still some more if you dig deep into the bed rock, and probably some more if you start strip mining everything in sight.

This sounds familiar to me. Oh, goddammit. *boots up Minecraft to do some coal mining*

an astonishing 52% of Republicans incorrectly think Trump won the popular vote

We have crossed the Rubicon of partisan thinking. Does anyone think there's a way to actually reverse this trend? I'm not hopeful.
posted by Gaz Errant at 9:14 AM on December 18, 2016 [2 favorites]


So one time I remember reading a decade or so ago that there was enough coal to power America for hundreds of years.

Was I fooled by right-wing propaganda?


There's a distinction between the amount of coal in the ground and the amount that can be extracted economically. The remaining coal is getting harder to mine because much of it is in thinner seams. Extracting it required cutting through a lot of rock, which kicks up more deadly silica dust.

Ironically, part of the reason that the coal industry is in decline is that oil and gas are now easier and cheaper to extract due to fracking. Coal can't compete any more.
posted by Surely This at 9:16 AM on December 18, 2016 [6 favorites]


"enough coal left" is not equal to "easily extracted coal that can remain competitive with natural gas and decreasing costs of renewable energy".

Also, the coal that is left is progressively lower quality that has more impurities, which means less efficient burning and more pollution.
posted by C'est la D.C. at 9:36 AM on December 18, 2016 [4 favorites]


So one time I remember reading a decade or so ago that there was enough coal to power America for hundreds of years. Was I fooled by right-wing propaganda?

Yes you were, in a way. There is no shortage of coal in the U.S. But the economics have changed reducing the number of jobs related to coal mining.

If you look at this graph, you will see that the largest number of coal mining jobs were lost under Ronald Reagan in the 1980s, not Obama. This was due to strip mining mechanization which replaced tunnel mining. Like the biggest coal shovels in the world.

And then you see a smaller decline during the Obama years. This is mainly due to the introduction of fracking to produce natural gas that is cheaper than coal.

So yeah, you may have been fooled by Republican propaganda. There is plenty of coal left but mechanization took away most of those jobs during the Reagan administration and Republican fracking took away most of the rest.
posted by JackFlash at 9:48 AM on December 18, 2016 [14 favorites]


A new poll shows an astonishing 52% of Republicans incorrectly think Trump won the popular vote

We have crossed the Rubicon of partisan thinking. Does anyone think there's a way to actually reverse this trend? I'm not hopeful.

Well, actually....
Another possibility, highlighted in this paper, is that differences in survey responses arise because surveys offer partisans low-cost opportunities to express their partisan affinities.
Definitely worth a read. (Beware: contains data.)
posted by perspicio at 9:53 AM on December 18, 2016 [6 favorites]


the aid needs to be excessive, direct transfers--outright bribes, practically--a spoonful of sugar to make the medicine go down

But we're told again and again that their dignity demands something else: they have to feel useful, have a sense of honour and tradition in their work. (Which I partially buy, but not quite.) I wasn't exactly joking when I talked about a kind of Rust Belt theme park where you pay people to dig up coal and another group to bury it, or get one group to assemble widgets on a production line and another group to take them to bits again. And arguably, that's what's going to happen, though it won't be acknowledged as such.

Coal country Republicans don't support explicit transition funding for those communities because it's more politically potent for them to campaign on bringing back the past than delivering the future.
posted by holgate at 9:58 AM on December 18, 2016 [8 favorites]


What kills me is that you could easily do both for your constituents? Try to bring back jobs but also help ease transitions when they happen. I think that's the main reason for the deficit hawks, because it creates a false situation where they have to choose only one.
posted by C'est la D.C. at 10:04 AM on December 18, 2016 [6 favorites]


...surveys offer partisans low-cost opportunities to express their partisan affinities

That's interesting (eponysterical?, Perspicio. I've never had a political survey call or poll or visit in my life, but I most certainly do lie on feedback forms and other ephemeral surveys all the time.*

Usually with the idea that "this isn't quite true, but maybe it'll shift the data a bit, in the hope I might encourage this company to actually resolving this decade-old problem" or "(A) is true, but I sure don't want to encourage it, so I'll pick (B) instead, which is another interesting idea."

I wonder if this kind of reflex system-gaming happens in political surveys.

* Yes, okay, I'm part of the problem, then. Rassenfrassen data purists.
posted by rokusan at 10:08 AM on December 18, 2016


What kills me is that you could easily do both for your constituents? Try to bring back jobs but also help ease transitions when they happen. I think that's the main reason for the deficit hawks, because it creates a false situation where they have to choose only one.

Ah, but "the Democrats are destroying your jobs!" keeps 'em voting for you for decades!
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 10:08 AM on December 18, 2016


Pretty sure it's "the Democrats are giving your jobs away to gay Mexicans!", but I suppose the effect is similar.
posted by rokusan at 10:14 AM on December 18, 2016 [4 favorites]


That is a great paper, perspicio.
posted by Coventry at 10:16 AM on December 18, 2016




No, no. Leaks are supposed to only hurt establishment Democrats! Didn't they get the memo?

Oh well. What's good for the goose is good for the гусак.
posted by rokusan at 10:30 AM on December 18, 2016 [2 favorites]


Mod note: A few comments deleted. corb I know you mean well but I think starting things off with "prove to me why you all don't think the jerk things I hereby attribute to you" is just a recipe for a really dumb fight. And unrelatedly, general PSA, please don't use the edit function to change content.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 10:30 AM on December 18, 2016 [2 favorites]


I wasn't exactly joking when I talked about a kind of Rust Belt theme park where you pay people to dig up coal and another group to bury it, or get one group to assemble widgets on a production line and another group to take them to bits again. And arguably, that's what's going to happen, though it won't be acknowledged as such.

And that puts me in mind of lazy ants. Specifically the reserve labor force theory.

And that, in turn, makes me think...suppose we (a) reframed "the unemployed" as "the reserve workforce" (instead of stigmatizing them as society's losers), (b) ungrudgingly provided low-level stipends for the unemployed, (c) game-ified job training for them in manners suggested by holgate's them park idea, and (d) tied additional incentives such as supplementary stipends to skilled gamemanship?

It might seem a bit too Brave New World-y to contemplate at first blush, but seriously...generally speaking, most people enjoy games, including the unemployed, right? So a dignity-positive system that leverages human nature to keep skills polished and even retraining those who have cycled out of the work force? Seems like an idea that could be worth examining. Beats sitting at home feeling resentful and playing FPSs, doesn't it?
posted by perspicio at 10:35 AM on December 18, 2016 [5 favorites]


How can we make them believe that we sincerely disagree, but we don't hate them or sneer at them, and we don't hate Christians or babies or stay at home moms or America?

I think the best way to do this is to work on sincerely developing empathy for people who have beliefs or ideas you don't agree with.

Have you ever heard of the Ideological Turing Test? It started off as a fight between intellectuals, but the basic concept is that the goal is to be able to model your opponent's beliefs so convincingly that a neutral observer would believe you were sincere.

It's really hard - the natural inclination of course is to focus on the elements of opponent's views you're most disturbed by - but I think trying to understand people as they are has a lot of value, and is a necessary starting point for any such agreement.
posted by corb at 10:39 AM on December 18, 2016 [16 favorites]


(regarding my game-ifying unemployment comment...actually, the Brave New World solution would just be to recycle "extra" people, so that wasn't a very apt comparison.)
posted by perspicio at 10:41 AM on December 18, 2016 [1 favorite]


Guardian: Leak reveals Rex Tillerson is director of Bahamas-based US-Russian oil company

At this point it'd be more efficient to skip the middle man and start appointing members of the Duma to cabinet posts.
posted by T.D. Strange at 10:46 AM on December 18, 2016 [2 favorites]


I think the best way to do this is to work on sincerely developing empathy for people who have beliefs or ideas you don't agree with.

The problem here is that's not nearly sufficient when the opposing ideas are "citizens like you don't deserve rights".
posted by T.D. Strange at 10:47 AM on December 18, 2016 [32 favorites]


trying to understand people as they are has a lot of value, and is a necessary starting point for any such agreement.

Please tell me how the Republican platform has done this for Muslims, the LGBTQ community, or poor people of color.
posted by TwoStride at 10:50 AM on December 18, 2016 [15 favorites]


>I think the best way to do this is to work on sincerely developing empathy for people who have beliefs or ideas you don't agree with.

The problem here is that's not nearly sufficient when the opposing ideas are "citizens like you don't deserve rights".


Well, you don't have to start with the *Klan's* talking points. And rounding up everyone we disagree with to the worst-possible-exemplar of beliefs we disagree with is exactly the problem.

How about starting with something like this, which agrees on desired outcomes, but suggests a fundamental re-evaluation of how to achieve them: The Misplaced Fear of ‘Normalization': The battle over norms is lost—but thankfully, the battle over outcomes remains.
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 10:54 AM on December 18, 2016 [1 favorite]


The problem here is that's not nearly sufficient when the opposing ideas are "citizens like you don't deserve rights".

Well, you don't have to start with the *Klan's* talking points. And rounding up everyone we disagree with to the worst-possible-exemplar of beliefs we disagree with is exactly the problem.


HB2 is not a Klan talking point. Gutting the VRA (it's got "Rights" right there in the name, recall) isn't rounding up anyone. Deporting birthright citizens with their parents was a major plank of the President-Elect.
posted by Etrigan at 11:00 AM on December 18, 2016 [19 favorites]


Thanks for the reply, Corb. Personally I've got family who do all of the things you mention (homeschooling, large families, military service) so I personally don't have disdain for any of that, really. I love these people and know their stories. But I think you're right that some Democrats do get judgmental about choices like those. Then again I think a lot of my Republican family have some disdain for me as a career woman and working mom, disdain for women who don't choose to have kids, and deep disapproval of my gay and lesbian friends. So being judgmental of each other's lifestyles goes both ways. I think humans will probably always judge each other and disapprove of each other to some degree, though. I'm not sure how that mundane human cultural cliquishness (like the jocks' table and the AV club table at middle school) metastized into this deep political polarization.

But I think there is a real issue here too about not just juding each other's personal choices, but about what kind of society we want to live in.

Type 1) A society organized around extended families, where people have duties primarily to family, receive support primarily from family, and fit into social roles depending on their place in the family structure... A society where old people are cared for by their adult daughters or daughters in law, and children are cared for by grandmothers when their mothers are busy, and wealth is passed parent to child along with family businesses or farms.

Type 2) A society organized around individuals instead of families. This society has daycare centers and nursing homes, so young women can have jobs other than "caregiver," but children and old people can't count on being cared for by their own relatives. Young adults move away from home instead of taking over a family business. They get support from government and institutions rather than from their family, and owe duties to the government and those institutions. For most women and minorities (who stand to inherit a lot less familial wealth) this kind of culture offers a lot more freedom, more roles they can choose to play. But that does come with a cost. Relationships are more tenuous. People get support from strangers and give support to strangers, and they marry later or not at all, and have fewer children, have less help raising those children, and rely strangers to take care of them when they are sick or old in their turn, too.

Do you think it's possible for one society to accommodate both of these ways of organizing? I'm not sure it is, completely. Because a lot of the people who end up as caregivers and people from poor families who would otherwise end up doing the low-prestige work in the type 1 society won't do it if they have the options that the type 2 society gives them, and without the labor of those people, the type 1 society falls apart.

I don't mind if other people want to live in the type 1 society. I can see the appeal. But I personally don't want to, and I feel like people who do want to live in that society want to undermine the institutions that give me other options, and if they succeed in making it hard to go to college, hard to get health insurance, hard to get birth control etc, then I won't have much choice but to be a stay at home mom and caregiver for my elderly relatives.

This is the real substance of the dispute between liberals and conservatives, I think. I'm not sure it's possible for us to both get exactly the type of society we want. But surely SOME kind of compromise is possible? And I don't see why we need to demonize each other...
posted by OnceUponATime at 11:04 AM on December 18, 2016 [64 favorites]


HB2 is not a Klan talking point. Gutting the VRA (it's got "Rights" right there in the name, recall) isn't rounding up anyone. Deporting birthright citizens with their parents was a major plank of the President-Elect.

Racial gerrymandering. Transphobia bathroom bills. Defunding Planned Parenthood. TRAP regulations. Overturning Roe v. Wade. Religious objection laws. All core planks of the Republican party platform designed to specially attack rights of women, POC or just liberals generally, that will almost certainly be implemented or expanded in the next 4 years.

That's before we get to the deportation squads and directing local police to enforce deportation, which is actually "rounding people up".
posted by T.D. Strange at 11:09 AM on December 18, 2016 [19 favorites]


> HB2 is not a Klan talking point. Gutting the VRA (it's got "Rights" right there in the name, recall) isn't rounding up anyone. Deporting birthright citizens with their parents was a major plank of the President-Elect.

> Racial gerrymandering. Transphobia bathroom bills. Defunding Planned Parenthood. TRAP regulations. Overturning Roe v. Wade. Religious objection laws. All core planks of the Republican party platform designed to specially attack rights of women, POC or just liberals generally, that will almost certainly be implemented or expanded in the next 4 years.

Right. Mainstream GOP voters don't all support all of these things, but they are for the most part quite comfortable letting the most extreme among them drive the party's agenda as long as they feel it advances their own interests. It's not just Trump's election that proves that -- just look at the governors and state legislatures that are passing and signing these awful policies into law. Once again, it's outcomes that matter, not intent. Meeting these voters where they are doesn't mean engaging with way they respond to opinion polls or the way they talk when you have a private conversation with them, it means engaging with the way they are voting.
posted by tonycpsu at 11:13 AM on December 18, 2016 [14 favorites]


OnceUponATime's distinction is useful here, because it taps into the last half-century of social mobility, and how the "stuff of the 50s" -- interstates, tract suburbs, the profusion of household consumer goods -- set up a trajectory where there's a division between those who liked its first incarnation and those who prefer its second- and third-order consequences. The trajectory's different in the UK, but it still feels like a story that maps to my parents' lives.

It wasn't that long ago that James Howard Kunstler was arguing how "peak oil" would end this kind of taut, attenuated connectedness over great distance -- that we'd have to live smaller and closer together, within a smaller radius, and that it was time to reinvest in small cities that would serve that way of life. A lot of that felt crankish at the outset, and increasingly so after years of cheap oil, but I'm not so sure now.
posted by holgate at 11:25 AM on December 18, 2016 [7 favorites]


Highly independent lifestyles also come with massive energy and environmental resource costs and other externalities. If everyone in America went solo lifestyle overnight, we'd see global warming worsen dramatically overnight, so I personally don't view that sort of independent living as a desirable outcome on any major scale, even though I'm sympathetic to people who choose it for personal reasons.
posted by saulgoodman at 11:26 AM on December 18, 2016 [1 favorite]


Originally, the cultural forces that were most invested in promoting the ideal of the independent lifestyle were Cold Warriors trying to resist the "effeminizing" influence of prosocial leftist politics, so again, this kind of goes back to deliberate campaigns to influence our attitudes toward specific political goals.
posted by saulgoodman at 11:32 AM on December 18, 2016 [3 favorites]


Kunstler is a crank, but he happens to be a crank who is right about the built environment, peak oil (fracking is only postponing the inevitable), and little else.
posted by entropicamericana at 11:33 AM on December 18, 2016 [2 favorites]


White House faces exodus of foreign policy experts ahead of Trump's arrival

...The rest of the 400 NSC staff are career civil servants on secondment from other departments. An unusual number of these more junior officials are now looking to depart.

...“Career people are looking get out and go back to their agencies and pressure is being put on them to get them to stay. There is concern there will be a half-empty NSC by the time the new administration arrives, which no one wants,” said one official.

“Career people are looking get out and go back to their agencies and pressure is being put on them to get them to stay. There is concern there will be a half-empty NSC by the time the new administration arrives, which no one wants,” said one official.

The official added that the “landing team” sent to the NSC – Trump representatives who are supposed to prepare for the handover to Trump appointees – have been focused on issues of process, how the office functions, rather than issues of substance involving an explanation of current national security threats and the state of the world the new administration will inherit.

...“Most of the folks I have talked to at the three agencies: DoD (department of defence), state and White House, claim they have little or no interaction with these teams to date,” Julianne Smith, a former deputy national security adviser to vice-president Joe Biden, said.

“There are very important substantive hand-offs that need to be occurring, that are in fact not happening. That is creating added concern about the career civil servants who are in these agencies, wondering what they are in for.”

posted by futz at 11:34 AM on December 18, 2016 [14 favorites]


Trump tweets a lie about NYT circulation numbers and the NYT tweets a fact check.

Lugenpresse, naturally.
posted by Rykey at 11:36 AM on December 18, 2016 [2 favorites]


Podesta is now explicitly saying that he thinks there was collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia. The intelligence agencies really need to let us know whether or not there is any evidence of that. I guess that's what the upcoming report is for, but damn, it seems like the collusion claim needs to be addressed sooner rather than later.
posted by diogenes at 11:38 AM on December 18, 2016 [9 favorites]


Do you think it's possible for one society to accommodate both of these ways of organizing? I'm not sure it is, completely. Because a lot of the people who end up as caregivers and people from poor families who would otherwise end up doing the low-prestige work in the type 1 society won't do it if they have the options that the type 2 society gives them, and without the labor of those people, the type 1 society falls apart.

I want to say that I think your entire comment above is one of the most insightful comments I've read in a good while, and I think you're entirely correct in the vision of how you see those two idealized societies. And I agree that it's extremely difficult to compromise on those societies - I think a lot of the struggle we're seeing now is the attempt to find a middle ground between those two societies, which winds up satisfying neither.

The only way I think one society can accomodate both of those ways of organizing is if funding and programs and laws are entirely local - this way people who believe primary loyalty to the family can move to a place where that will be accomodated, and people who believe primary loyalty is to the state/institutions can move to a place where that will be accomodated. But I acknowledge even that is an imperfect solution - because as you said, people who don't feel they get enough return on that work (I would argue it's only low-prestige because of the way society is shifting, but that is a different, lengthy, discussion probably best for memail) will travel to the areas where they can be more independent, and even in the state/government-loyalty areas, if someone wanted to move out of them into the family-loyalty areas, they would be doing so without the extended family structure that makes it possible in the first place.

I don't mind if other people want to live in the type 1 society. I can see the appeal. But I personally don't want to, and I feel like people who do want to live in that society want to undermine the institutions that give me other options.


I think this is, by nature of living in a society, a thing that cuts both ways. I'm not talking about which way is fair or moral or right here, just noting how law works. For example, taxes and modern family law help provide for some of those institutions that allow single people to be independent - but they signficantly cut the ability to amass familial wealth - as does the way that the state works inheritance law in many cases. And this is kind of what you're talking about - how do we make it, or is it, possible for everyone to have the life they want?
posted by corb at 11:42 AM on December 18, 2016 [6 favorites]


What time does the EC vote tomorrow? Should I even commute into Downtown DC?
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 11:49 AM on December 18, 2016


Choosing to live in a "type 1" society arrangement is not precluded by the existence of institutions to support the people who choose the "type 2" path. Government social supports benefit both choices.

The "type 1" adherents are attempting to tear down those support institutions, so their choice is the only one available to anyone.
posted by T.D. Strange at 11:50 AM on December 18, 2016 [20 favorites]



What would it take? Believe that their way of life is a perfectly fine way of life for them to have, even if you don't want to be a part of it. Or if you already believe it, tell me. Tell me why you believe it. I want to hear you. I want desperately to hear you, to believe you. I am as primed as anyone can ever be.


corb, what you're describing is condescension and patronizing. Of which there is a great deal in liberal circles. I ought to know, as I live in the belly of the beast.

What you don't hear is active malice.

But form the Republican side, in this day and age, there is active malice a-plenty.

For example, sanctuary cities. I live next to one. A friend of mine lives right in it. Years ago, the city was in the clutches of a vicious, murderous gang, the MS-13. They had set up shop on the same block where my friend owned his house, and was living with his wife and daughter in it. He had the lovely experience of a plainclothes cop visiting his home to set up cooperation with the neighborhood. One of the things the cop said was "don't let them see you make the call. Leave the scene, get out of sight, then call."

Imagine what it's like. You're in your house, with your spouse and sprog, and a cop. A COP, sitting in your living room, says the words "don't let them see you make the call."

That's why Somerville became a sanctuary city. Because it was a matter of life and death to establish to everyone there that they should not be afraid to call 911.

Now, we have an actively malicious political party interfering in a way guaranteed to make life more dangerous in a city right next to mine. This will get people killed. The MS-13 is much weaker, but is still there. Visa overstayers are still there. And if they're afraid to make the call, innocent people will die as a result.

There are worse things in life than being patronized. The party you worked for is doing things out of active malice that are making things actively dangerous for some of us.
posted by ocschwar at 11:51 AM on December 18, 2016 [25 favorites]


For example, taxes and modern family law help provide for some of those institutions that allow single people to be independent - but they signficantly cut the ability to amass familial wealth - as does the way that the state works inheritance law in many cases.

You need to provide some support for this claim. It is typical Republican propaganda. In other words, bullshit.
posted by JackFlash at 11:51 AM on December 18, 2016 [14 favorites]


What time does the EC vote tomorrow? Should I even commute into Downtown DC?

Electors vote in their respective state capitals, IIRC. Though I imagine that there will be protests in DC all day and know of one starting at 8:30.
posted by Slackermagee at 11:51 AM on December 18, 2016 [1 favorite]


Well I was thinking of it being more of a riot, that a protest. Maybe that's Tuesday, then.
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 11:53 AM on December 18, 2016


I thought we wouldn't know results until January 6th.
posted by asteria at 12:02 PM on December 18, 2016 [1 favorite]


I just realized today that I lived in Annapolis in 1996 and Raleigh in 2000, but it never even occurred to me before this year that I could go watch the EC vote. My friends and I will be joining the protests tomorrow morning in Atlanta, and then I want to go inside at noon and watch the vote. No faithless electors are expected in Georgia, but I just want to be there to witness.
posted by hydropsyche at 12:02 PM on December 18, 2016 [4 favorites]


The existence of a federal government is an acknowledgement that families, municipalities, and even states operating independently with their own rules and practices is insufficient for the kind of country our founders wanted America to be. The combination of the Taxing and Spending Clause and the Supremacy Clause leaves no doubt as to where the power to decide wealth distribution lies, and the Sixteenth Amendment further extended this power to be decoupled from and superior to any state / local / familial interests. Those who do not accept the validity of these portions of the Constitution are free to expatriate and found their own republic with rules that give less power to the federal government.
posted by tonycpsu at 12:03 PM on December 18, 2016 [6 favorites]


You need to provide some support for this claim. It is typical Republican propaganda.

When we are politicizing things like "inheritance law affects the collection of family wealth", we are in a place where we are letting partisan feeling prevent us from taking neutral assessments.

Here's de Tocqueville on inheritance, writing from a time before there were Republicans or Democrats, as a foreigner, and with an entirely positive view of its effects:
When the equal partition of property is established by law, the intimate connection is destroyed between family feeling and the preservation of the paternal estate; the property ceases to represent the family; for, as it must inevitably be divided after one or two generations, it has evidently a constant tendency to diminish and must in the end be completely dispersed. The sons of the great landed proprietor, if they are few in number, or if fortune befriends them, may indeed entertain the hope of being as wealthy as their father, but not of possessing the same property that he did; their riches must be composed of other elements than his....

I do not mean that there is any lack of wealthy individuals in the United States; I know of no country, indeed, where the love of money has taken stronger hold on the affections of men and where a profounder contempt is expressed for the theory of the permanent equality of property. But wealth circulates with inconceivable rapidity, and experience shows that it is rare to find two succeeding generations in the full enjoyment of it.
posted by corb at 12:07 PM on December 18, 2016 [2 favorites]


A bunch of my friends grew up in Europe in the 60s and 70s, and I've always been jealous that it seemed that their society's safety nets made their families stronger, where I think the lack of one tore my family apart, and that was even at the peak of the American safety net.
posted by maggiemaggie at 12:11 PM on December 18, 2016 [27 favorites]


Three leading professors of psychiatry have written to Barack Obama to express their “grave concern” over Donald Trump’s mental stability.

“Nevertheless, his widely reported symptoms of mental instability — including grandiosity, impulsivity, hypersensitivity to slights or criticism, and an apparent inability to distinguish between fantasy and reality — lead us to question his fitness for the immense responsibilities of the office.”
posted by futz at 12:16 PM on December 18, 2016 [11 favorites]


corb: “The only way I think one society can accomodate both of those ways of organizing is if funding and programs and laws are entirely local - this way people who believe primary loyalty to the family can move to a place where that will be accomodated, and people who believe primary loyalty is to the state/institutions can move to a place where that will be accomodated.”
We fought a war over this once. Another isn't going to fix it. I want a society where people with no family to support them don't have to work their fingers to the bone and still have their children go hungry because it's a better place for me to live, not over some misguided allegiance to "the state."
posted by ob1quixote at 12:19 PM on December 18, 2016 [35 favorites]


Somehow I don't think inheritance law is the driving force behind Trump voters.

But I've been wrong a lot in 2016, so what do I know. I'm sure "lock her up" and "build a wall" and all the discriminatory policies cited above really refer to repeal of the estate tax.
posted by T.D. Strange at 12:20 PM on December 18, 2016 [20 favorites]


When the equal partition of property is established by law, the intimate connection is destroyed between family feeling and the preservation of the paternal estate; the property ceases to represent the family; for, as it must inevitably be divided after one or two generations, it has evidently a constant tendency to diminish and must in the end be completely dispersed. The sons of the great landed proprietor, if they are few in number, or if fortune befriends them, may indeed entertain the hope of being as wealthy as their father, but not of possessing the same property that he did; their riches must be composed of other elements than his....

That's not a bug, it's a feature.
posted by Daily Alice at 12:21 PM on December 18, 2016 [14 favorites]


experience shows that it is rare to find two succeeding generations in the full enjoyment of it.

Ivanka daughter of Donald son of Frederick seems to be enjoying the fuck out of it.
posted by Etrigan at 12:21 PM on December 18, 2016 [9 favorites]


Donald Trump is the best argument for making the inheritance tax 100% of the estate.
posted by murphy slaw at 12:30 PM on December 18, 2016 [22 favorites]


Here's de Tocqueville on inheritance, writing from a time before there were Republicans or Democrats, as a foreigner, and with an entirely positive view of its effects:

But as Jefferson noted, the earth belongs to the living and not the dead, as do systems of government and constitutions.
posted by holgate at 12:32 PM on December 18, 2016 [8 favorites]


“The only way I think one society can accomodate both of those ways of organizing is if funding and programs and laws are entirely local - this way people who believe primary loyalty to the family can move to a place where that will be accomodated, and people who believe primary loyalty is to the state/institutions can move to a place where that will be accomodated.”

What does this actually mean though? Surely one can feel deep loyalty to ones family and express that loyalty by wanting to make sure said family has safety and health care and food and clean air and water and wants the state to help guarantee some level of those things even if they lose their job or become disabled or their son is gay or they adhere to a minority religion (or no religion) or etc... Why can't we fight for a safety net not because we believe in institutions over family, but because the safety net protects our families most of all?
posted by zachlipton at 12:33 PM on December 18, 2016 [30 favorites]


Somehow I don't think inheritance law is the driving force behind Trump voters.

Not the details, perhaps, but part of it is "what I have is mine to possess and pass on to others, earned entirely by the toil of my ancestors and why are you talking about FHA loans?"
posted by holgate at 12:35 PM on December 18, 2016 [2 favorites]


But corb, America has a very strong hereditary class/wealth system. We tax very little compared to other wealthy industrial countries and it is in fact easy to pass along family wealth - that's one of the reasons we don't have a lot of class mobility. The perception that we have an onerous estate tax is one of those things that mobilizes people who will never, ever have to pay estate tax. Estate tax is levied on only about .2 percent of estates in the US, and applies only to estates valued at more than five million.
posted by Frowner at 12:36 PM on December 18, 2016 [45 favorites]


I'm a little torn on whether to share this; the pointless "Racism or Classism? Choose One" derail is blessedly, finally chilled out in this iteration of electionthreads and I don't want to poke that particular wasps' nest. But I found this to be a good piece and I see people are still asking how to reach out to potential allies across racial and class lines, so.

To Other Working Americans:
The true, long-term interests of white workers lie with the fate of all other workers, no matter what their race. All workers, of all races, are exploited. We are exploited because we put in the lion's share of the work, skill, and experience, and we bear the scars and lifelong pain from working class life, but we never actually get ahead enough to breathe free. We work multiple jobs to barely meet our needs, while bosses and the people in charge profit from that labor. We are born where we're at, and we die where we're at while rich politicians and white collar business owners live in the lap of luxury. Who are these rich people? Who are these politicians? The truth is that 95% of them are white. They are also mostly male. Almost all of them are English speaking. They are also mostly Christian (or at least pretend to be so). And yet, in spite of having so many superficial things in common with one another, our lives are completely separate. When we stay up late at the kitchen table with a stack of bills, trying to figure out how the budge is going to work, they're eating at restaurants where they'll never even look at the amount on their bill. Tonight, when we finally go to bed in our noisy apartments, our modest houses, or our crowded trailers, they will go to bed in luxury and comfort, with no worries at all. Tomorrow morning, they'll wake up hours after we do, and they won't have to rush through getting their kids to school, or pray that their car starts so that they won't be late for work again. They might look like us, but they don't actually know us at all.
posted by byanyothername at 12:42 PM on December 18, 2016 [6 favorites]


As much as genuine solidarity and confraternity among Americans would be ideal, I think we are beyond the point where that's enough. Democrats may have to just say "we've got people for that" and leave it to professionals to relate to target groups and handle relating between target groups.

I think all of the arguments are there to appeal to nearly every sort of American but it might just be more than a single person can marshal, and we have to accomodate the marketing-slash-propaganda-driven, unlimited-money-in-politics, acceptance-of-surveillance corner our society has painted itself into, anyways.

This year was the first time I've volunteered for a campaign and I don't know about anyone else, but I was extremely creeped out by the Big Data aspects. I'd been aware of all of that from discussion in the press of the techniques that made Obama's campaigns successful, but as I glanced over a person's name, gender, age, and party affiliation in the course of priming myself to make a phone call or knock on a door I had the uncomfortable awareness that I was the fingertip of a surveillance organization.

My understanding is that so far this information has been used to more effectively and efficiently target what are still essentialy 20th-century campaign techniques. But I'm thinking (probably mostly due to seeing the phrase "Ideological Turing Test" in corb's comment above) that the campaign of the next Clinton-like candidate will need to be able to not only generate an interlocking, cross-referenced set of white papers and policy papers and accompanying messaging, but also a software artifact incorporating all of that: something you could ask "Siri, what would our candidate say to a 45 year-old white accounting executive from rural Ohio while she's waiting to pick up her luggage at the airport after returning home from a business trip?" and have it select or tailor an advertisement based upon the "answer", which would be some sort of weighted version of the campaign's overall messaging, possibly also "translated" into the interlocutor's predicted language and predicted framework for viewing the world. Maybe with some further tailoring based on every Google search the target has ever made concerning the subject of the advertisement.

I guess this would basically be a version of a recommender system? A difference being that the "item" being recommended isn't necessarily drawn from a discrete set of options, but may also be customizable to a complicated degree... it's basically recommending something like a tailored decision tree for advertising / customized avatar of the candidate / customized version of reality?

If you think 2016 has been a big year for politically-motivated hacking, you ain't seen nothin' yet: just wait until you can hack into a candidate's surrogate brain. All of their surrogate brains, one being devoted to each voter.
posted by XMLicious at 12:42 PM on December 18, 2016 [4 favorites]


Corb, Wikipedia says that "only the largest 0.2% of estates in the US will have to pay any estate tax". Consequently, even if every one of those estates had, generously, ten beneficiaries other than the spouse, US estate taxes would potentially harm 2% of the population. And it wouldn't even harm most of them, because money that goes to taxes goes to the services that the 2% use, and particularly to things like the civil law and defense which let the .2% accumulate their wealth in the first place.

So the estate tax thing is a total red herring. Unless your circumstances are very different than you have indicated, there is no real prospect of you ever being materially harmed by it. Do you know the bit near the beginning of Animal Farm where they're talking about a revolution, where some animals say “Mr. Jones [the farmer] feeds us. If he were gone, we should starve to death.” That's what the US dialogue over estate taxes sounds like. It's such shallow thinking that I'm frankly embarrassed to read it.
posted by Joe in Australia at 12:43 PM on December 18, 2016 [16 favorites]


lying about tax burdens in the united states is an honorable republican tradition, and trump took it to new levels during his campaign.

he repeatedly claimed that we're the highest-taxed nation in the world, when in fact we're well behind other industrialized nations.
posted by murphy slaw at 12:44 PM on December 18, 2016 [18 favorites]


Three leading professors of psychiatry have written to Barack Obama to express their “grave concern” over Donald Trump’s mental stability.

If Obama's press conference the other day is any indication, my guess is his response to this will be something along the lines of:

"Ah, a jocular ribbing of the right honorable fellow who'll be stepping into my shoes come January. Love it, love it. Look forward not backward, am I right? Mele Kalikimaka!"
posted by Rykey at 12:45 PM on December 18, 2016


History of the Estate Tax (pdf from the IRS) for some actual facts, rather than conservative panic.


That's what the US dialogue over estate taxes sounds like. It's such shallow thinking that I'm frankly embarrassed to read it.

Temporarily Embarrassed Millionaires.
posted by soundguy99 at 12:48 PM on December 18, 2016 [1 favorite]


Er, isn't corb's de Tocqueville quote saying something about primogeniture rather than anything to do with inheritance tax?
posted by XMLicious at 12:48 PM on December 18, 2016 [5 favorites]


I think it's more than just taxes and inheritance. I think we do have "type 1" areas (small towns) and "type 2" areas (cities)... and young people have been pouring out of the latter and into the former, leaving small towns with shrinking populations and suffering economies and increasingly elderly residents feeling angry and abandoned.

Just as health insurance plans can't survive without young, healthy people in their risk pools (hence the individual mandate) small towns can't survive without young, healthy people in their labor pools. I think making it harder to get SNAP and Pell grants and so on functions like a "mandate" on young people to stay in their small communities (because that's the only place they'll get any kind of support ) propping up the local economy and supporting the younger and older generations.

It seems to me that when people get to pick between type 1 and type 2, enough young people pick type 2 that type 1 has a hard time surviving, which is why conservatives feel (accurately) that their way of life is threatened. But is it really fair to compel young people to stay in those type 1 communities if they want to leave? Keep in mind that overall tax money flows FROM blue states TO red states on average, and FROM cities TO small towns. It's not tax money that these Pell grants and food stamps cost small towns... right now "type 1" get more back in government subsidies and investments than they spend. It's people, not money, that these programs really cost them. But those people are absolutely necessary to their continued existence.

This does make it hard to compromise. But what if we found better ways to subsidize people to stay in their communities and start families and businesses if they want? A marriage bonus? Grants and low interest loans for start up businesses in small towns? A new Homestead act -- perhaps literally giving away land in Appalachia. I think some of this might really help keep those "type 1" communities viable for those who really want to live there, without closing down other options for those who don't?
posted by OnceUponATime at 12:53 PM on December 18, 2016 [10 favorites]


If there is one thing that this election cycle has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt it is that the mass of the Republican electorate doesn't know or care about this sort of ideological policy-driven debate over the estate tax or other Paul Ryan-esque budgetary crap. None of this stuff has anything to do with why most of those folks turned out to vote.
posted by Justinian at 12:54 PM on December 18, 2016 [12 favorites]


> Just as health insurance plans can't survive without young, healthy people in their risk pools (hence the individual mandate) small towns can't survive without young, healthy people in their labor pools.

American small towns don't have a shortage of young, healthy workers, they have a shortage of jobs for those workers. Aside from jobs that depend on specific tracts of land (farming, resource extraction, etc.) it turns out that it's easier to sustain a business that employs people in higher-density areas, because the infrastructure that supports those jobs (roads, transit, office/retail space, etc.) is less expensive than in areas where the population is more spread out.

Historically, the US has tilted in favor of subsidies to address this imbalance, whether it was a postal service that delivered for the same price to anyone regardless of how remote they are, or development patterns that build major roads to places where very few people live, expecting those roads to encourage people to move there, which they did. This isn't a bad idea, but it has its limits, and when it becomes clear that coal mining in West Virginia isn't economically competitive with natural gas drilling in the Marcellus shale, we don't owe the people in West Virginia coal mining jobs, we owe them the standard of living that came with those jobs -- hopefully via another job they can be trained for, but if not, then through cash transfer, assistance with moves toward higher-density areas where the jobs are, etc.
posted by tonycpsu at 1:00 PM on December 18, 2016 [12 favorites]


the mass of the Republican electorate doesn't know or care about this sort of ideological policy-driven debate

No, they just know their small towns are dying, and that it's somehow the Democrats' fault. But if their small towns weren't dying, maybe they wouldn't be so angry at Democrats?
posted by OnceUponATime at 1:00 PM on December 18, 2016 [1 favorite]


But if their small towns weren't dying, maybe they wouldn't be so angry at Democrats?

How Ya Gonna Keep 'em Down on the Farm (After They've Seen Paree?)

Small towns suck (for many people) regardless of the job situation. Cities are the future and nothing we do will change that.
posted by Justinian at 1:02 PM on December 18, 2016 [8 favorites]


I feel like most suburban wealthy Republicans, while they did vote for Trump, would've been happier with Romney?
posted by OnceUponATime at 1:04 PM on December 18, 2016


the mass of the Republican electorate doesn't know or care about this sort of ideological policy-driven debate over the estate tax or other Paul Ryan-esque budgetary crap

As a point of anecdata, the estate tax was a talking point that resonated with my elderly parents, who despite having made it big and have a net worth of somewhere just north of a million dollars in retirement, will never, ever come close to the ~$5.5 million minimum to have to worry about it. The very wealthy have done a good job of confusing the issue to the point that many people incorrectly think the money they want to pass onto their children will be taken away, and I suspect that was part of what swayed some of the famed upper middle class white voters towards Trump.
posted by Candleman at 1:07 PM on December 18, 2016 [4 favorites]


I lived in a tiny town in an economically depressed region for about a year, and enjoyed it a lot. It wouldn't have worked without fast internet, though.
posted by Coventry at 1:07 PM on December 18, 2016 [1 favorite]


Conservatives are afraid liberals will condescend to them. Liberals are afraid conservatives will kill them.
posted by supercrayon at 1:08 PM on December 18, 2016 [92 favorites]


If there is one thing that this election cycle has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt it is that the mass of the Republican electorate doesn't know or care about this sort of ideological policy-driven debate over the estate tax or other Paul Ryan-esque budgetary crap.

I feel like this is true on a policy level, but we have to be careful not to make the assumption that this means voter motivation isn't driven by material, structural concerns. Engineering the economic and social structures we live with in order to promote better individual and community outcomes is difficult, but seems easier to me than forcing people to just be "better" at navigating modern, industrial society.

Actually modern, post-industrial really.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 1:09 PM on December 18, 2016 [1 favorite]


It's really not just about inheritance. There's a lot of ongoing debate among experts still about whether or not urban living really does work out better for energy and resource consumption. There's some evidence the nature of dense population urban living actively increases personal resource consumption rates. And it is true that currently, it's estimated that 80% of greenhouse gas emissions are from large urban centers. Basic economics would argue we should all be living with one or more people if possible, because pooling resources among individuals leads to more efficient consumption patterns and energy use, generally. Two people sharing a single living space and other basic life resources reduce their individual carbon footprints over what two individuals living and maintaining two separate households can achieve, generally. It's less efficient to cool and heat and otherwise maintain more lodging structures for the same number of people, so living completely alone is more of a burden on the commonwealth, just from a strict resource use efficiency point of view. People living alone are more likely to slip into poverty when facing unexpected life events and emergencies, too, so from a certain point of view, it's a choice that everybody else has to help subsidize somehow, whether from inheritance taxation or other smoothing mechanisms. Obviously, we still have to be willing to do that, though, because not everyone has the benefit of even the option to cohabitate full-time (like me right now, for instance).
posted by saulgoodman at 1:09 PM on December 18, 2016 [1 favorite]


(Oops. Meant to cite this, though there may be better sources...)
posted by saulgoodman at 1:13 PM on December 18, 2016


This year was the first time I've volunteered for a campaign and I don't know about anyone else, but I was extremely creeped out by the Big Data aspects.

The thing is, none of that shit worked. The Democrats were so busy with big data entry that they didn't listen when traditional on the ground leaders were begging them to spend more effort in Michigan and Wisconsin.

Meanwhile Trump ran pretty much a standard campaign. Except he outsourced most of his ad budget to 24/7 free media coverage.
posted by T.D. Strange at 1:13 PM on December 18, 2016 [3 favorites]


I feel like this is true on a policy level, but we have to be careful not to make the assumption that this means voter motivation isn't driven by material, structural concerns. 

Republicans' Economic Outlook Improves Substantially - "After Trump won last week's election, Republicans and Republican-leaning independents now have a much more optimistic view of the U.S. economy's outlook than they did before the election. "

1. I'm still waiting to hear a good "economic anxiety" explanation of why working-class whites voted overwhelmingly for McCain in '08.
posted by the man of twists and turns at 1:16 PM on December 18, 2016 [3 favorites]


So the estate tax thing is a total red herring. Unless your circumstances are very different than you have indicated, there is no real prospect of you ever being materially harmed by it.

When I said that the way the state works inheritance law lowers the ability to amass familial wealth, you - and others - assumed I was talking specifically about the estate tax. And you have an answer for that - the argument strikes you as one that is one that's being talked about by the major political parties, and so that's where everyone went with it.

But I wasn't actually talking about that at all - or at least, not mostly. I was talking specifically about how our complex system of laws make it difficult to consolidate wealth within a single family while preventing the wealth from escaping that family. How difficult it is to leave, for example, property that can't be easily sold outside of the family. How property taxes act on the assessed value of the property, not the income-producing nature of the property, thus lowering the value of leaving large pieces of property to people without the ability to produce a large income. How property is divided between spouses and children, thus shrinking the property and "family land". How nursing homes shrink inheritances.

And where I think this impacts people is actually kind of abstract. I don't think people are consciously voting specifically over this difference. But I think that in many ways, the underlying cultural values that were created when these systems were very different still exist and are transmitted, while the systems that would allow these values to survive don't exist. So there's a disconnect between cultural feelings about Family And How It Works, and the reality of land transfer and income and inheritance and expectations in the United States, and I think that those differences contribute strongly to the increasing sense of economic anxiety.

So for just one example - it's much easier to take in 'spare' family members when you have the ability to build additions onto your property cheaply and easily so that they don't have to double-up rooms, and where doing such a thing won't be forbidden by code or increase your property tax. In turn, having those 'spare' family members present and contributing decreases the cost of living for everyone. It decreases childcare costs, it decreases capital expenditures, it allows you to take advantage of the economies in scale in food-buying and household-good buying, for example. It's entirely economically feasible, especially when you have a family business that the people involved might be extra hands for.

But when you have to hire an expensive contractor to do those additions, and the cost of everything has gone up because of all the above named factors, you're less likely to build an addition onto your house - you're more likely to have Uncle Joe sleeping on the couch - which in turn, lowers how Uncle Joe - and probably you - feel about the matter. Instead of feeling expansive and with good family feeling, you feel cramped and resentful. And Uncle Joe doesn't know why he feels resentful - he doesn't know that a multiplicity of rules and changes over time have culminated in him feeling worthless. All he knows is he's prepared "to contribute" but feels like a chump.

Add a few other factors onto that, and now Uncle Joe votes for Trump, because he doesn't exactly know why he's not doing as well as his great-great-uncle Joseph did, but he knows that he's not, and he's working just as hard as great-great-uncle Joseph. He doesn't know exactly what rules and regulations he wants repealed - he just knows he wants things to go back to where this wouldn't be happening to him.
posted by corb at 1:21 PM on December 18, 2016 [4 favorites]


The thing is, none of that shit worked.

There was probably some magical thinking involved there... a lot of effort on organization despite sharply reduced activist support compared to Obama's campaign, because of a confused and somewhat dispiriting message, and arrogance about Trump's prospects. On the other hand, good organization and data tracking probably is very helpful, as long as you've got the people to use it.

Meanwhile Trump ran pretty much a standard campaign. Except he outsourced most of his ad budget to 24/7 free media coverage.

Who knows what they actually did, since they lie a lot, but the Trump campaign claims to have made extensive use of personal data for fairly Orwellian targeted facebook advertisements.
posted by Coventry at 1:27 PM on December 18, 2016 [5 favorites]


Texas Begins $350M in Medicaid Cuts; Disabled Children Affected

HO HO HO MERRY CHRISTMAS and a Happy Fucking New Year
posted by futz at 1:30 PM on December 18, 2016 [17 favorites]


Regarding Corb's comment about the estate tax:

So, right now the exemption for the estate tax is $5.45M. Married couples who plan this kind of thing can get their taxes assessed as if they are two different people who each have $5.45M in wealth, so the exemption for almost all estates is effectively $10.9M.

That's an awfully big number and it only applies to about 0.2% of estates, as said earlier.

What can you do with $1M? Well, the S&P500 has gotten about an 8% return since the end of WW2, so excluding inflation you can probably expect about 6-7% or so, so it would be quite easy to get a return of about 5%. That's $50,000, which is a little bit above the median income in America.

In other words as the law stands now, if a married couple dies with a $10.9M estate, ELEVEN heirs could each receive $1M and immediately retire to a living standard higher than half the country without a cent in tax.

The places where these heirs live tend to be more expensive of course, but an heir could live anywhere in America as they don't have to work again for the rest of their lives. Of course most heirs don't retire because they've gotten really good educations and have very higher-paying jobs: but this is just an argument in favor of a lower exemption isn't it? Since these heirs are doing just fine on their own?

Income taxes, capital gains taxes, dividend taxes, sales taxes all have philosophical arguments against them: working, investing, and spending all help the economy, and we get less of each of those things when we tax them. But the estate tax, that is the most justifiable tax of all. It's already grotesque how much a parent's wealth determines a kid's lot in life, and the estate tax is about the most direct way of addressing that.

ON PREVIEW: Corb: you keep abstracting how high the exemption on the estate tax is. It's $10.9M, enough money for 11 children and grandchildren to never know another day of labor for the rest of their lives and still get a higher income than 50% of the country (and leave quite a bit for their children and grandchildren as well). Even under HRC's plan the exemption was still $10.9M, with the max rate above that going from the current 40% to 65%. Who are these economically anxious heirs of parents worth $10.9M?
posted by Luminiferous Ether at 1:34 PM on December 18, 2016 [38 favorites]


I was talking specifically about how our complex system of laws make it difficult to consolidate wealth within a single family while preventing the wealth from escaping that family.

Yes, that is called "taxes", and it is what allows us to have what is known as "civilization".

To speak to your so-called example, yes, it's expensive to build and most people can't just do it themselves. That is called "regulation", and its opposite is not "freedom", it's "Triangle Shirtwaist Factory."
posted by Etrigan at 1:36 PM on December 18, 2016 [56 favorites]


Very few adults in the United States want to have their parents, siblings, or grown children living with them, even if there are significant cost savings and economies of scale. We're seeing more people having to do it out of economic necessity in the wake of the Great Recession, but the cultural changes that made us want to have our nuclear family live independently from other nuclear families within our extended families are not driven primarily by economics. It's just a part of The American Dream. Maybe that dream was never realistic without keeping large segments of the population out of the workforce and denying them their fair share of the proceeds from America's post-war economic boom, or maybe we just need to find other ways to help distribute resources and align our economy to ensure that everyone's needs are met. But it wasn't contractors getting healthcare that caused people to move away from multi-family housing, it was how most of us chose to live.
posted by tonycpsu at 1:36 PM on December 18, 2016 [7 favorites]


So for just one example - it's much easier to take in 'spare' family members when you have the ability to build additions onto your property cheaply and easily so that they don't have to double-up rooms, and where doing such a thing won't be forbidden by code or increase your property tax.

The funny thing is that you advocate for far more local control and governance as the solution to these problems, but the federal government doesn't give a darn about whether you build an extra bedroom onto your home; that fight is pretty much entirely with your city, county, and/or HOA.

And I'm not convinced that most Americans want to keep adding bedrooms onto their house until they've built a giant compound for their entire extended family. Some do, and some find a way to make that kind of arrangement work, but the fact that Thanksgiving travel is such a large industry is a clue that this isn't a lifestyle everyone has sought out.
posted by zachlipton at 1:45 PM on December 18, 2016 [8 favorites]


So there's a disconnect between cultural feelings about Family And How It Works

There's also a cultural argument about what is a family as well. Conservatives still idealize the nuclear family with a working dad, stay at home mom, and the 2.5 kids, but that leaves out same-sex marriages and single parent households.

likely to build an addition onto your house - you're more likely to have Uncle Joe sleeping on the couch

The US a long time ago also decided that a national labor market was a good thing. The idea is basically if Joe can't find work close to family, then he picks up and moves elsewhere. Yes, that does cause Joe to be away from family, but to keep Uncle Joe both employed and living with the family is going to require more than just some tax adjustments. It requires at least attracting jobs to where Joe lives, or a shift in the American attitude that a national mobile labor market is always a good thing?
posted by FJT at 1:51 PM on December 18, 2016 [3 favorites]


corb, in de Tocqueville's Old World Uncle Joe probably wouldn't get his own room with a couch to sleep on unless he were from an unusually well-to-do family, would he?

I don't understand what you're saying these things have to do with "the way that the state works inheritance law" somehow cutting the ability to amass familial wealth. Primogeniture resulted in amassing of familial wealth by (from our perspective) taking it away from most of the family and giving it to one family member, not by refraining from taxing wealth in general or anything like that as far as I know.

If a family wanted to obtain the supposed benefits of primogeniture, couldn't everyone other than the eldest sibling disclaim their inheritance, if indeed primogeniture prevents wealth from escaping the family somehow?
posted by XMLicious at 1:52 PM on December 18, 2016 [5 favorites]



I dunno if I'm reading it wrong but the idea that there is two ways of organizing a society and that it's behind this political divide because it's being taken by one group that the other is against organizing around families vs organizing around the 'state' (individuals) makes me so beyond mad that I can barely think straight. I'm literally spitting with rage here.

It is one of the most offensive notions that I have ever heard. Maybe it's because I'm not American and have grown up in a what is appearing to be more and more a different culture at it's roots, one where the idea that there is some sort of difference or competition between the two is barely imaginable. Like wtf?

But if this really is the case and what a huge swath of Americans think about people who support safety nets (that they're not chosing family) then...I just don't know. The political divide and worldviews is way, way worse then I thought. If this group views 'the state' and safety nets as some sort of either or, one for the family and the other not...I'm at a loss of how to even approach it because it seems so utterly ridiculous and stupid.

And yeah I know I'm supposed to be empathetic and listen and maybe eventually I'll get over the absolute insult of it to do so but holy cow if this really is a major state of the political divide in the US right I'm not sure how it's fixable. It's just so, so wrong on so many levels.
posted by Jalliah at 1:59 PM on December 18, 2016 [38 favorites]


it's much easier to take in 'spare' family members when you have the ability to build additions onto your property cheaply and easily so that they don't have to double-up rooms, and where doing such a thing won't be forbidden by code or increase your property tax.

1) What happens when I buy your house and the roof in your cheap-ass, not-up-to-code addition starts leaking?

2) If you put on addition, your house is worth more. Why wouldn't your property tax go up as your property value increases?
posted by kirkaracha at 2:10 PM on December 18, 2016 [5 favorites]


If this group views 'the state' and safety nets as some sort of either or, one for the family and the other not...I'm at a loss of how to even approach it because it seems so utterly ridiculous and stupid.

They would respond that churches and private charity can make up for everything the safety net does. Really.
posted by T.D. Strange at 2:12 PM on December 18, 2016 [8 favorites]


corb: Are there any polls or related social science research which demonstrate that a large fraction of Americans are acutely concerned with accumulating property within their families across multiple generations?
posted by Coventry at 2:13 PM on December 18, 2016 [1 favorite]


"When the equal partition of property is established by law, the intimate connection is destroyed between family feeling and the preservation of the paternal estate."

What the hell are you even talking about? There is never been a law established in the U.S. prescribing the distribution of inherited wealth. You and your spouse can distribute $10.9 million in cash or property absolutely tax free to anyone you want -- your many children, a single child, your next door neighbor or even your dog. The law doesn't tell you how to do that. Partition your wealth any way you want. The government doesn't care. That Tocqueville quote makes no sense.

And state inheritance taxes have similar exemptions. For example, Washington state exempts the first $4.2 million for a couple and has generous exemptions for family farms and family small businesses.

And then you go on and shift the goalposts, complaining about property taxes. Yet you live in a state that has no income tax, thereby relying on a regressive property and sales tax. Don't you realize that you are getting screwed by state Republicans who insist the wealthy pay no income tax while the middle class pays burdensome sales and property taxes to make up for it?

The idea that the government is preventing you from accumulating and passing on wealth is just Republican bullshit.
posted by JackFlash at 2:14 PM on December 18, 2016 [34 favorites]


And then you go on and shift the goalposts, complaining about property taxes. Yet you live in a state that has no income tax, thereby relying on a regressive property and sales tax.

It's almost as if this distinction between "state-focused" and "family-focused" outlooks is a convenient deflection away from what is really the usual "fuck you, got mine" attitude of those who think taxes are somehow an imposition on them because lord forbid they might have to pay money that helps a non-blood-relative.

Weird, huh?
posted by tocts at 2:21 PM on December 18, 2016 [14 favorites]


They would respond that churches and private charity can make up for everything the safety net does. Really.

Yes I know that. That isn't what is hitting my rage button. It's more foundational then that it's the idea that people that support type two are for the 'individual' and the 'state' as an organizing principle, that it's this either or between that and supporting 'the family' as an organizing principle. It's one, wrong and two not the way that it even works in reality.

But then again maybe it's because this idea is so utterly 'foreign' in it's cultural context. It's just more of an indication of how two cultures can be so close in so many ways and so utterly different at the same time.
posted by Jalliah at 2:21 PM on December 18, 2016 [1 favorite]


ZOMG STOP: @realDonaldTrump: If my many supporters acted and threatened people like those who lost the election are doing, they would be scorned & called terrible names!
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 2:27 PM on December 18, 2016 [4 favorites]


We should be sure to acknowledge that there are all sorts of practices and phenomena existing in our society designed to prevent both families and individuals from amassing wealth, like student loans extracting wealth from people by inducing them to borrow against their own futures, payday lending at usurious rates most popes in history would excommunicate people over, and reverse mortgages on the other end to drain down wealth before it can be passed on.

But unrestrained rapacious exploitation on the part of the people benefiting from those things is usually what conservatives promote, not what they oppose, as far as I've ever known.
posted by XMLicious at 2:28 PM on December 18, 2016 [13 favorites]



" Donald I don't care if your people scorn me or call me names. So there! *sticks out tongue* nyah nyah."


Swear that's the level this guy's brain is at. It's like listening to 12 year olds in the school yard.
posted by Jalliah at 2:30 PM on December 18, 2016 [2 favorites]


@realDonaldTrump: If my many supporters acted and threatened people

Didn't come from his phone. One of the Grasshoppers on his staff has snatched the pebble.
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 2:31 PM on December 18, 2016 [3 favorites]


The tweet is certainly his and not a staff person. I think he's just tweeting from his computer now, as well.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 2:35 PM on December 18, 2016


Responding privately to folk so this doesn't just become an enormous derail.
posted by corb at 2:36 PM on December 18, 2016 [3 favorites]


He doesn't use a computer but does dictate some tweets to staff per a Times article earlier in the campaign that I can't find right now.
posted by chris24 at 2:40 PM on December 18, 2016 [1 favorite]


The problem with the go-to Conservative answer for any problem (Sort it Out Locally!) which corb threw out above is all those people who are trapped in their local area and can't afford to move or don't wish to.

The problem is that as a nation we have determined that some things are Wrong and should not be allowed in our country. Murder is wrong, and if Texas decided to make murder legal, there are a lot of us who would hope that the federal government would step in an say "No, murder is still illegal, you can't just do that."

A lot of us are protected at a very basic level only by the federal government. Gender discrimination, racial discrimination, the right to have public education, integration, the right to marry who we choose, the right to make health decisions for our own bodies etc, etc. The problem with local control is that absent the federal government and the constitution a lot of local areas would pass laws that would make them look decidedly UnAmerican. And there would be no recourse for anyone who found their rights taken away. Those of us who live in Red States rely HEAVILY on the federal government for our continued freedom to exist. And I don't mean handouts. I mean the federal government is the only thing protecting our rights.

So when I hear conservatives talk about reducing the power of the federal government, even when they are reasonable sounding conservatives that I otherwise respect, my blood runs cold. America is a country with certain principles. Freedom, equality, fairness, the pursuit of happiness. Obviously we are constantly struggling to live up to those principles. I deeply feel that absent the oversight of the federal government, you'd see a lot of localities that quickly had none of the principles of our Founding Fathers. Local government is good at some things. Land zoning, managing city services, organizing education and local tax rates. But there has to be common standards for our whole nation. If there's no oversight then the water in Flint is perfectly fine. Then a state legislature could make murder legal. They are trying right now to take away my rights to healthcare and the rights of my friends to marry. There are some things that HAVE to be Wrong and not allowable in America. Or what good is having a nation at all?
posted by threeturtles at 2:51 PM on December 18, 2016 [44 favorites]


now Uncle Joe votes for Trump, because he doesn't exactly know why he's not doing as well as his great-great-uncle Joseph did, but he knows that he's not, and he's working just as hard as great-great-uncle Joseph. He doesn't know exactly what rules and regulations he wants repealed - he just knows he wants things to go back to where this wouldn't be happening to him.

Which makes good ol' Uncle Joe a LOW INFORMATION VOTER and so fucking what? Pandering to the Uncle Joes of the US with blatant lies may very well have been what won Trump the election, but it's not much of an argument for "understanding" them or for changing course in future Dem campaigns or for governing according to how the Uncle Joes of the world think things should work.

This is what drives me to teeth-grinding every time you bring up this "understand the other side" thing, corb - WE DO. We understand that Uncle Joe can't be arsed to turn off Rush Limbaugh telling him it's "rules and regulations" that cost him his good paycheck and bother to figure out why he really doesn't live as well as his great-great-uncle, which info is not exactly hard to find if you bother to look (HINT: de-regulation and other conservative economic policies.) We understand that hey, of course Uncle Joe wouldn't consider himself a racist, hell no, he's proudly worked alongside plenty of black fellas, but, only, y'know, you see these young guys doing nothin' all day with their saggy pants and that rap shit they listen to, well. . . . . We understand that good ol' Uncle Joe's got nothin' against the queers, really, only he just doesn't think they should be making a big deal about it in public, kissing each other and having special parades and stuff, they don't need to shove it in his face. We understand that Uncle Joe thinks that of course women should be able to have a job (although it's a damn shame that so many have to work, these days) but really staying at home and raising kids is what women were built for, and that Hillary woman running for President just doesn't seem right.

We understand them, corb. We just think they're fucking wrong.

And unlike Trump and most Republican politicians and the whole right-wing media and punditry and think-tank apparatus, we're not lying to them.
posted by soundguy99 at 2:57 PM on December 18, 2016 [45 favorites]


Mod note: Folks, it feels like things are kind of getting pretty far down the track of specifically responding to corb's personal views, and that may not be the most edifying way to go. Consider this a friendly nudge away from the everybody-focus-on-corb's-specific-views track, and back toward more general post-election topics.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 3:02 PM on December 18, 2016 [13 favorites]


But when you have to hire an expensive contractor to do those additions, and the cost of everything has gone up because of all the above named factors, you're less likely to build an addition onto your house

Property tax isn't really my area, but I do an awful lot of zoning and building permit applications. Pretty much every jurisdiction has looser and less expensive requirements for homeowners than for commercial projects, and the more rural the jurisdiction (and the more likely to actually have the space for serious family farmhouse-style additions) the less onerous the permitting.

The last family farmhouse that I could reasonably be said to have a stake in was lost to arson some years back (and nobody was living there at the time, there being no jobs anyone wanted nearby.) It was pretty awesome seeing the additions that had left interior windows and that sort of thing; it's a shame it's gone, but more because of nostalgia than actual family need. All that remained on my last visit was some bricks from the chimney and foundation posts; I'm not sure even those are left now.

(And this is such a derail but it's just so much more pleasant to think about than topics more directly Trump-related, sorry.)
posted by asperity at 3:02 PM on December 18, 2016 [5 favorites]


"So for just one example - it's much easier to take in 'spare' family members when you have the ability to build additions onto your property cheaply and easily so that they don't have to double-up rooms, and where doing such a thing won't be forbidden by code or increase your property tax."

Interestingly, we have a natural test case for this claim in Indiana, where there is something called a log cabin exemption where if you own the land and do the work yourself, you may build anything you want onto your house, not subject to ANY building codes (except, beginning just a couple years ago, they may require you have either septic or sewer and not dump your sewage in the yard what with the cholera). Indiana also has low property tax rates, significantly lower than surrounding states, and very loose zoning codes in most places (where they exist at all) and, as noted, you can exempt yourself from them by building yourself. So if this is the case, we should see Indiana significantly leading surrounding states in home building and additions.

In fact, however, Indiana significantly lags the region (and the US as a whole) in new home construction and home additions, and hardly anyone takes advantage of the "log cabin" exemption; most people in this red state, even when given the choice to exempt themselves from building codes, prefer to use contractors, or, if building themselves, undergo city inspections.

Which is a semi-common thing with Republican economic arguments -- they're theories that aren't actually backed by empirical evidence; indeed, the empirical evidence very often contradicts the theory (as with trickle-down economics, or the Kansas catastrophe, etc.).

I'm not sure I buy the argument that "building and zoning codes are impoverishing the American family and pissing off GOP voters" (indeed, you want strict-ass zoning, find yourself a conservative suburb of a major city) is a GOP claim. But if it is, the data contradicts the claim. Given the option, people don't actually want to do this.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 3:10 PM on December 18, 2016 [43 favorites]




Poll: 55% of Americans bothered by Russian election hacking. This has the potential to be Trump's equivalent to Obama's birtherism problem. Except, you know, plausible.
posted by Coventry at 3:46 PM on December 18, 2016 [12 favorites]


you want strict-ass zoning, find yourself a conservative suburb of a major city

Can confirm this is true and also a reason their telecommunications infrastructure tends to be upgraded with, uh, less than all possible haste. I suppose it's possible this plays into the low-information-voter phenomenon as well.

It'd be nice to see massive telecommunications projects like KentuckyWired improving rural (and not-so-rural) access to information in every state. I'm hopeful that KY will be so successful with this that other states will give it a try.
posted by asperity at 3:46 PM on December 18, 2016 [1 favorite]


How are only 55% of people concerned about it? This is a huge violation of our sovereignty, an unprecedented act of sabotage. I can't believe after all the people killed, all the nasty cold war plots and intrigues, whole nations' futures derailed in service to protecting the U.S. from the threat of communism and Soviet aggression, now we all just collectively roll over and say, oh, ah, oops! No big deal after all. It's surreal how fractured and powerless we seem now.
posted by saulgoodman at 4:31 PM on December 18, 2016 [32 favorites]


saulgoodman, when I saw those numbers earlier, all I could think is that the 45% not concerned either don't believe it happened or are Trump voters who benefited from it. Had it gone the other way, that Russia intervened to help Clinton, you'd better believe that 45% would believe it happened because Breitbart and Stormfront said so, but also would protest because they were harmed by the intervention.

I firmly believe that the wish to be uninformed as voters plays a part in this.
posted by Silverstone at 4:44 PM on December 18, 2016 [2 favorites]


Regarding the Type 1 vs. Type 2 family structures in society, there are very strong elements of both in Japan (I've lived here for about 10 yrs). The cultural framework that created this balance may not be directly transferrable (unless you want to incorporate ancestor worship into Christianity), but there is still plenty to be gained by looking at the social fabric here.

Basically nuclear families usually live with or near grandparents, and grandparents are much more involved in child care. And this is despite, or in addition to, the national preschool and daycare enrollment fees determined by family income. Grandmothers often pick up the children in the afternoon allowing mothers to work a little later whenever needed. We live with my wife's mother who does a lot of the family cooking, which is a huge help for our work schedules.

Japan also does suffer from the effect of younger generations moving away from small towns for the jobs of big cities. Although I don't think they're doing this to get away from family obligations. It's probably a common factor but secondary to simply more jobs. In response to this trend, the national government passed a law enabling anyone (but aimed at city dwellers) to allocate much of their local taxes to any other remote local area (more info). This was originally with the thought that people would support their hometown communities, but it warped into a strange trend where small towns offer gifts to outside tax payers and prefectures with more popular gifts get disproportionate tax revenue. Overall I think the system has helped in countering the population vacuum, but could probably be improved a lot.

All this said, family structure here has downsides too which may or may not apply to other countries/cultures. One point that I consider a downside is that most college students commute from home. This may be more about the lack of undergrad scholarships, and the convenience of public transportation, but many people live with parents until marriage. I think the lack of "campus towns" also means a lack of culture and intellectual hubs that inspire creative thinking and help bridge the urban and rural culture gaps. So these hubs are instead limited to large cities, which exacerbates the problem of young people leaving small towns.

When families and communities are more tightly-knit, there are also issues of privacy or pressure to live up to expectations of those around you. In the US I could see this being the biggest turn-off for the freedom junkies, but Japan does have coping mechanisms like Love Hotels, or more subtle examples like private table rooms in restaurants.


I love the universal healthcare, daycare, senior care, all of which thrive alongside tight local communities and family life, which sounds like the best of both worlds but does create problematic side effects along the way. But even with Japan's problems, the US should really be looking here and at most other first world countries for inspiration and national discussion about what may work to improve the American system. But all I usually hear is "That would never work in America because America is [...]."
posted by p3t3 at 4:49 PM on December 18, 2016 [24 favorites]


The Democrats were so busy with big data entry that they didn't listen when traditional on the ground leaders were begging them to spend more effort in Michigan and Wisconsin.
---
But Strange, in the run up to an election, how do you know who is right?


And it wasn't just their big data program. Every pollster and aggregator had it the same way. They were up by an average of 5+ points in the last 30+ polls in both WI and MI. The polls in swing states Trump won ended up being 5-6% off. They ran the campaign and evaluated requests for resources based on the data they had.
posted by chris24 at 4:54 PM on December 18, 2016 [12 favorites]


How are only 55% of people concerned about it?

Because it benefited their guy.

It's to the point now where nothing Putin could do would be as bad as having Hilary as President for 45% of the country. He's not the enemy anymore, Democrats are.
posted by T.D. Strange at 5:01 PM on December 18, 2016 [17 favorites]


Then Putin already won. And in hindsight, I'm wondering just how much of a hand he's had in stoking the divisions here, given that's been the stated aim of the Russian intelligence services all along and we really don't know just how extensive their operations have been. Jesus what a shit show.
posted by saulgoodman at 5:08 PM on December 18, 2016 [16 favorites]


Trump finds budget director to carry out tax cuts for big business, funding cuts for everything else. There’s a hawk in the henhouse now.
After his expected nomination was reported, Mulvaney told reporters that “the Trump administration will restore budgetary and fiscal sanity back in Washington after eight years of an out-of-control, tax and spend financial agenda, and will work with Congress to create policies that will be friendly to American workers and businesses.”
When I first read that I seriously thought he was describing what they were planning to do in 2024 just before leaving office.
posted by XMLicious at 5:11 PM on December 18, 2016


Then Putin already won.

I think that's almost inarguable. We're just waiting around to see the terms of our peaceful(?) transition to a Russian client state. He won, the US is ruled by a puppet government or at best useful idiots, we just don't know exactly what we're giving up yet.
posted by T.D. Strange at 5:15 PM on December 18, 2016 [13 favorites]


How are only 55% of people concerned about it? This is a huge violation of our sovereignty, an unprecedented act of sabotage.

I've been texting back and forth with a friend who voted for Trump and every bad thing I point out about the incoming administration is countered with his glee about tax breaks for the rich and the dismantling of the regulatory system for banks, wall street, etc. This is a guy who works for one of the big financial companies and is in debt up to his eyeballs. He was house flipper in the late 2000's and ended having to file for bankruptcy in 2009. I've tried reasoning with him and he acts like I'm harshing his fucking buzz. I decided tonight to not waste my time and he can get fucked.

So with that said, I'm asking just want in the fuck can I do? It was mentioned up thread that there's those of us that are sick and feel hopeless and we're looking for something to rally around to take action. Where the fuck is the democratic party? Where are the progressive leaders? Someone, somewhere tell me what I can do besides reading these goddamned election threads and feeling hopeless.

(and just so you know, I've started donating to the ACLU monthly as a start)
posted by photoslob at 5:16 PM on December 18, 2016 [11 favorites]


I'm wondering just how much of a hand he's had in stoking the divisions here,

Oh, I'm starting to wonder how many of the commentators on Facebook are paid stooges. And how many groups were egged on by them.

The problem with aggregation is that it becomes so much easier to hack a system. When there were tiny clusters of social media -- with Livejournal, say, or blogs in general-- a troll could only do so much damage. Now, it feels way less restrained.
posted by steady-state strawberry at 5:25 PM on December 18, 2016 [8 favorites]




When are the results from the EC vote due tomorrow?
posted by Coventry at 5:36 PM on December 18, 2016 [1 favorite]


photoslob:

-yeah, monthly donations to anyone you can afford (ACLU, NAACP, Plannet Parenthood, Common Cause). Bonus is that not only do you help the cause, they keep you updated on where they're taking action. You should probably also subscribe to one of the big newspapers (New York Times or Washington Post) to support independent media.

-Sign up for one of the national daily/weekly action reminders: Rebecca Solnit's FB has one; there are others called tell all your friends and a wall of us; there's also a text message based service that I absurdly can't find the name of even though I'm currently subscribed. These will largely involve tasking you to call your Senators and congressmen (which you can also do on your own!) but also include things like signing petitions, and every so often doing something in person (protesting the Electoral College vote at your statehouse tomorrow, for example.)

-Join a locally based anti-Trump political action group on Facebook - Pantsuit Nation spun off into lots of local chapters when the national group became a non-profit, so you could start there, but there are lots of options. You're looking for a group that will keep you updated when something goes down in your state that doesn't make the national groups - for example, my local PN group is where I found out about the Voter ID laws the legislature was trying to force through in a lame duck session.

-Ideally, this group will be a place where you can connect with people who are looking to get involved in a way that's somewhat more in-depth than just making phone calls, etc. That might be working to drag the local Democratic party to the left, but it also might mean starting an in-person, independent political action group to dig in its heels and fight Trump tea-party style, as outlined in this document, here.

-Finally, if you can afford it, come to the January 20th/January 21st protests. You're going to be angry that day - you might as well be surrounded by people who feel your pain.

I'm sorry that your friend is being so intransigent. One of the things that's been so hard for a lot of us over the past month is that we've seen an ugly side of people we thought we knew. But it's not our job to be the voice of reason and persuasion anymore. Now we fight.
posted by pretentious illiterate at 5:37 PM on December 18, 2016 [9 favorites]


There are some things that HAVE to be Wrong and not allowable in America. Or what good is having a nation at all?

I know after Trump's sworn in people are going to die unnecessarily and loot is going to go to places I don't like, but have you read what's happening in Syria? A fucked up theocratic kleptocracy is still better than barons, warlords and bandit chefs competing to decide who dies and where the loot goes using such tools as assassination, ambushes and battles. Not to mention they all have a tendency to rape, pillage and burn on the way to commit mass murders

It been 150 years since the recent unpleasantness, and here in the Missouri Ozarks, we're still talking about how the local State Guard fought skirmishes with the Confederate Army, the Federal Army, Bushwhackers, Jayhawkers and non-aligned bandits. That's a five way war in just 3 years for a group nominal loyal to the appointed state government and the Union.

Right now we've got white and latin street gangs and opposing 1%er MCs recruiting locally since the DEA created a power vacuum in the drug business, then left town. Ask me how much help I expect Trump's DHS to be.
posted by ridgerunner at 5:39 PM on December 18, 2016 [7 favorites]


The real eye-opener in that poll: 71% of Republicans are just fine with state-sponsored interference in our democratic process. Fuck that party and fuck anyone who supports it. This is beyond the pale.
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 5:42 PM on December 18, 2016 [37 favorites]


Wait why did the State Guard fight with the Federal Army?
posted by Apocryphon at 5:48 PM on December 18, 2016


Pot meet Kettle

Duterte painkiller use draws concern in Philippines

Duterte on Monday revealed that he used to take fentanyl, often prescribed for cancer pain and other chronic ailments, because of a spinal injury from previous motorcycle accidents.

He however said his doctor made him stop using it on learning he was "abusing the drug" by using more than the prescribed patches.

The firebrand leader has attracted controversy over his war against suspected users of illegal drugs, which has claimed thousands of lives, and his incendiary language against the United States and the United Nations.


A drug abuser is encourages people to kill other drug users? Projection much? Is this the Year of the Sociopath?
posted by futz at 5:49 PM on December 18, 2016 [38 favorites]


Are there ANY people who support the death penalty for "illegal drug abuse" who HAVEN'T abused "legal drugs"? It's just a symptom of jealousy based on the belief that the illegal drugs are cheaper and the pushers have customer service.
posted by oneswellfoop at 5:52 PM on December 18, 2016


I am quite looking forward to the attempts to cast supine acceptance of foreign political interference in your own elections as some sort of national myth of truly heroic patriotism.
posted by dng at 5:53 PM on December 18, 2016 [1 favorite]


71% of Republicans are just fine with state-sponsored interference in our democratic process. Fuck that party and fuck anyone who supports it.

Seriously, and here on Metafilter we're having a long debate about about the merits of the conservative worldview. The conservative worldview is tied to the Republican party, and the Republican party literally doesn't care about preserving our current form of government. So fuck that party and I'm not interested in parsing their feelings on the estate tax.
posted by diogenes at 5:56 PM on December 18, 2016 [29 favorites]


the Republican party literally doesn't care about preserving our current form of government.
The Republican party LOVES our current form of government for its ability to give them far greater power than they otherwise would have and prevent expanding the electorate to include people who may not like them.
posted by oneswellfoop at 6:09 PM on December 18, 2016 [8 favorites]


The thing is, none of that shit worked. The Democrats were so busy with big data entry that they didn't listen when traditional on the ground leaders were begging them to spend more effort in Michigan and Wisconsin.

Can't you basically declare any approach that was used to not work using this logic? Maybe campaigning in English is what doesn't work and Clinton should have been giving stump speeches in Russian.

If big data and other forms of surveillance really are useless I'd love for the Democrats and Republicans and pollsters and SuperPACs galore to stop tracking me and calling me and sending me junk mail year after year, but I suspect that isn't going to happen.

(Okay, if we get to the point that giving stump speeches in Russian is effective there will be no need for any of that except the tracking, I guess.)
posted by XMLicious at 6:15 PM on December 18, 2016 [5 favorites]


When are the results from the EC vote due tomorrow?

January 6th. The EC ballots are cast tomorrow, but not actually counted by Congress until the 6th.
posted by un petit cadeau at 6:22 PM on December 18, 2016 [3 favorites]




Sad!

Great idea!

second link goes to a Robert Reich FB thing, someone who does FB help me out, assuming that link is no good.
posted by vrakatar at 6:43 PM on December 18, 2016 [2 favorites]


Wait why did the State Guard fight with the Federal Army?

Technically, it was about the amount of grain the Army was requisitioning, but there was already hard feelings over General Thomas Ewing (USA) using Kansas Redlegs to depopulate several Missouri counties along the Kansas border in October '63. Western and southern Missouri was just a mass of seething hatred and retaliatory warfare for years.
posted by ridgerunner at 6:49 PM on December 18, 2016 [2 favorites]


Wired: Is the Opioid Crisis Partly to Blame for President Trump?
There’s a correlation between those affected and support for Trump. But the causation is still unclear.
posted by Joe in Australia at 6:55 PM on December 18, 2016 [4 favorites]


not actually counted by Congress until the 6th.

Well, the good news is, there's no way hell will break loose until after Christmas.

Say, do the electors cast paper ballots?

Unless Russia does something. Or China. Or -- hell, the EU.

We're fucked, aren't we?

posted by steady-state strawberry at 6:55 PM on December 18, 2016 [1 favorite]


The EC ballots are cast tomorrow, but not actually counted by Congress until the 6th.

Thank you.
posted by Coventry at 6:57 PM on December 18, 2016


Myesh you can see how it would take a few weeks to count 538 votes. Wtf?
posted by ian1977 at 6:58 PM on December 18, 2016


Say, do the electors cast paper ballots?

Basically, yeah.
posted by un petit cadeau at 7:02 PM on December 18, 2016 [2 favorites]


I think "certified" is probably a better verb to use -- the rules assume that the EC vote is basically a formality, which is true.

Again, for the nth time, these electoral college wankdreams are not going to solve our underlying problem: which is that the US elected a fascist president. We have to face this reality.
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:06 PM on December 18, 2016 [11 favorites]


Why this sudden interest in telling the boring, simple truth?

It's just for show. Fwiw, Liz Spayd was relieved that the boring truth wasn't dredged from a reporter's ability to discern objectivity. Dodged the ol' bullet with that one.
posted by petebest at 7:10 PM on December 18, 2016


House GOP quietly closes Flint, Mich. water investigation
“The committee found significant problems at Michigan’s Department of Environmental Quality and unacceptable delays in the Environmental Protection Agency’s response to the crisis,” wrote Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah. “The committee also found that the federal regulatory framework is so outdated that it sets up states to fail.”
And gutting the EPA is just what we need to vastly improve their response time in the future.
posted by p3t3 at 7:42 PM on December 18, 2016 [24 favorites]


Trump holds off record session with reporters

President-elect Donald Trump held an off-the-record conversation with reporters on Sunday evening.

While the topics of conversation were not reported, the meeting was confirmed in a presidential pool report. It's been more than 140 days since Trump has held a press conference.

The gathering at Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Fla., where the Trump family is spending the holidays, lasted about 30 minutes.

Melania Trump, chief of staff Reince Priebus, top advisers Kellyanne Conway, Stephen Miller and Jason Miller were present, according to the pool report.


That is the whole article other that a sentence about where he went to dinner and a vomit inducing photo (for me) of him in his terribad awful, gaudy, nouveau dictator-chic florida residence. As of now I saw only 3 websites reporting this including Sputnik International.
posted by futz at 7:43 PM on December 18, 2016 [5 favorites]


At a time when neo-Nazis are posting photos of Jewish children with yellow stars pasted over their clothing, and calling them a "vicious, evil race", Brendan O'Neill helpfully reminds us about what he calls "the most dehumanising insult of our times".

Yes, you know what it is. "White male".
posted by Joe in Australia at 7:57 PM on December 18, 2016 [12 favorites]


The gathering at Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Fla.,

Man, imagine how nice the Trump Tire Swing is!
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 7:59 PM on December 18, 2016


President-elect Donald Trump held an off-the-record conversation with reporters on Sunday evening.

In some ways that's unfortunately preferable. Can't let the press talk. Not that it helped anyway.

Chuck Todd, get back to kicking yourself in the nards right now! Ass.
posted by petebest at 8:03 PM on December 18, 2016 [1 favorite]


Brendan O'Neill helpfully reminds us about what he calls "the most dehumanising insult of our times".
Let’s call it Jenkins’ Law: the fury that greets anyone who says old white men have become hate figures proves that old white men have become hate figures.
Well, there's another thing a man took from a woman and claimed credit for.
posted by Etrigan at 8:03 PM on December 18, 2016 [4 favorites]


Trump holds off record session with reporters

May every so-called journalist in this picture rot for this. The man won't have a press conference in in over four months and you folks grant him an off-the-record chat?
posted by zachlipton at 8:06 PM on December 18, 2016 [15 favorites]


Yes, you know what it is. 'White male'.

I blame Foreigner.
posted by kirkaracha at 8:08 PM on December 18, 2016 [1 favorite]


Can someone explain what makes attending an off-record session so traitorous for a member of the press?
posted by So You're Saying These Are Pants? at 8:12 PM on December 18, 2016


the agony and the irony: they're killin' me (whoa)
posted by petebest at 8:13 PM on December 18, 2016 [2 favorites]


May every so-called journalist in this picture rot for this.

What, you thought they'd be confrontational? They care about access, not fact checking or accountability or truth or accuracy or democracy.
posted by T.D. Strange at 8:14 PM on December 18, 2016 [2 favorites]


A new Homestead act -- perhaps literally giving away land in Appalachia.

I'm not averse to a bit of socialist land reform where needed, but in practice that plan would mean carving up the national forests -- the forests currently used for growing weed on the sly -- instead of reclaiming and replanting bankrupt acreage from natural resource companies. And as I've noted, home ownership rates are already high, so it's wouldn't be a case of converting renters into property owners, even if you could justify it as equitable and not just showering special snowflakes with gold.

Can someone explain what makes attending an off-record session so traitorous for a member of the press?

It's Mike Allen, who pioneered a particular form of payola at Bullshitico, and is now pitching a new insiders-insiders product in exchange for a $10k subscription.
posted by holgate at 8:17 PM on December 18, 2016 [4 favorites]


Can someone explain what makes attending an off-record session so traitorous for a member of the press?

It depends on what you consider the job of the press to be. If you think the press should act as a check on power, to report truthfully the government's actions and critically explain the implications to the public, then attending an event where no transparency, recordings or questioning is allowed is not compatible with that idea. Any setting where the government interacts with the press watchdogs must be open and recorded.

On the other hand, if the press is there to dutifully repeat whatever the government says, who cares? Party on, the press releases will publish themselves in the morning, and any opportunity for Chuck Todd to build rapport with the President Elect is that much better for Chuck Todd's next contract negotiation.
posted by T.D. Strange at 8:19 PM on December 18, 2016 [17 favorites]


I do realize such off-the-record sessions aren't new with Trump, but we're talking about reporters here. Their basic function is to collect information and report on it. If they agree that everything is off-the-record, they are agreeing from the start that they won't actually report on what they've learned, which means they are fundamentally not doing their jobs.

I believe off-the-record interviews have their place in many situations, and they may be the only way to report certain stories, but what's the point of them when we're talking about the President (or President-elect)? This isn't a situation where you're talking to employees not authorized to talk to the press or working on a national security story involving classified information. This is a man who frequently lies when he's on the record with cameras in his face. What has he possibly done to earn the right to speak off the record? What purpose does this serve than the gratification of egos and demonstrate to Trump that the press would jump through a flaming hoop on his command as long as he sweetens the deal with a glass of Trump-branded wine first?
posted by zachlipton at 8:24 PM on December 18, 2016 [37 favorites]


Can someone explain what makes attending an off-record session so traitorous for a member of the press?

N O R M A L I Z A T I O N
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 8:25 PM on December 18, 2016 [25 favorites]


Very regrettably, Obama used off-record press briefings a lot. I didn't like it when he did it, but you know, he did real press interviews too. It's just that our ability to protest the corrupting influence of the Trump organisation is lessened when they can truthfully say that Obama did it too.

2017: See also: warrantless surveillance, imprisonment without trial, assassination.
posted by Joe in Australia at 8:30 PM on December 18, 2016 [7 favorites]


It's also remarkable that they immediately granted such deference to Trump, after he spent the last 140-some days since his last press conference stoking rallies full of Trumpkins against the press, personally, and overtly threatening to curtail the first amendment and use the federal government to retaliate against individual journalists and media outlets owned by what he considers threats or rivals (Bezos and the WaPo).

This is another moment of, "I didn't believe leopards would eat MY face". He's been saying for months, "I'm going to make the leopards eat your fucking faces as soon as I get control of the leashes", and the press tonight decided, "Well, let's go to a party with the leopard guy and not ask any questions, I'm sure he wasn't serious about the face eating stuff."
posted by T.D. Strange at 8:30 PM on December 18, 2016 [28 favorites]


The man is a fascist who's encouraged violence and hatred not only against minorities, but also against the press. But fuck it, he asked us to join him for drinks so what the hell. So craven they'll not only sell us out, they'll sell themselves out.
posted by chris24 at 8:31 PM on December 18, 2016 [11 favorites]




It's also remarkable that they immediately granted such deference to Trump, after he spent the last 140-some days since his last press conference stoking rallies full of Trumpkins against the press, personally, and overtly threatening to curtail the first amendment and use the federal government to retaliate against individual journalists and media outlets owned by what he considers threats or rivals (Bezos and the WaPo).

I think these are two sides of the same coin, Trump seeing which of the journalists will kowtow and which won't. It's the same power-trip dominance game he's been doing with all the big-wigs he summons to Trump tower.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 8:34 PM on December 18, 2016 [12 favorites]


Judd Legum expresses it pretty well here: "This photo illustrates an important structural imbalance that Trump is exploiting right now. Trump is behaving differently than every other president. No press conferences. No tax returns. No explanation for massive conflicts. Many folks in the media, however, continue to treat Trump just like everyone else. There has not been any adjustment."

I didn't like that President Obama did off-the-record sessions either, but he also has apparently done five press conferences since Trump won, while Trump has held 0 since July and done a handful of handpicked interviews since Election Day. If the press can't grow some kind of a spine with a man who routinely threatens free speech and sics hateful mobs on individual reporters, what's the point of the entire enterprise of political journalism?
posted by zachlipton at 8:40 PM on December 18, 2016 [33 favorites]


I think these are two sides of the same coin, Trump seeing which of the journalists will kowtow and which won't

For sure, and it's a clear signal of which journalists see their job as being a check; and which ones are angling to be the anchor on Trump TV.
posted by T.D. Strange at 8:42 PM on December 18, 2016 [2 favorites]


So what publications do those journalists work for?
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 8:45 PM on December 18, 2016 [2 favorites]


One of the interesting things about that photo of the journalists at the off-the-record meeting is how few widely recognizable faces there are. I'm on the fence as to whether I can identify anyone accurately and I feel like I'm pretty plugged into this stuff. Maybe it's just the terrible lighting.
posted by feloniousmonk at 8:47 PM on December 18, 2016


every so-called journalist in this picture

Proof once again that having your picture taken with Trump reveals your soul. Look at the eyeshine: everybody in that picture except Trump is a replicant. And not even Nexus 6 models! They're probably Note 7s.
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 8:51 PM on December 18, 2016 [7 favorites]


what's the point of the entire enterprise of political journalism?

A nice house, smooth ride, retire at 55? What is the point, indeed.

Those journalists are a smiley bunch. Maybe Twimp pumped in NO2?
posted by petebest at 9:01 PM on December 18, 2016 [1 favorite]


Can someone explain what makes attending an off-record session so traitorous for a member of the press?

I agree with everyone else's answers plus after all no press conferences for months they appear to have lapped up the crumbs that trumpski offered them. They sold their soul for 30 minutes of trumpski either basking in his own graciousness for deeming to speak to them or 30 minutes of trumpski admonishing them about well they better treat him or they won't have another opportunity like this again.

I am sure that there was very little, if any back and forth. This was trump at the last minute deciding that maybe those people who follow him around needed a dose of verbal diarrhea. Who the fuck knows but it is not a good look for the lapdog media.
posted by futz at 9:09 PM on December 18, 2016 [7 favorites]


and

N O R M A L I Z A T I O N

As rightly mentioned above.
posted by futz at 9:19 PM on December 18, 2016 [1 favorite]


This year's White House Press Correspondents' Dinner is going to be as boring as a mid-season episode of The Apprentice.
posted by oneswellfoop at 9:25 PM on December 18, 2016 [4 favorites]


Whatever they did talk about in there, I know what didn't happen:
Mr. Trump, can you say right now whether you will ban Muslims from entering the country?
Mr. Trump, there are more than one million young people eligible for DACA for whom this country is their only home. What action will you take with regard to them?
Mr. Trump, you and your staff have offered one excuse after another for delays in releasing your tax returns. Where are they and why won't you commit to a date to release them?
etc...
Followed by the transmission of whatever he said to the public, thus informing them on the views and actions of one of our country's leaders.
posted by zachlipton at 9:26 PM on December 18, 2016 [11 favorites]


I see your points about the off-the-record briefing.

However I could also see a journalist arguing that attending this briefing is just a stepping stone toward building a more fruitful relationship with Trump. Is that genuinely unbelievable? I'm not sure I believe it myself, but I could also see making the argument and making the attempt.
posted by samthemander at 9:31 PM on December 18, 2016


It's believable, but that's not the kind of relationship journalists are supposed to build with the people in power they are charged with reporting on.
posted by Superplin at 9:34 PM on December 18, 2016 [14 favorites]


"However I could also see a journalist arguing that attending this briefing is just a stepping stone toward building a more fruitful relationship with Trump. Is that genuinely unbelievable? "

Typically it would go the other way, a journalist would spend a lot of time reporting on a public figure and they would develop a working relationship and the public figure would come to see the journalist as a fair reporter and a truth teller, and the journalist would come to see the public figure as a purveyor of reliable information and someone who only refused to answer questions for fairly good reasons, and THEN the journalist might sometimes have an off-the-record chat with the public figure to get some idea of the public figure's stance on the issues and maybe some direction for his journalistic snooping. (Another point is that the public figure has to trust the journalist will actually keep things off the record and not rat them out; that requires a relationship.)

STARTING off-the-record is almost always bad. Off-the-record is a place you achieve, not a place you start.
posted by Eyebrows McGee at 9:50 PM on December 18, 2016 [50 favorites]


Trump’s Extremist Israel Ambassador Pick Is a Bankruptcy Lawyer Who Helped Him Pull One of His Greatest Scams

It turns out David Friedman isn't just a bankruptcy lawyer, he was Trump's bankruptcy lawyer during the Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts debacle, in which Trump took the company public, sucked it dry for himself, and left investors, employees, and vendors with pennies on the dollar.
posted by zachlipton at 9:52 PM on December 18, 2016 [29 favorites]


It turns out David Friedman isn't just a bankruptcy lawyer, he was Trump's bankruptcy lawyer during the Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts debacle, in which Trump took the company public, sucked it dry for himself, and left investors, employees, and vendors with pennies on the dollar.

Cool, sounds like it'll lead to some fuuuun confirmation hearings then!
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 10:01 PM on December 18, 2016 [2 favorites]


I could also see a journalist arguing that attending this briefing is just a stepping stone toward building a more fruitful relationship with Trump. Is that genuinely unbelievable?

The thing to understand is that any non-adversarial relationship with Trump, fruitful or no, is poison. This is not exaggeration, not hyperbole. He is a monster.
posted by perspicio at 10:19 PM on December 18, 2016 [19 favorites]


I just feel I need to elaborate a bit.

What makes a monster? It's really simple. It's human in form, but morally unrecognizable as human.

Short of certain physiological deformation, damage, or other abnormality of the parts of the brain responsible for moral reasoning, nobody truly knows whether a human creature's moral reasoning that is so thoroughly thwarted as the entirely of the record on Trump reveals his to be is actually beyond redemption. But nobody has figured out how to do it with any reliability. The very best that those who have dedicated their lives to such matters have been able to come up with is heavily stacking incentives against monstrous behavior, while removing most or all opportunities for it.

So for all intents and purposes, a monster he is and will remain. And certainly so while he is unfettered and empowered.

None of this implies blame. It generally takes genetic defect, brain damage, or spending one's formative years in a deeply toxic environment to produce a result like this. Such a person does deserve to be understood. And we owe it to ourselves and to our aspirations of a just society not to behave bestially toward him even when he loses the upper hand. (Think Gadaffi and Saddam.) That he is horrific does not absolve us of responsibility to be better than our own worst impulses.
posted by perspicio at 10:37 PM on December 18, 2016 [4 favorites]


Cool, sounds like it'll lead to some fuuuun confirmation hearings then!

Trump himself is massively compromised and underqualified; all that just slid off him. Unless the Republicans are planning on impeaching him, I expect that they'll use procedural tricks to minimise criticism, and anything else will be reported as "critics say that Baalzebub roasts and eats the souls of the damned, but Republicans say that he's a no-nonsense businessman who is tough on crime."
posted by Joe in Australia at 10:38 PM on December 18, 2016 [20 favorites]


Makes sense, Eyebrows.
posted by samthemander at 10:59 PM on December 18, 2016 [1 favorite]


Martin Freeman on The Late Show from a couple of Fridays ago (discussing Sherlock, in which Freeman plays Dr. Watson):
Stephen Colbert: There was a little criticism for one of the seasons because it implied that the Royal Family was being blackmailed by a dominatrix, or something like that.
Martin Freeman: Yeah.
Stephen Colbert: They're a little bit "You can't say that about the royal family!" Do you care about that? Or "they're just folks down the road?"
Martin Freeman: Obviously the answer is I don't care about it...
Stephen Colbert: Why is that obvious? You're... a subject. 😼 ( laughter ).
Martin Freeman: Listen, that's nothing compared to what you're going to be in January.
Apologies for likely geo-locked CBS content.
posted by XMLicious at 11:34 PM on December 18, 2016 [18 favorites]


The hardest part, news-wise, about living in a very different time zone is waking up and reading the news.
I desperately hope that tomorrow morning I wake up to hear that the election has been thrown to the house.
And then, that Obama is coming back from his holiday and sharpening his political knives and doing something concrete to insure Trump loses in the House. If Trump had a plan I didn't agree with, as well as a passel of ideas I find morally and ethically repugnant, I could maybe live with the idea of his paroxysmal Presidency. I don't think the guy really does have a plan though. I mean, maybe he does and I just haven't been able to see it but I don't see this turning out well. God I wish I thought I wasn't in the minority thinking this.
posted by From Bklyn at 11:46 PM on December 18, 2016 [5 favorites]


He has a plan. It's really quite simple.

You won't really like it when it rolls out to greet you.
posted by perspicio at 11:51 PM on December 18, 2016


However I could also see a journalist arguing that attending this briefing is just a stepping stone toward building a more fruitful relationship with Trump.

And they'll be right, in the sense the organizations there people represent and likely these people themselves will be getting the "exclusive" interviews Trump will give in lieu of press conferences as this kind of event shows who is willing to play ball by his rules.

I'd guess he'll also use these kinds of events to set "context" for his actions, which acts as a way to shape the dialogue about what he's doing and control the conversations. Getting "privileged" info is a great way to stoke reporters egos, so they are more likely to use that info as a background for what they write. Basically we shouldn't really trust anyone who goes to these functions to report without bias.

As mentioned, there are times where off the record meetings can be reasonably defended, for example, when there are major events affecting national security interests where what info is shared publicly might make a difference as would providing some level of confidence over handling that can't be directly reported, or when just discussing how an administration will be handling press briefings and information, talking to the press about the press essentially. These sorts of situations though should be rare and provided without favor to recognized press outlets and should not be used to divulge privileged information to a select few or to otherwise attempt to obscure actions from the public or control access and press conduct.
posted by gusottertrout at 12:34 AM on December 19, 2016 [5 favorites]


So are MeFites going to these protests today?

Haven't noticed anyone discussing them here or in the media, but thanks to whatever mailing lists I got myself on, I hear a lot about them in my email.
posted by OnceUponATime at 3:09 AM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


Yep. Headed to downtown Atlanta in a bit. If this is it for our country, I at least want to be there.
posted by hydropsyche at 3:38 AM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


I have to work, but I'm following the coverage.
posted by pxe2000 at 3:45 AM on December 19, 2016


Yes. In fact, here's what I posted to my Facebook last night:

I'll be here tomorrow. If you don't see me, that's why. And if you have any time today to come by the Capitol between 9am and 2pm tomorrow, let me know!

I don't know that it will change things. But it's really important to me to remind our Electors that I'm a Texan, too. It's important to me to remind the Grand Old Party that I am watching the choices the party makes during these times of Russian corruption to ignore the allegations made by our security officials, and that I am young, and I vote.

Whatever happens tomorrow, I will watch, and I will remember.


I got a friend to come, too. In a few minutes I'll be getting up and putting together my signs, and then it's downtown to the Capitol for us.
posted by sciatrix at 4:26 AM on December 19, 2016 [12 favorites]


May every so-called journalist in this picture rot for this. The man won't have a press conference in in over four months and you folks grant him an off-the-record chat?

Clearly, the members of the press still don't understand how to deal with Trump - a reflexive liar, an arch manipulator, a bully, a fraud, and, in sum, the worst example of a pathological narcissist ever to reach higher office. In James Fallows series on journalism under the coming Trump administration, he highlighted a reader's comments, which are more insightful than any member of the press I've seen:
Nobody seems to realize that normal rules do not apply when you are interviewing a narcissist. You can’t go about this in the way you were trained, because he is an expert at manipulating the very rules you learned. It’s clear to me that reporters (and anyone else) who will deal with DT directly need to take a crash course in handling someone displaying these behaviors.

The Times got in trouble by trying to make sense of his words. It’s an easy mistake for people in a word-saturated medium to make, but anyone who’s dealt with a narcissist knows you never, ever believe what they say—because they will say whatever the person they are talking to wants to hear. DT is a master at phrasing things vaguely enough that multiple listeners will be able to hear exactly what they want. It isn’t word salad; it’s overt deception, which is much more pernicious.

But the Times fell for it. I’m watching the same mistake get made over and over again, but I don’t know how to help journalists get out of the trap. If we are going to survive the days ahead, someone needs to teach reporters the difference between naming narcissism—[JF note: which, to emphasize, there is no point doing]— vs. dealing effectively with a narcissist.
Emphases added because this was written three weeks ago, and in the interim the media hasn't taken in this lesson in the slightest bit.
posted by Doktor Zed at 5:04 AM on December 19, 2016 [39 favorites]


"However I could also see a journalist arguing that attending this briefing is just a stepping stone toward building a more fruitful relationship with Trump. Is that genuinely unbelievable? "

It's unbelievable that any credulous reporter would expect anything except a buffet of bullshit at all times. Trump has no answers, and they have no questions.

So either they're well-meaning but naïve set-up pawns (the huge grins in the photo arguably supports that), or they're naked opportunists who will paper over Trumps outrages for a stale sandwich.

See Also: Cheney/Bush Rampage, 2000-2008.
posted by petebest at 5:14 AM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


the media hasn't taken in this lesson in the slightest bit.

If only there were a way to monetize it for the 24-hour news cycle.
posted by petebest at 5:19 AM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


Ivanka Trump and Kushner will make history next month as the first members of a presidential family who are practicing Modern Orthodox Jews. They observe the Sabbath, walk to synagogue regularly and attend services on the High Holidays. The eldest of their young children, who is 6, is expected to attend a Jewish day school, according to a source close to the incoming first daughter.

The question now gripping the Washington Jewish community is where the Kushner-Trump family will build out the community necessary to live a traditional Jewish life, as the family decamps from its Trump-branded building in Manhattan to serve as West Wing advisers.

posted by roomthreeseventeen at 5:22 AM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


None Dare Call it Treason
posted by T.D. Strange at 5:46 AM on December 19, 2016 [11 favorites]


From the link above:

Beware of Donald Trump. Witlessly or willfully, he’s doing the Kremlin’s bidding. Anyone who enables him — on his payroll or in the press, by sucking up or by silence, out of good will or cowardice — is Vladimir Putin’s useful idiot. This is a national emergency, and treating it like normal is criminally negligent of our duty to American democracy.

Amen!
posted by diogenes at 5:53 AM on December 19, 2016 [11 favorites]




The president-elect continues to employ a battalion of retired cops and FBI agents to protect him and clamp down on protesters.

Clearly they need to identify themselves in some consistent way. Shirts in a low-key earth tone might do the trick.
posted by Bringer Tom at 6:05 AM on December 19, 2016 [31 favorites]


Oh good. For a nanosecond I almost would have expected a pivot.
posted by petebest at 6:07 AM on December 19, 2016


Trump private security force ‘playing with fire’: The president-elect continues to employ a battalion of retired cops and FBI agents to protect him and clamp down on protesters.

I don't think impeachment is going to happen because I don't believe the GOP has the spine to do it, but if it were to occur and Trump claimed the charges against him are a coup by the CIA, these are the guys that would try to keep him office, right? His own Praetorian Guard loyal only to him and not the rule of law?
posted by bluecore at 6:13 AM on December 19, 2016 [12 favorites]


Once he gets in office he'll have almost unlimited resources to expand his private security force. Expect to see the USSS gradually replaced by Blackwater.
posted by T.D. Strange at 6:33 AM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


Expect to see the USSS gradually replaced by Blackwater.

Well his Secretary of Education is Erik Prince's sister...
posted by zombieflanders at 6:45 AM on December 19, 2016 [7 favorites]


Indeed.
posted by tivalasvegas at 6:57 AM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


Expect to see the USSS gradually replaced by Blackwater.

Expect to see the press tut-tut in a stern, almost believable, fashion. Seriously, we've got TOP MEN on the case! Top Men! Matt Lauer, Chuck Todd, and that guy who loves The Real Housewives but doesn't think Steve Bannon is a racist.

Yes the full might of American Journalism® will be bought to bear on these and other see-it-coming-a-mile-away crises. But first, John Hopper learns why some kids love the Internet!

(Coming out? Okay . .) Ha ha! Great, thanks John. We'll be right back after these messages.
posted by petebest at 7:03 AM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


I was listening to my favorite non-political podcast, 99% Invisible, to an episode called Ten Letters to the President. Currently POTUS receives tens of thousands of letters, packages, and emails every day. As you can imagine the staff who is responsible for reading all of this is considerable: 45 paid staffers, 35 interns and 300 volunteers. President Obama reads 10 letters and/or emails every day he occupies the White House. By his request these letters are chosen by his staff to reflect different topics and different viewpoints and he has claimed that this material has done more to shape his policy than anything else because it is the unfiltered voice of the American public.

So my obvious questions are:
1) Will DJT read any letters?
2) Will he instruct his staff to give him letters that offer different viewpoints?
3) Will he take to twitter to mock or berate letter writers who write things he disagrees with?
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 7:27 AM on December 19, 2016 [9 favorites]


1) No
2) No
3) Yes

God. This is no fun at all.
posted by From Bklyn at 7:34 AM on December 19, 2016 [7 favorites]


He doesn't read, so letters are out. Presumably any pictures of hot women/girls will go through.

He will keep fighting with teenagers on Twitter instead.
posted by TwoStride at 7:35 AM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


After thinking about it a bit more I think that he will outsource the letters to whomever is interested, Ivanka maybe. He will claim he is too busy and people can give him a 2 minute summary if they think it is really necessary.


Politico Trump advisers spar over new political arm
The issue came to a head last Wednesday, in a glass-walled conference room on the 14th floor of Trump Tower, where about a dozen members of Trump’s inner circle gathered to plot the future of the still-unformed nonprofit.

At the head of the table sat Brad Parscale, Trump’s digital director, and Kellyanne Conway, his campaign manager, with top aides scattered all around, among them Trump’s longtime attorney Michael Cohen, Trump’s deputy campaign manager David Bossie, senior Trump communications adviser Jason Miller, Vice President-elect Mike Pence’s senior adviser Marc Short, and Rebekah Mercer, the most influential donor in Trump’s orbit.[...]But while everyone present agreed the nonprofit would be vital to enact the president-elect’s political agenda, they disagreed on who exactly would control it,
Nice bit of insider gossip about the struggle of shaping this non-profit propaganda unit. Who will head it (possibly Parscale but Conway will definitely have a part) and what data and analytics provider will they use (probably not Rebekah Mercer's company.) Outside donors will fund it and because DJT has clearly signaled that he rewards monetary donations with administration jobs, the donor list will be robust.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 7:46 AM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


Isn't that wrong though?
posted by petebest at 7:53 AM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


Morally or factually?

(j/k neither matters anymore)
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 8:00 AM on December 19, 2016 [5 favorites]


After thinking about it a bit more I think that he will outsource the letters to whomever is interested, Ivanka maybe. He will claim he is too busy and people can give him a 2 minute summary if they think it is really necessary.

If I was trying to think like a Trump, I would turn the Office of Presidential Correspondence into a profit center for the Trump Organization. Every letter that comes in and every presidential greeting request contains data valuable to marketers as people are sending in intimate details about their lives, families, and career situations. Ask the president for help in finding a job and your info will be sold to MLM companies promising to help you get rich quick.
posted by peeedro at 8:08 AM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


1) No
2) No
3) Yes

God. This is no fun at all.


Well, ok, we could play this one:

1) What will be the form of the crisis that provides DJT with an excuse to impose martial law?
2) Will he suspend habeas corpus?
3) Will congress positively affirm this imposition, tacitly accept it, or actively oppose it?
4) What is the most likely event that could derail this outcome?
5) What is the most feasible strategy of collective and individual actions available to bring about this event?

I don't even want to say what my answer to #1 is. #2 and #3 are obvious. Barring a highly unexpected result from today's major event, my answer to #4 is that the current president beats him to the punch. That would require a damned powerful #5 though. Just spitballing, something like a 50-state turnout of (Occupy + BLM) x 10.

Hate to say it, but I don't think the left is spirited enough to do that until after it's far too late.

This is looking more and more like goodbye, Republic.

I've never wanted to be wrong so badly in my life.
posted by perspicio at 8:08 AM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


His own Praetorian Guard loyal only to him and not the rule of law?

I kind of hope so. The Praetorian Guard was the leading cause of death among Roman Emperors.
posted by VTX at 8:11 AM on December 19, 2016 [5 favorites]


Forgive my naivete here, but the mountain of "Surely this" moves by Trump that has been piling up since the primaries keeps raising a question in my mind that I hope someone can answer.

I can't imagine that amidst all the public-facing condemnations of Trump inside his own party since early 2016, there haven't been (many?) behind-the-scenes, no-holds-barred screaming fits thrown at Trump directly. I'm talking straight-up "GODDAMN IT TRUMP YOU'RE FUCKING EVERYTHING UP AND IF YOU DON'T BACK DOWN NOW YOU'LL BE RUN OUT OF THIS TOWN ON A RAIL" conversations.

Seems like politicians—most of whom are wealthy white male attorneys and businesspeople—would be no stranger to behavior like this type of behavior; in fact, we have documentation of it in other cases. It also seems like Trump wouldn't be able to resist the chance to call such behavior out publicly.

So... my layperson's guesses as to why we haven't heard about this kind of thing:

1. That's not really how these people communicate, even when they're super pissed at each other. And even if they did, the opportunities (e.g., Paul Ryan directly calling Trump) are not as abundant as we think.
2. Even if these screaming fits took place, some Elite Gentlemen's Agreement keeps them strictly behind closed doors, and nobody but nobody ever breathes a word about them.
3. Professional politicians are too, um, politically savvy to burn bridges (or at least the Trump Bridge) in this way, lest they come back to threaten their own tenuous grasp on power down the road. They'd rather politic around the problem than to address it head on.
4. The screaming did happen, but Trump basically shrugged and said "Fuck you," but wasn't motivated to tweet about it (explicitly, anyhow).
5. Plenty of people wanted somebody to do the screaming, but they didn't want it to be them.
6. The politer public condemnations were an accurate reflection of the extent of Trump's adversaries' feelings on the matter, so there weren't even any harsher feelings to be expressed.
7. The screaming happened, and it's well-known among insiders, but the media never got wind of it, or didn't care.

Which (if any) of these is most likely? My question is apropos of nothing specific in recent posts to this thread—as somebody with bascially zero familiarity with Washington culture, I'm just really curious about something that seems so likely, and we're fortunate enough to have people here on MeFi who can respond based on firsthand experience or extra-reliable information.
posted by Rykey at 8:17 AM on December 19, 2016 [6 favorites]


His own Praetorian Guard loyal only to him and not the rule of law?

Silver lining: that history/classics double minor is finally paying off!
posted by corb at 8:22 AM on December 19, 2016 [12 favorites]


Josh Marshall, TPM: No Sackcloth and Ashes
The consequences of the 2016 election are devastating. But it is important to distinguish causes and outcomes. The mechanics are not the same. I've already discussed that not only does the Democrats' economic messaging need work but their policies do. Messaging is important. Policies drive messaging. Just as much, there is a failure of political organizing at the state level and local level. Some of that atrophy at the local level is a recurrent pattern that afflicts the party that holds the presidency for two terms in a highly partisan era (see what happened to Republicans in 2005-2009). But it is also the product of Democrats' fixation on the presidential contest and a misplaced belief that demography is a sufficient driver of election wins. It is not. If 2016 teaches us anything it is that singular message.

There is a huge amount of work for Democrats to do. But a key part of that work is resisting the demand from the supercilious center that Democrats don sackcloth and ashes and repent of their ideals and even of themselves. Demography and ideology are critical. But require a politics and relentless organizing to give them force. That is where Democrats should be focusing their attention.
posted by tonycpsu at 8:23 AM on December 19, 2016 [8 favorites]


Id put my money on #5. Everyone sitting around waiting for someone else to be the hero.
posted by ian1977 at 8:24 AM on December 19, 2016 [10 favorites]


Which (if any) of these is most likely? My question is apropos of nothing specific in recent posts to this thread—as somebody with bascially zero familiarity with Washington culture, I'm just really curious about something that seems so likely, and we're fortunate enough to have people here on MeFi who can respond based on firsthand experience or extra-reliable information.

Within high level public dealing social structures like exist in Washington, one doesn't need to scream at another at the same level since that can cause harm to one's own standing, they work as much by signalling through secondhand releases of damaging information, snubbing from "important" social events and other more plausibly deniable forms of rejection. People in Washington know all too well how quickly someone in power can be out and someone out will be in so you don't burn bridges lightly, you just suggest you could in hopes of cowing, and then bare your neck if you lose the bet to let the new guy in charge know you'll follow his lead for a while, until the next opportunity comes to better your relative positions. That's always been my read on it anyway. They yell more at those they perceive as beneath their station.
posted by gusottertrout at 8:34 AM on December 19, 2016


Some links worth sharing:

How Will They Change their Minds?
Reality is persistent, and propaganda that explains it away has to keep changing. Eventually people catch on, even if they don’t begin each day with The New York Times and end it with PBS Newshour. You don’t have to believe the “liberal media” when the news is happening to you and the people you love.
[I think this is an excellent analysis and it gives me real hope.]

And via the same blog:

Charlie Sykes on Where the Right Went Wrong:
When it became clear that I was going to remain #NeverTrump, conservatives I had known and worked with for more than two decades organized boycotts of my show. One prominent G.O.P. activist sent out an email blast calling me a “Judas goat,” and calling for postelection retribution. As the summer turned to fall, I knew that I was losing listeners and said so publicly.

And then, there was social media. Unless you have experienced it, it’s difficult to describe the virulence of the Twitter storms that were unleashed on Trump skeptics. In my timelines, I found myself called a “cuckservative,” a favorite gibe of white nationalists; and someone Photoshopped my face into a gas chamber. Under the withering fire of the trolls, one conservative commentator and Republican political leader after another fell in line.
But also, some reason to hope that Sykes is wrong when he says "Don't expect any profiles in courage" from Congressional Republicans...

Why the GOP Congress Will Stop Trump From Going Too Far:
Many vocal Trump critics, including McCain, Murkowski, Portman, and Lee, along with Senators Marco Rubio of Florida and Rand Paul of Kentucky, just won reelection. All of these members now have six years of relative electoral freedom to challenge Trump without facing the electoral consequences. Members of the House Freedom Caucus already show no reticence to do so. If we see scandals arise from the commingling of the public’s business with Trump’s enterprises, or a foreign policy disaster, expect other House Republicans to jump ship rather than face the electoral consequences. GOP Trump critics will also likely enjoy the behind-the-scenes support of the large swath of the donor and corporate class horrified by the potential chaos of a Trump presidency. The fact that Trump enters office as the least popular president-elect in modern history will lower the bar for Republican defiance—presuming his ratings stay low.
posted by OnceUponATime at 8:35 AM on December 19, 2016 [8 favorites]


Which (if any) of these is most likely?

Well the shape of my best guess/understanding is roughly that there are three classes of people involved. In descending quantitative order:

A) critically compromised people (almost all of whom can be easily tipped, if they aren't already, into an endless cascade of immoral behaviors to stay one step ahead of punishment for any/all of them)
B) monsters (amoral creatures who love power)
C) people of integrity -- can be subdivided into (i) those who recognize that DJT is in category B, and (ii) those who do not

So to answer your question:

Group A: 2, 3, 4 (motivated by fear, not principle) and 5
Group B: 1, 3
Group C(i): 1, 3
Group C(ii): 1, 2, 3, 4
posted by perspicio at 8:36 AM on December 19, 2016


Al Jazeera: BREAKING: Russian ambassador shot in Turkey's capital Ankara

@chrislhayes While this situation plays out, can someone maybe take you-know-who's phone away? At least, for like, the day?
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:37 AM on December 19, 2016 [12 favorites]


> Many vocal Trump critics, including McCain, Murkowski, Portman, and Lee, along with Senators Marco Rubio of Florida and Rand Paul of Kentucky, just won reelection. All of these members now have six years of relative electoral freedom to challenge Trump without facing the electoral consequences.

And every one of them aligns with Trump ideologically on a vast majority of issues. If there's a betting pool, I want in on this action, and will take even odds that not a single one of these named "vocal Trump critics" is part of a decisive voting faction that stops Trump from getting something he wants.
posted by tonycpsu at 8:39 AM on December 19, 2016 [8 favorites]


Makes sense,gusottertrout. I guess my next question would be why they didn't see Trump as beneath their station during the primaries, though. (Clearly I'd make a terrible member of the ruling class.)
posted by Rykey at 8:40 AM on December 19, 2016


At best, I think the congressional Republicans will only fight Trump when his public support has dropped significantly and/or has done something so terrible that his polling numbers finally drop where they belong.



The above article talks about how donors very quickly got to Rubio after he slightly signaled some Tillerson opposition. I don't think the big money donors are that wary of Trump anymore now that he's almost in office and signaling how much work he's going to do for them.

Well, I clearly don't know how to do links, but the Washington Post has two articles about it a few days ago.
posted by not that mimi at 8:44 AM on December 19, 2016


Maine elector David Bright will cast his vote for Bernie Sanders.

If he followed the state's popular vote, his vote would have went towards Clinton.
posted by drezdn at 8:44 AM on December 19, 2016 [7 favorites]


Oh, many of them surely did, but they couldn't risk alienating his fans, who they also don't much care for, but who they need to support them should they gain power. The challenge is to harm your competition as much as you can without seeming to actually be doing much of it yourself. That Trump somewhat ignored that last part threw off his competitors for a while as it doesn't fit the usual model of business. That's what got Trump the nomination, but it isn't as easy to duplicate as it might seem for others since their brands aren't as strong and aren't built on the same image as Trump's. They have to feign more integrity and care than he does, emphasis on feign of course.
posted by gusottertrout at 8:45 AM on December 19, 2016


Really want to recommend the How Will They Change Their Minds? essay posted by OnceUponATime above. It's been a while since I read something that made me feel a bit hopeful.
posted by Mchelly at 8:52 AM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


I don't think the big money donors are that wary of Trump anymore now that he's almost in office and signaling how much work he's going to do for them.

Big money donors don't want war with China any more than we do. They want lower taxes and fewer regulations, but even more than that, they want stability. War destroys capital and spreads out previously concentrated wealth. (At some level, working class Trump voters may know this, which is why they don't mind blowing it all up...) Political uncertainty is terrible for the markets.

I hope Trump turns out to be merely a standard issue billionaire serving the interests of standard issue American billionaires, because it means our country and our political system will probably survive the next four years, and we'll get a chance to try again.

If he's serving the interests of Russian billionaires, of course, there is no such guarantee. Their capital is much less at risk.
posted by OnceUponATime at 8:53 AM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


If he's serving the interests of Russian billionaires

If?
posted by petebest at 8:55 AM on December 19, 2016 [8 favorites]


Trump’s Extremist Israel Ambassador Pick Is a Bankruptcy Lawyer Who Helped Him Pull One of His Greatest Scams

If you want a glimpse at how Trump came to that decision, look back at this article from April: Trump Meets With Orthodox Jews and Reveals His Israel Advisers - His Jewish Lawyers
One of the first things Trump did when he sat down in the sunny corner conference room at Trump Tower and saw that almost all the 20 or so faces around the room were Orthodox Jews was summon some Orthodox Jews of his own to the room — including an executive vice president at The Trump Organization.
Other highlights include:
* The meeting was set up by a Fox News anchor trying to curry favor with Trump
* Trump punts every policy question about Israel to his lawyers
* Trump talks about how many great Jewish friends he has, including his son-in-law
* Trump praises notable anti-semite Saddam Hussein
* Trump tells Lewandowski he is proud of him because the battery charges were dropped
* Trump refers to Jews as "you people"
posted by peeedro at 8:58 AM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


Maine elector David Bright will cast his vote for Bernie Sanders.

Fuck him. All he's doing is giving Trump cover so if he loses some electors Trump can dismiss it by saying Clinton did too. She's just as bad. Look how she and DNC robbed Bernie.
posted by chris24 at 9:02 AM on December 19, 2016 [27 favorites]


Those who are wondering what to do, Obama has some guidance.
Obama says Democrats lost by not showing up: Obama said Democrats hadn't made enough of an attempt to sway voters outside the nation's population centers. Persistent losses in statewide and local races only illustrate the party's structural conundrum, he said.

"There are clearly failures on our part to give people in rural areas or in exurban areas a sense day-to-day that we're fighting for them or connected to them," he told NPR's Steve Inskeep. "Part of the reason it's important to show up...is because it then builds trust and it gives you a better sense of how should you talk about issues in a way that feel salient and feel meaningful to people."

In the NPR interview, Obama said Democrats had "ceded too much territory" and took some blame for ignoring political strategy during his early days in office.

"More work would have needed to be done to just build up that structure," he said. "One of the big suggestions that I have for Democrats as I leave, and something that I have some ideas about is, how do we do more of that ground-up building?"

Obama said he would work with the party once he leaves office to develop those changes, offering advice and scouting talented young politicians to champion and promote.
I wouldn't wait for more details from him, though. Just get out and organize.
posted by Coventry at 9:03 AM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


Al Jazeera: BREAKING: Russian ambassador shot in Turkey's capital Ankara

I really hope this isn't a franz ferdinand moment of some sort.
posted by localhuman at 9:05 AM on December 19, 2016 [21 favorites]


A live blog of electoral college voting (warning: autoplay video). So far it's 55-27 with none of the electors doing anything unexpected.

I never put much stock in the idea of the electors choosing someone other than Trump, but I did have at least a little hope that a few would defect, narrowing his electoral college margin of victory, underscoring the brokenness of the EC, and delegitimizing him somewhat.
posted by jedicus at 9:07 AM on December 19, 2016 [8 favorites]


If there are history books in 50 years I have the terrible feeling that this will be in a lot of them.

I should add a warning that the above post shows the body of the shot ambassador.
posted by Rust Moranis at 9:12 AM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


Al Jazeera: BREAKING: Russian ambassador shot in Turkey's capital Ankara

I really hope this isn't a franz ferdinand moment of some sort.


Seems like blowback from Russian actions in Syria. Hard to see how it would trampoline into an escalation into, say, Turkey. Then again, Putin and Erdogan are strongmen with unlimited authority to make war, so who knows.
posted by dis_integration at 9:13 AM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


No, but I guarantee Hillary will get fewer EC votes than she should.

Because if there's one thing the left loves it's cutting off our nose to spite our face.

And Obama should have never removed Dean from DNC Chair. Or pulled people like Sebelius and Napolitano from their governorships.
posted by asteria at 9:13 AM on December 19, 2016 [17 favorites]


Also hello metafilter. Been lurking for 10 years. Too angry not to participate in these threads now.
posted by Rust Moranis at 9:13 AM on December 19, 2016 [56 favorites]


Maine elector David Bright will cast his vote for Bernie Sanders.

Fuck him. All he's doing is giving Trump cover so if he loses some electors Trump can dismiss it by saying Clinton did too. She's just as bad. Look how she and DNC robbed Bernie.


And giving Trump cover to steal reelection in 2020 regardless of the vote. This is so stupid. And perfectly in character with die hard Bernie Cultists.
posted by T.D. Strange at 9:14 AM on December 19, 2016 [20 favorites]


Maine elector David Bright will cast his vote for Bernie Sanders.

The movement for democratic electors to vote for someone else as a protest of Trump (?!) is the most remarkable example of a real-life footgun I can think of.
posted by dis_integration at 9:17 AM on December 19, 2016 [19 favorites]


Just curious, what is Russia's relationship with Israel?
posted by drezdn at 9:22 AM on December 19, 2016




he said if there was any chance for Clinton to win he would have voted for her, he's doing it to encourage the young folks who got involved this year.

What the what?

This is the epitome of the Bernie cult that sank us.

Sanders doesn't deserve it - I'm sure he's a very nice man - but I want his name to go down with Nader. Or, better yet, to make his supporters do the heavy work of redeeming him.
posted by steady-state strawberry at 9:23 AM on December 19, 2016 [13 favorites]


I'm seeing reports, though no confirmation of said, that the ambassador has died in the hospital.
posted by XtinaS at 9:26 AM on December 19, 2016


Turkish media now say the Russian Ambassador is in a hospital's emergency services section and the treatment is underway. Not announced dead (same guy)
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 9:27 AM on December 19, 2016


Or, better yet, to make his supporters do the heavy work of redeeming him.

Seriously. Sanders has been more vocal than most Democrat leaders since the election. He is good. His supporters? Make me want to tear my hair out.
posted by everybody had matching towels at 9:28 AM on December 19, 2016 [6 favorites]


One of the first things Trump did when he sat down in the sunny corner conference room at Trump Tower and saw that almost all the 20 or so faces around the room were Orthodox Jews was summon some Orthodox Jews of his own to the room — including an executive vice president at The Trump Organization.

What's scary about this is that it solidifies the sense among secular and Reform Jews (who represent 2/3rds of Jewish Americans and are overwhelmingly left on the US political spectrum) and Jewish organizations that they are almost certainly going to be left out of any political process entirely, if not targeted by either the administration or his supporters. Meanwhile, in Israel:
The IDI’s monthly Peace Index survey, published Tuesday, found that 48 percent of Israeli Jews think that leftists are either “not so loyal” or “not loyal at all” to the state.

Almost 55 percent said they “strongly agree” or “moderately agree” that voicing criticism of the state at times of tense security situations is “unacceptable.”
This makes the choice of David Friedman, who once called J Street and fellow supporters of the two-state solution (which is over 60% of Jewish Americans) as bad or worse than Nazi collaborators really ominous stuff for anyone that doesn't toe the Netanyahu line here, abroad, and in Israel itself.
posted by zombieflanders at 9:28 AM on December 19, 2016 [5 favorites]


This is the epitome of the Bernie cult that sank us.

Pointing at one thing and saying that's why we lost is the reason we lost
posted by beerperson at 9:28 AM on December 19, 2016 [21 favorites]


Hard to see how it would trampoline into an escalation into, say, Turkey.

Is it?*

*Who's famous catchphrase is, "I tawt I taw a puddy tat"?
posted by petebest at 9:30 AM on December 19, 2016


Just curious, what is Russia's relationship with Israel?

Growing closer under Netanyahu and Putin. Lots of high-level diplomatic visits and communications between the two recently.

Wikipedia for background.
posted by jedicus at 9:30 AM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


Did a boy yell out "warn the Ambassador!" just before the shooting? Because if the world is changing from Hamilton to Ragtime, we should have been holding rehearsals all month.
posted by zachlipton at 9:33 AM on December 19, 2016 [7 favorites]


Mod note: On what is shaping up to be a weird day even by the standards of

*gestures at all this*

let's try and make an effort to not spiral down into one or another overly familiar wormhole, including but not limited to some swirling rehash of Bernie v Hillary or tangential broad-brush arguments about their supporters.
posted by cortex (staff) at 9:33 AM on December 19, 2016 [17 favorites]


Why the GOP Congress Will Stop Trump From Going Too Far:

Nope. Seriously, nope. Charlie Sykes is right about this. These guys are not going to magically see the light.

Reality is persistent, and propaganda that explains it away has to keep changing.

We've talked a lot about the need for empathy with these fucking fuckers, so I'll share:

The first thing to understand about a lot of people is that they think everyone in the government is lying to them anyway. This is not solely a right-wing notion - I heard it a lot from my lefty people too, especially this past year.

So plenty of Trump voters don't mind that he's blatantly lying because they think everyone is lying to them at that level of government. If anything, it makes Trump's lies a feature, not a bug: he's obvious enough to figure out, and he's deliberately pandering to them. They think all the stuff Dems have to say about women and PoC and LGBTQA is just pandering lies too, but this time they get to be the center of attention.

I remember a GOP voter once telling me, "At least the GOP will stab you in the face, not the back."

Rather than just relying on my view of stuff, I'd like to refer you back to roomthreeseventeen's excellent find from earlier in the thread: Voting Against the Grandkids. That reminds me of Trump people I actually know: they're not, like, poor innocent dupes who are just too stupid to know Bargain Bin Hitler's lying. They're complicit in the scam because it makes them feel better. Scams generally work this way - there's an old adage that you can't scam an honest person. They're not honest, they're not expecting honesty. They just want to feel better.

It'll make them harder to dislodge too, because admitting Trump is a fucking nightmare will mean admitting they're remotely culpable. They'll cling to 'he's not so bad' a lot longer than they should over that.

tl;dr: whatever we do, the only conservatives we can count on are the ones who already went #NeverTrump. They were a pleasant surprise, and I'm grateful that they exist. The rest aren't coming. There's no magic words or technique that'll bring them on board, and indeed, many will *never* admit they were wrong simply out of shame.

Upon preview after spending way too much time on this:
I really hope this isn't a franz ferdinand moment of some sort.

Fucking hell. Me too. :(
posted by mordax at 9:34 AM on December 19, 2016 [26 favorites]


I knew nothing miraculous would happen with the EC, and yet today I am spectacularly sad and discouraged about the state of our nation.
posted by agregoli at 9:34 AM on December 19, 2016 [12 favorites]


If there are history books in 50 years I have the terrible feeling that this will be in a lot of them.

Just quickly: the caption says the assassin is "Clearly doing the islamist "tawhid" sign" - however, as someone notes below tht post, looking closely at that very picture you see that the raised forefinger has been hastily photoshopped in.
posted by progosk at 9:34 AM on December 19, 2016


Been lurking for 10 years. Too angry not to participate in these threads now.

Welcome aboard! Do you have any evens left to spare for those in need?
posted by C'est la D.C. at 9:36 AM on December 19, 2016 [18 favorites]


looking closely at that very picture you see that the raised forefinger has been hastily photoshopped in.

I've seen video of the shooting. It's not photoshopped.
posted by Gaz Errant at 9:39 AM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


Without the Christian Right, There'd Be No President Trump: What Do They Want in Exchange?
Trump made all the right noises about easing Christians’ sense of persecution in an increasingly liberal cultural and legal climate. One key issue carried a particular weight. “He said he was going to be very forceful about religious liberty, and particularly the Johnson Amendment.”
posted by adamvasco at 9:47 AM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


The rest aren't coming. There's no magic words or technique that'll bring them on board, and indeed, many will *never* admit they were wrong simply out of shame.

Oh hey that reminds me, how did that whole Iraq thing turn out? Lemme guess: we won, and the war paid for itself? Yeah it started off a little tetchy but then boom! Mission Scooter Surprise Turkey Libby Accomplished! Heckuva job, Dubz!

Of course the news media were relentless about following up on . . uh . . Y'know. Jon Stewart retiring? Lens flares? I forget.

Hey look did you know we just had an election and put in power a man and organization exponentially more unqualified and terrible than Tha Cheney Gang!? Ha ha! Ahhhh we are some duuuuuumb motherf--kers.
posted by petebest at 9:48 AM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


I've seen video of the shooting. It's not photoshopped.

Saw it now - and right you are; so it's a glitch in the frame taken from the video. My bad.

posted by progosk at 9:53 AM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


Oh hey that reminds me, how did that whole Iraq thing turn out? Lemme guess: we won, and the war paid for itself?

I have a friend who was Army National Guard and was called up to serve in Iraq in 2003. His mom, who says she cried herself to sleep every night while he was deployed, still defends voting for Bush in 2004 because he was going to end abortion.
posted by peeedro at 9:53 AM on December 19, 2016 [12 favorites]


The Sanders elector is a dem who has belatedly caught up with reality. There are no lasting consequences for breaking the rules and the rules only exist when it's convenient for the people with power to enforce them.

And the Dems don't seem to have any power currently, so [insert Bill Murray Fuck It Meme].
posted by Slackermagee at 9:55 AM on December 19, 2016


Welcome aboard! Do you have any evens left to spare for those in need?

No. My evens gland was empty by 2007 and slowly refilled over a few years but for the last 1.5 years it has been squeezed drier than ever before. On the other hand my outrage duct has only enlarged and the muscles ringing it are stronger than ever. I think the anger stage of grief is more helpful than the evens stage from here on out.
posted by Rust Moranis at 9:55 AM on December 19, 2016 [11 favorites]


So, apropos of nothing I was reading the wiki thing about the history of the dial tone, when this came up:
Invented by engineer August Kruckow, the dial tone was first used in 1908 in Hildesheim, Germany.[1] In the United States, the dial tone was introduced in the 1940s, and became widespread in the 1950s.

When President Dwight D. Eisenhower retired in 1961 it was nearly universal, but the president himself had not been confronted with a dial tone. When he picked up his own household phone his assistant had to explain what the strange noise was, as well as show Eisenhower how to use a rotary dial phone.
Ike had never heard a dial tone until he retired. And now we've got Tweetin' Trump. Things sure are funny sometimes.
posted by petebest at 9:59 AM on December 19, 2016 [10 favorites]


BBC America (BBC World News? hard to interpret chyron): Russian foreign ministry confirms that Russian ambassador Andrei Karlov has died from his words. Turkish officials say shooter has been "neutralized".
posted by XMLicious at 10:03 AM on December 19, 2016


Still no defections in the EC, including Pennsylvania, which pretty much seals the overall result. Neither Texas nor Maine have voted yet.
posted by jedicus at 10:04 AM on December 19, 2016


BBC America: Russian foreign ministry confirms that Russian ambassador Andrei Karlov has died from his words. Turkish officials say shooter has been "neutralized".

FRANKIE SAY
WAR!
HIDE YOURSELF

I bet the EU parliament are realizing what a bullet they dodged.
posted by Talez at 10:05 AM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


tl;dr: whatever we do, the only conservatives we can count on are the ones who already went #NeverTrump. They were a pleasant surprise, and I'm grateful that they exist. The rest aren't coming. There's no magic words or technique that'll bring them on board, and indeed, many will *never* admit they were wrong simply out of shame.


Yep. If a Republican went Trump, there's really nothing we can do. Any effort to convince just makes them more pro-Trump since we're just damn lying liberals. They'll have to be turned off by Trump themselves and come to sanity on their own. Our efforts are much better spent fighting Trump and GOTV and preserving voting right for our coalition.

In that vein I told my mother that not only were my wife and I not coming home for Christmas, but that we wouldn't be seeing her or talking again for the foreseeable future. I'd already unfriended her on Facebook and blocked her on Twitter late last year to avoid the deluge of rightwing bullshit, but had still been emailing and the occasional FaceTime. And on those Facetimes she gave a bit of hope that Trump would be a bridge too far even for her, a born again Christian and Republican in South Dakota.. She was a Cruz supporter and couldn't understand her brothers who were backing Trump. But as the election went on, and Trump picked Pence with his anti-abortion and anti-gay views that she agrees with, I could tell she was wavering, starting to succumb to the dark side. And after the election, we hadn't talked except for very brief emails about very basic things. Because I knew that she'd caved. And sure enough, checking her Twitter it's a shitstorm of pro-Trump, anti-Dem bullshit. So it's over. I'm done giving people the benefit of the doubt because they're old, they grew up in a different era, they're family. I'm done letting them have the best of both worlds; holding their despicable beliefs and harming people I love and still get to have me as part of their lives. Letting people get away with things I think has helped lead us to this point. If a racist fascist Russian mole buffoon isn't a bridge too far then fuck it. Not to say that I won't debate and fight and try to convince people. But after spending years doing so with certain people and realizing it's no use, I'm no longer having them in my life.
posted by chris24 at 10:05 AM on December 19, 2016 [39 favorites]


Where are you guys getting EC results?
posted by ian1977 at 10:05 AM on December 19, 2016


Where are you guys getting EC results?

The AJC has a liveblog (warning: autoplay video).
posted by jedicus at 10:07 AM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


...that Russian ambassador Andrei Karlov has died from his words...

Well that was a hell of a typo. I meant "died from his wounds", of course.
posted by XMLicious at 10:10 AM on December 19, 2016 [6 favorites]


A Sev-Ank
F Bla C A Sev-Ank
A Syr-Smy
A Arm S A Sev-Ank
A Mos-Liv
F StP/SC S A Mos-Liv
A Ukr-War
posted by theodolite at 10:11 AM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


Where are you guys getting EC results?

I'm strongly averse to autoplay video, so I'm using the 270towin page.

You may have to refresh and go to the front page for new headlines, but they deliver the data on a page that's simple enough to load.
posted by Leslie Knope at 10:17 AM on December 19, 2016




Trump private security force ‘playing with fire’: The president-elect continues to employ a battalion of retired cops and FBI agents to protect him and clamp down on protesters.

Jason Miller seems to have pulled off the rare feat of calling this story "complete nonsense" while seeming to confirm it.
posted by zachlipton at 10:19 AM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


For Americans shrugging at the Russia/Turkey news: We're treaty-bound to Turkey's defense (NATO Art. 5) if they're attacked

Oh, well, luckily for Trump he has a great reason to withdraw from NATO now! And Putin will swerve and go after the Baltics instead once he does.
posted by asteria at 10:22 AM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


270 tow in? Wha??? ohhhhh....

I cant watch this. Its like election night but without the illusion of hope.
posted by ian1977 at 10:22 AM on December 19, 2016 [7 favorites]


Trump has picked Vincent Viola as his Secretary of the Army (a non-cabinet post). He's a billionaire businessman, founder of a high frequency trading company, owner of a professional hockey team, West Point graduate, and helped to fund/found West Point's Combating Terrorism Center after 9/11. His real connection to Donald Trump is his taste in interior decorating, his $114 Million townhouse is "turgidly ornamented and giddily gaudy in its unrestrained grandiosity".
posted by peeedro at 10:24 AM on December 19, 2016 [5 favorites]


Whose biggest experience in the military is random training weekends.
posted by corb at 10:25 AM on December 19, 2016 [5 favorites]


The shooting of the Russian ambassador and the seizing of the drone by China make me think that real-world events are going outpace Trump's ability to govern by Twitter very, very soon.
posted by staggering termagant at 10:27 AM on December 19, 2016 [39 favorites]


The shooting of the Russian ambassador and the seizing of the drone by China make me think that real-world events are going outpace Trump's ability to govern by Twitter very, very soon.

Soon? It has from day one. Trump just doesn't give a fuck.
posted by Talez at 10:30 AM on December 19, 2016 [10 favorites]


If by "govern," you mean, "allow Kellyanne, the Steves, and Jared/Ivanka to make major policy decisions while he Tweets"... well, things will go on as they've begun.
posted by TwoStride at 10:32 AM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]




You're right, Talez, he doesn't, but the rest of the world doesn't give one about how he feels about Vanity Fair.

Pretty soon things are going to heat up internationally to the point where Trump's domestic agenda will have to be shelved in favor of unraveling blankets a la Threads because North Korea, China, Russia, and Guam have all nuked us. Silver lining?
posted by staggering termagant at 10:36 AM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


Serious question: If Russia invaded the Baltics or did something to Turkey in retaliation for the ambassador and Turkey/the US's position on Syria, wouldn't that finally spur the "adults" left in the US to lock Trump in a room and take over?

No, I guess not. If Russia installing their president didn't do it, I guess nothing will. Y'all are probably right.

I had hope there for a second that WWIII might finally get someone to do something about Trump.
posted by staggering termagant at 10:41 AM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]




Competent foreign policy is something American voters never appreciate while we have it, but we sure do miss it when it's gone, and our people are dying in wars.

You guys might think the GOP has no interest in reining in Trump, but I think they care about foreign policy more than the average voter, and it's Trump's disastrous foreign policies, not his domestic policies, that they may actually stand up and reject.

The bad news is, they'd replace him with someone with equally disastrous domestic policies. But if that prevents WWIII, it's still a win for me.
posted by OnceUponATime at 10:44 AM on December 19, 2016 [10 favorites]


AJC: Dec 19, 2016 1:44 PM EST The count: Donald Trump has 179 votes; Hillary Clinton has 93 votes. There are 266 votes pending.
posted by Wordshore at 10:46 AM on December 19, 2016


Obama left the economy in pretty good shape and American companies have been on the upswing. One of the problems with expecting and predicting the worst about Trump is that the bar is set so low-- if he doesn't start World War III then it's a win. Which gives him a sort of freedom, and even earns respect from the average person if the economy doesn't crater, etc.
posted by cell divide at 10:47 AM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]




The bad news is, they'd replace him with someone with equally disastrous domestic policies. But if that prevents WWIII, it's still a win for me.


Domestic policies can be undone later.

Our soldiers will not respawn, however.
posted by ocschwar at 10:53 AM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


The, vaguely, nice thing about his cabinet is that billionaires really don't want to see complete and unpredictable chaos, so that's something. I mean it won't stop anything they consider reasonable atrocities, but they'll at least pay attention when it looks like something might effect their bottom line.

Syria and Iran don't really fit into that equation all that well, so probably more bad news for them, but I'm gonna figure Erdogan makes with the show of siding with Russia, keeping Turkey from getting attacked by them, and Trump will side with his allies, which would make NATOs position weaker since Turkey and probably the US are going to stay close to Putin if things continue as they have been. Flynn, I gather, hasn't been a fan of policy in Ankara, but I'm not sure what he's thinking now with Erdogan cracking down. Israel seems to be moving more towards a Russian friendly position as well, which should suit Trump fine and fit with the other elements at this rate.
posted by gusottertrout at 10:54 AM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


One of the problems with expecting and predicting the worst about Trump is that the bar is set so low-- if he doesn't start World War III then it's a win.

But then, Trump started out with a massive inheritance and repeatedly went into bankruptcy, merrily screwing the people he worked with along the way. So.
posted by mochapickle at 10:54 AM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


Donald Trump's family will be the main attraction at a fundraiser the day after the inauguration, celebrating hunters, shooters and fishermen who probably pushed Trump over the line in November.

TMZ obtained a draft of the invite for "Opening Day," a massive party that will be thrown at the Walter E. Washington Convention Center in D.C.
The attire is "Camouflage & Cufflinks ... Jeans, boots and hats are welcome."

Now, here's what you get ... for a price.
-- BALD EAGLE PACKAGE ... a private reception for 16 guests to rub elbows with Donald J. Trump. The package includes a "multi-day hunting and/or fishing excursion for 4 guests with Donald Trump Jr. and/or Eric Trump." You also get 85 VIP guest tickets to the event. Price: $1 MILLION.

-- GRIZZLY BEAR PACKAGE ... private reception for 8 people to meet and greet Donald J. Trump. The hunting/fishing trip is also part of the package. It's a scaled-down version of the Bald Eagle Package. Price: $500,000.
There are other packages as well. As for the entertainment, Alabama and Toby Keith will perform.

Our sources say it's still not clear if President Trump will attend ... they're all working on the details, and if he's not there it could affect price. That said, the event is legit and the Trump family is behind it.

posted by futz at 10:55 AM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


-- BALD EAGLE PACKAGE ... a private reception for 16 guests to rub elbows with Donald J. Trump. The package includes a "multi-day hunting and/or fishing excursion for 4 guests with Donald Trump Jr. and/or Eric Trump." You also get 85 VIP guest tickets to the event. Price: $1 MILLION.

The creme de la creme of the hunting trips being named "Bald Eagle" must be purely coincidental and not at all metaphorical.
posted by Talez at 10:57 AM on December 19, 2016 [13 favorites]


You guys might think the GOP has no interest in reining in Trump, but I think they care about foreign policy more than the average voter, and it's Trump's disastrous foreign policies, not his domestic policies, that they may actually stand up and reject.

I couldn't possibly disagree with this more strongly. They care about one thing, and one thing only, and that thing is tax cuts for the rich. Everything else, everything, is window dressing until they can get to the next round of tax cuts. Paul Ryan can't point out Turkey on a map, much less give a shit about what Trump does in response to a crisis there. The GOP is going to support whatever insane thing Trump blunders into around the world just like they did with Bush, because he's the man that signs the tax cuts.

That's the sum total of the Republican's foreign policy oversight.
posted by T.D. Strange at 10:58 AM on December 19, 2016 [26 favorites]


Come on, they don't only care about tax cuts for the rich! They also care about making sure that the working class is weak, demoralized, and defenseless.
posted by Pope Guilty at 11:01 AM on December 19, 2016 [10 favorites]


asteria: Or pulled people like Sebelius and Napolitano from their governorships.

I have to admit, as someone who moved to Arizona in the summer of 2008, it felt like a bait-and-switch move to have Napolitano taken away from us, leaving her post to the next in line... Jan Brewer.
posted by Superplin at 11:01 AM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


The incoming protofascist regime, which has taken power on a platform largely composed of anti-minority sentiment, courting its supporters with a guns-and-camo-themed event called "Opening Day" just after inauguration? Sounds fine to me.
posted by contraption at 11:02 AM on December 19, 2016 [12 favorites]


*crosses Alabama and Toby Keith off playlist*
posted by petebest at 11:03 AM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


Donald Trump Expected to Retain a Private Security Force As President: [NY Mag]
Donald Trump won’t content himself with the standard-issue presidency — he’s going to have his customized. Daily intelligence briefings are out, along with the norms that prohibit the appearance of corruption. “Victory rallies” are in — as is the private security force that policed dissent at Trump’s events throughout his campaign.

Politico: "Trump private security force ‘playing with fire’"

Paul Krugman comments: "That 1930s show returns. And I'm not talking about macroeconomics"
posted by snuffleupagus at 11:08 AM on December 19, 2016 [5 favorites]


You guys might think the GOP has no interest in reining in Trump, but I think they care about foreign policy more than the average voter, and it's Trump's disastrous foreign policies, not his domestic policies, that they may actually stand up and reject.

We talk a lot about projection on the part of the right-wing, and it's true: they totally project. Trump's Mirror just keeps getting more obvious.

The thing we *don't* like to talk about is that we do it too. Every time someone talks about 'surely this,' they're engaging in projection - the notion that our opposition shares our same values deep down, and that there's a violation of facts or morals or decency or common sense egregious enough to make them come to their senses.

Well, that isn't how it works. Our moral values are not universal. The very idea that hey, facts are the be all and end all of arguments? Not universal. I know people who sincerely believe supernatural forces drive events, limiting the ability of humanity to destroy ourselves. It's not made up, it's not arguable for them, and I'm not talking about only conservatives.

Not only does the entire world not agree with us - even generalizing to the broad stuff that Mefi basically agrees about - but plenty of people don't even engage in the process of deciding what to believe by criteria that we would find sound. I would argue that the vast majority of people, including elected officials who should know better, are driven largely by emotion over thinking shit through.

We ignore that at our peril. 'Surely this' is a trope that needs to be buried in 2016. We should be looking at the evidence, not what we would do in someone's place. In this case, I'm with qcubed: even the 'best' GOP thinkers have done a pretty shit job with foreign policy, not just domestic.
posted by mordax at 11:11 AM on December 19, 2016 [14 favorites]


Domestic policies can be undone later.

Our soldiers will not respawn, however.


The people that will die from conservative ideology as enacted by Trump and the crazies in state legislatures, especially as it relates to health care, will easily outnumber the total losses from the Iraq and Afghanistan. They're not going to "respawn," either.
posted by zombieflanders at 11:11 AM on December 19, 2016 [34 favorites]


And that's not counting the millions or tens of millions of people who will essentially become domestic equivalents of the wounded.
posted by zombieflanders at 11:13 AM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


King Hûi of Liang said, 'I wish quietly to receive your instructions.'

Mencius replied, 'Is there any difference between killing a man with a stick and with a sword?'

The king said, 'There is no difference!'

'Is there any difference between doing it with a sword and with the style of government?'

'There is no difference,' was the reply.
posted by theodolite at 11:14 AM on December 19, 2016 [26 favorites]


Joining their New York counterpart's effort, two California state senators introduce the TRUMP (Tax Returns Uniformly Made Public) Act, which would require a candidate to release five years of tax returns to appear on the presidential ballot.
posted by peeedro at 11:16 AM on December 19, 2016 [38 favorites]


A Sev-Ank
F Bla C A Sev-Ank
A Syr-Smy
A Arm S A Sev-Ank
A Mos-Liv
F StP/SC S A Mos-Liv
A Ukr-War


I never thought I'd find myself saying "please don't ruin the carefree, joyful spirit of the boardgame Diplomacy for me" but here we are in the year of our lord two thousand sixteen.
posted by cortex at 11:17 AM on December 19, 2016 [8 favorites]


"That 1930s show returns. And I'm not talking about macroeconomics"
Hitler Died April 30, 1945
Trump Born June 14, 1946
Reincarnation?
posted by ThreeCatsBob at 11:21 AM on December 19, 2016 [5 favorites]


ROBERT REICH: RALLIES AND LIES. THIS IS HOW TYRANNY BEGINS

...In short, the rallies and tweets give Trump an unprecedented platform for telling Big Lies without fear of contradiction—and therefore for advancing whatever agenda he wishes.

It’s no coincidence that Trump continues to denigrate the media, and hasn’t held a news conference since July.

A president intent on developing a base of enthusiastic supporters who believe boldface lies poses a clear threat to American democracy. This is how tyranny begins.

posted by futz at 11:25 AM on December 19, 2016 [23 favorites]


Apologies if this has all been explained elsewhere, but searching these threads is difficult. I'm wondering about New York's expenses for protecting Trump. The federal government is granting the city $7 million, which is a fraction of how much it costs. What's to prevent NYC from saying "okay, we'll spend our $7 million, but no more"? And while they're at it, can they hold Trump's motorcade to the same traffic standards any driver is held to?

Is there anything more than convention that requires a city to provide extra services to a single resident?
posted by The corpse in the library at 11:26 AM on December 19, 2016 [5 favorites]


As the leader of the Justice Department and Secret Service, will Trump be able to deputize private individuals to grant them police/secret-service legal powers?
posted by Coventry at 11:27 AM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


If so, Elvis died way too soon.
posted by peeedro at 11:28 AM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


The first faithless elector of the day is a Minnesota Democrat. Muhammad Abdurrahman attempted to vote for a ticket of Bernie Sanders and Tulsi Gabbard (FUCKING TULSI GABBARD), but the vote was declared invalid and another elector was selected. What the fuck.
posted by sunset in snow country at 11:29 AM on December 19, 2016 [16 favorites]


Over my head / before my time, peeedro.
posted by Coventry at 11:29 AM on December 19, 2016


Elvis lobbied Nixon for law enforcement powers, there's even a movie about it.
posted by peeedro at 11:30 AM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


In a bitter irony that epitomizes 2016, the only electors likely to defect are those in states that went for Clinton.
posted by C'est la D.C. at 11:31 AM on December 19, 2016 [29 favorites]


Thanks, peeedro. Looks entertaining.
posted by Coventry at 11:32 AM on December 19, 2016


AJC: Dec 19, 2016 2:32 PM EST Ohio cast 18 votes for Donald Trump. (Trump now on 245)
posted by Wordshore at 11:33 AM on December 19, 2016


Dec 19, 2016 2:34 PM EST From the AP: "Maine Democratic elector casts vote for U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders for president instead of Hillary Clinton."

Dec 19, 2016 2:19 PM EST Minnesota cast 10 votes for Hillary Clinton after Muhammad Abdurrahan, a "faithless voter" refused to vote for her and was replaced by an alternate.
posted by Wordshore at 11:36 AM on December 19, 2016


NeverTrump turned out to be the biggest fraud in US history.
posted by T.D. Strange at 11:36 AM on December 19, 2016 [17 favorites]


NeverTrump turned out to be the biggest fraud in US history.

They didn't have the votes, or even the electors. Only half of the electors needed to flip were from NeverTrump strongholds. The majority of NeverTrump support came out of Republicans in blue states and small states with few electors.
posted by corb at 11:40 AM on December 19, 2016 [7 favorites]


Biggest fraud in American history you say? Hmm, I think I can think of a bigly one.
posted by cell divide at 11:44 AM on December 19, 2016 [6 favorites]


Trump's private security team at work. (The guys in the maroon & blue sweaters, per Politico's article Inside Trump's 'privatized mercenary force'.)
posted by Coventry at 11:45 AM on December 19, 2016


They care about one thing, and one thing only, and that thing is tax cuts for the rich.

Again, if all you care about is the interests of the rich, the rich very much do NOT want to get into WWIII. (Something like the Iraq war is different -- almost no American assets were destroyed, and some contractors made a lot of money.)

But actually I think it would be more accurate to say "They agree about one thing, and one thing only, and that thing is tax cuts."

It was the GOP and their policies that wrecked the first deal with North Korea, and we're going to see that happen with Iran. It was the GOP and their policies that suggested we didn't really need global support to go into Iraq. It was the GOP and there policies that contributed to the death-in-the-crib of Kyoto, which we're about to see for Paris.

I think these mistakes were made by different factions within the GOP, which were ascendant at different times.

The "Rockefeller Republicans" who serve the interests of the billionaires are very much pro free trade and anti war. They are internationalists. They want money flowing freely and corporations free to operate globally. Wars interfere with that. So do climate change accords. These guys are the ones screwing over the Kyoto accords and the Paris agreements. They are mostly libertarian. You can find this point of view in "Reason" magazine. They don't like Trump because he's destabilizing.

Still some of the more ideological billionaires are "neoconservatives." Neocons want to extend American hegemony. They like trade agreements, treaty organizations, etc, and they don't mind fighting "small" wars if that will help extend our influence, but they aren't stupid enough to think we can turn Russia or China into democracies or American satellite states. So they don't want war with the other Great Powers either. You can find this point of view in the letters that former Bush administration foreign policy leaders wrote about how horrible Trump would be, before the election. Paul Wolowitz and Elliot Abrams and so on. They think Trump will undermine our interests.

Then there are the "paleoconservatives" who are generally isolationist and nationalist and opposed to war because they are opposed to having anything to do with other countries at all (they also hate trade agreements and treaties. They are the ones trying to screw up the Iran deal.) This is the Pat Buchanan wing of the party, and they are more about ideology than money. They like Russia, because Russia is white and Christian. They see Islam as a threat in and of itself. Trump sort of fits here, but paleocons want to do stuff like "build a wall" and "ban Muslims" and then retreat within our borders and leave everyone the fuck alone. Their nationalism and their isolationism go together. They aren't interested in spreading democracy or saving people. They like military spending because they think we should have missiles pointed at everyone like a porcupine has spines pointing in all directions, but like a porcupine, they would use those weapons defensively rather than offensively. You can find this point of view in The American Conservative. They don't like most any war that doesn't start with an attack on American soil, because basically, they don't care what happens in any other country. They don't like Trump to the extent that he's increasing the risk of such an attack on American soil.

So I think different parts of the Republican coalition approach foreign policy differently, but NONE of them want to go to war with China, or destabilize the current US dominated world order. Except the Buchanan paleoconservative wing, most of them don't want to pull out of NATO or our other alliances either.

And all of these groups, I think, care more about their foreign policy positions than most Democrats do.
posted by OnceUponATime at 11:46 AM on December 19, 2016 [14 favorites]


Oh, the guy in the blue sweater is actually Lewandowski.
posted by Coventry at 11:47 AM on December 19, 2016


(Grumbles at different places online changing their running totals, but depending on where you read, Trump currently has 238, 240, 241 or 245 EC votes. All academic anyway, it seems.)
posted by Wordshore at 11:51 AM on December 19, 2016


And all of these groups, I think, care more about their foreign policy positions than most Democrats do.

This is an incredibly vague statement after such a detailed lead up. Please elaborate what you mean.
posted by C'est la D.C. at 11:52 AM on December 19, 2016


A president intent on developing a base of enthusiastic supporters who believe boldface lies poses a clear threat to American democracy. This is how tyranny begins.

With thunderous applause?
posted by entropicamericana at 11:53 AM on December 19, 2016


So, did those self-styled "Hamilton electors" ever actually settle on their conservative alternative? Their website says they wanted to push for somebody like Romney or Kasich that Republican electors would be comfortable backing, but I never heard about them actually choosing somebody.
posted by Rhaomi at 11:55 AM on December 19, 2016


(On second thought, I guess not, since all the Democratic electors are backing Clinton.)
posted by Rhaomi at 11:56 AM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


Not as far as I was aware from the protests this morning, and as far as I'm aware they sent the bulk of their staff to Texas. As I type this, we're sitting in the State Capitol Hall to witness. The stands are packed with people hoping for either a Hail Mary miracle or at least the ability to say they were here to witness Republicans sell us down the river.
posted by sciatrix at 12:01 PM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


This Ankara thing could be a big deal and I am dreading Trump's response. It's probably not going to lead to WW3, but it might lead to an existential crisis for NATO. If Russia decides to retaliate with force, I can't see Trump backing Turkey as a NATO ally, not when it would be presented by Trumpists as "siding with a Muslim terrorist." I generally think "false flag" is the "here's a photo of a blurry light on a black background, it's a UFO, right?" of political discourse but it's pretty much straight out of the KGB playbook for this to have been arranged in an attempt to break NATO. Who knows if it is, but fucking hell, he's not even actually in charge yet...
posted by feloniousmonk at 12:01 PM on December 19, 2016 [5 favorites]


And all of these groups, I think, care more about their foreign policy positions than most Democrats do.

This is an incredibly vague statement after such a detailed lead up. Please elaborate what you mean.


I don't think most Democrats know or care how Obama's foreign policy was different from what had gone before. How iconoclastic he actually was, in that world.

And... Do you think there is a consensus among Democrats about whether we should have intervened in Syria? Or failing a consensus, is there a vigorous argument among Democrats? (As there was between neocons and paleocons?) Or do Democrats just feel uncomfortable with and uncertain about the whole issue and unwilling to voice a strong opinion one way or the other about what should be done? Because that's the sense that I have. I think Democrats argue more about domestic issues, and define themselves more in terms of their positions on domestic issues.

But I think Republicans' foreign policy positions form a more central part of their political identity within the party, and that they will probably fight for them.
posted by OnceUponATime at 12:04 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


Is Russia's military big enough to sustain conflicts in multiple regions of the globe (Syria, Turkey)? I was under the impression that they leaned on cyberattacks and other covert operation (positioning) because they didn't have enough heft to throw around in that way.
posted by C'est la D.C. at 12:04 PM on December 19, 2016


I think if there's ever been a time when the U.S. looked weak enough to the outside world for some other major power to risk making a pre-emptive attack, it's now, so I hope you're right about it not happening, but I'd take nothing for granted.
posted by saulgoodman at 12:05 PM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


Why would Russia attack Turkey over this incident?
posted by Coventry at 12:06 PM on December 19, 2016


Just curious, what is Russia's relationship with Israel?

I think Israel wishes it knew, and I think that is going to characterise foreign relations in the next decade or so. Russia could (but hasn't) stop Israel from attacking missile shipments going to Hezbollah. On the other hand, it could (but hasn't) stop those shipments itself.

I have no idea what Russia's goal in the region is; at one point I would have said that it was securing a Syrian state strong enough to protect Russia's naval base, but maybe it goes further than that and has something to do with controlling the flow of oil and gas from the region. That would one have been seen as an intolerable attack on US interests, but Trump's administration picks now make a strong response seem unlikely, as long as the sugar gets spread around.
posted by Joe in Australia at 12:06 PM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


Their aircraft carrier turned out to be useless and is merely symbolic.

They just unveiled a stealth fighter that's alleged to be more capable than the F-35 and cheaper, but how quickly they can produce them and train pilots on them, who knows.

Most importantly, Russia's ability to withdraw rapidly from some uber-remote deployment is nowhere near NATO's, so that does restrain them somewhat.
posted by ocschwar at 12:06 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


C'est la D.C.: They're really not able. It's a gamble on Putin's part, only, unlike the Cold War, it's really working for them this time. They are scraping by in a show of force, hoping that a) their public forgets about all that corruption and shitty economy stuff and b) so that people here and elsewhere believe they are powerful, and potentially increase concessions or dealings with them.
posted by constantinescharity at 12:07 PM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


I'm more worried about China. Also worried about regional escalation getting out of hand WWI style by a seemingly incomprehensible series of misunderstandings and chance events leading to a larger conflict everyone gets pulled into eventually in some way...
posted by saulgoodman at 12:10 PM on December 19, 2016 [8 favorites]


Also, reportedly there are multiple fatalities from a large truck drove into a crowd at a Christmas market in Berlin.

I really would like an adult to be in charge of our response to today's many events.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:10 PM on December 19, 2016 [8 favorites]


There was also a shooting at a Mosque in Zurich. No evidence any of these things are connected, but it's, uh, a bit of a day.
posted by zachlipton at 12:12 PM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


Texas invocation has mentioned the freedom of electors twice and abjured electors to do what is good and what is right. Slightly astonishing, that.
posted by sciatrix at 12:13 PM on December 19, 2016 [14 favorites]


Dec 19, 2016 3:10 PM EST The Maine elector who voted for Bernie Sanders has his vote ruled "improper." He has switched the vote to Clinton.
posted by Wordshore at 12:14 PM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


I don't think any sets out to start a world war, and the idea that billionaires love money too much to go to war is dangerous. Many billionaires have their money because of war, or because of violence, or coercion. The idea that because you're fabulously wealthy you are less likely to be dangerous or stupid is a fallacy, one that we're seeing up close in American politics.
posted by cell divide at 12:14 PM on December 19, 2016 [20 favorites]


I've called his office multiple times over the last few weeks, but time to again. This shit needs to stop.

@SenSchumer
I've known Vinnie Viola for a over decade, and his dedication to the @USArmy is second to none.
posted by chris24 at 12:15 PM on December 19, 2016 [5 favorites]


Okay, today, it's a bit of a bumpy ride and I'd like to get off now.

NATO is definitely on the line and I don't think it's a coincidence that, if the truck in Berlin is an intentional attack, the target is Germany. What we need in Europe is just another leeeeettle push rightward and we're all fucked.
posted by lydhre at 12:16 PM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


Star Spangled Banner physically painful to hear today, and I say that after singing it with the crowd twice this morning.
posted by sciatrix at 12:17 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


A Colorado elector has been replaced for refusing to vote for Clinton. He reportedly is a Sanders supporter who before the election said he wouldn't vote for Clinton unless she gave an interview to The Young Turks.
posted by zachlipton at 12:18 PM on December 19, 2016


Curious how the faithless elector votes are being ruled improper/invalid. What's the legal basis for that, and why didn't the Hamilton electors address the issue when they were selling their plan?
posted by Coventry at 12:18 PM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


Russia has a shitload of tanks, which is the main strength of their armed forces (other than you know, their shitload of nukes). But that's not really a ton of help in a limited war. They could roll into Poland, Ukraine or the Baltics, but getting those tanks anywhere else quickly is an issue. They also have modern fighter planes and submarines probably on par with their US counterparts, but in far fewer numbers. The US has 127 F-22s in service, Russia has 8 T-50 demonstrators. They don't have anything like the US's ability to project air/naval force around the globe, and their logistics chain is probably running at full capacity sustaining operations in Syria, with most of their Black Sea fleet currently deployed there. So no, they can't really operate in two theaters at once, and the forces they would use against Turkey are already engaged in Syria.

There's also no real reason for Russia to actually attack Turkey, they pretty much need access through the Bosporus to keep their economy functioning. And NATO isn't current weak enough yet to try and break up that ham-handedly, not in advance of their ongoing psy-ops in the French and German elections. I'd be surprised to learn it was a 'false flag'.
posted by T.D. Strange at 12:19 PM on December 19, 2016 [11 favorites]


Being fabulously wealthy is, in fact, splendid insulation from the horrors of war. There's no draft in the country and even if there were, well, sometimes you're so rich you get bone spurs in your heels.
posted by lydhre at 12:19 PM on December 19, 2016 [21 favorites]


BBC America (BBC World News? hard to interpret chyron): Russian foreign ministry confirms that Russian ambassador Andrei Karlov has died from his [wounds]. Turkish officials say shooter has been "neutralized".

Well, I guess this is the start of Obama's promised retaliation against Russia for the alleged tampering in the US election. Turkey is a country whose favor the US and Russia are competing for; the Russian ambassador being assassinated could lead to Russia-Turkey relations souring and drive them back toward US influence. Either way, Turkey will be massively influential to the outcomes of the Syria conflict.
posted by indubitable at 12:20 PM on December 19, 2016


If the goal is the end of NATO, Russia doesn't need to invade Turkey or anything close to it for this to get out of hand fast. They probably couldn't without total mobilization and an all-in commitment. What they can do is shoot down enough Turkish fighters that it can't be downplayed or covered up, forcing a situation where Turkey is faced with the choice of ignoring it and eating the consequences of that at home and abroad or of invoking article 5 and hoping for American, German, British, etc. support. If it doesn't come, then what happens to NATO?
posted by feloniousmonk at 12:21 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]




Well, I guess this is the start of Obama's promised retaliation against Russia for the alleged tampering in the US election.

Just to be clear, you're claiming that Obama ordered a hit on the Russian ambassador to Turkey?
posted by cooker girl at 12:23 PM on December 19, 2016 [18 favorites]


Two electors just declared ineligible to serve. Two others who are eligible, including Art Sisneros, absent.
posted by sciatrix at 12:23 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


What they can do is shoot down enough Turkish fighters that it can't be downplayed or covered up, forcing a situation where Turkey is faced with the choice of ignoring it and eating the consequences of that at home and abroad or of invoking article 5 and hoping for American, German, British, etc. support.

That's true, but it doesn't make a ton of sense to make that gamble now, before their puppet US president is installed, and before their puppet candidates in France and Germany have gone to the ballot. They only get to make that play once, because if NATO calls it...
posted by T.D. Strange at 12:24 PM on December 19, 2016


A Colorado elector has been replaced for refusing to vote for Clinton. He reportedly is a Sanders supporter who before the election said he wouldn't vote for Clinton unless she gave an interview to The Young Turks.

Really? That was the ask? What a moron.
posted by tivalasvegas at 12:24 PM on December 19, 2016 [26 favorites]


Watching the Texas Electoral College vote as this will probably be the one which pushes Trump over 270.
posted by Wordshore at 12:27 PM on December 19, 2016


Just to be clear, you're claiming that Obama ordered a hit on the Russian ambassador to Turkey?

It wouldn't surprise me. He did just issue a direct threat last week, and it's at least as plausible as all the silly speculation here about a full on ground invasion of Europe or Turkey.
posted by indubitable at 12:28 PM on December 19, 2016


I don't know where to put this, but it's yet another future turd on the pile of Trump and it makes me sad. Anyone who can guide me on how to seek political asylum/protection/escape to a gay friendly country, MeMail me, please.

Could Republicans Undo Marriage Equality?
posted by yoga at 12:28 PM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


Who knows what's going on for sure, it could be just another terrible event, it could be Russians thinking that NATO is the US and the moment to act is when the US is at its weakest, during an acrimonious transition, it could be something else entirely. Basically the only thing I can know for sure is I don't want Trump or any of his people reacting to these events.
posted by feloniousmonk at 12:29 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


That's true, but it doesn't make a ton of sense to make that gamble now, before their puppet US president is installed, and before their puppet candidates in France and Germany have gone to the ballot. They only get to make that play once, because if NATO calls it...

Can NATO afford to start a war with Russia knowing that the hegemonic keystone of the alliance is soon to be led by an erratic, ignorant, thin-skinned egomaniac with no diplomatic or military experience?

I don't think either Obama or Merkel would make that call. I think they would have to back down, and I'm afraid Putin might know it.
posted by tivalasvegas at 12:29 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


The great big Christmas tree in the room is especially upsetting right now. A baby just burst into tears.
posted by sciatrix at 12:30 PM on December 19, 2016




I doubt that anyone in the US government pointed the attacker at the Russian ambassador themselves, but it wouldn't surprise me if providing resources to Syrian rebels was part of the retaliation Obama promised.
posted by Coventry at 12:31 PM on December 19, 2016


Dec 19, 2016 3:29 PM EST Nebraska electors cast 5 votes for Donald Trump.
Dec 19, 2016 3:22 PM EST Missouri has cast 10 votes for Donald Trump.

(Think that puts Trump on 256, depending on where you read)
posted by Wordshore at 12:32 PM on December 19, 2016


Really? That was the ask? What a moron.

Apparently he wanted her interviewed specifically about DAPL, so sort of a principled moron anyway.
posted by zachlipton at 12:34 PM on December 19, 2016


Really Clinton delegates?! This is our political parties in a nutshell - Republicans are so disciplined and fall into lock step with each other when the time comes, and Democrats make empty futile gestures and flail around. Jesus it's painful to watch.
posted by supercrayon at 12:36 PM on December 19, 2016 [69 favorites]


so sort of a principled moron anyway.

The worst kind of moron, in my opinion.

Eight of the 12 [Washington EC] members voted for Hillary Clinton, three voted for former Secretary of State Colin Powell, and one voted for "Faith Spotted Eagle."

wait no, the worst might be this kind of moron.
posted by tivalasvegas at 12:37 PM on December 19, 2016 [14 favorites]


This is our political parties in a nutshell - Republicans are so disciplined and fall into lock step with each other when the time comes, and Democrats make empty futile gestures and flail around
Thank you for saying this in better words than I've been able to come up with in the past few months.
posted by Brainy at 12:37 PM on December 19, 2016 [8 favorites]


Worth noting that all three states with faithless electors going against Hillary, WA, CO and ME, have legalized marijuana. (cite)
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:38 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


The Texas Electoral College vote seems to be bogged down, as four people are no-shows, of which two have been declared illegible anyway. This may take longer than the primary season.
posted by Wordshore at 12:39 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


Two electors just declared ineligible to serve. Two others who are eligible, including Art Sisneros, absent.

Any more on this and how they're handling it? Are electors being properly replaced with their district alternates? This was a strategy we tried in Cleveland for a legal challenge, I'm wondering if people are trying to repeat it.
posted by corb at 12:39 PM on December 19, 2016


and Democrats make empty futile gestures and flail around.

Not only futile gestures, but ones that can be used as precedent for very bad things down the road.
posted by drezdn at 12:39 PM on December 19, 2016 [10 favorites]


Electoral College now taking nominations for the four vacant seats on the Texan college.
posted by sciatrix at 12:40 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


Before the swearing in, I would like to take this opportunity to remind everyone that the Turdfungus will have the NSA reporting to (well, to Ivanka presumably), and for encryption and privacy there's never been a better time, than right now.

https://www.privacytools.io/ was mentioned before, and there's a tmely AskMe with more links and information.

Get encrypted up. Drink fresh water. Go tell a tree you love it. It all helps.
posted by petebest at 12:40 PM on December 19, 2016 [12 favorites]


This may take longer than the primary season.

Turn, curse and spit, you fool! DO IT QUICKLY.
posted by tivalasvegas at 12:40 PM on December 19, 2016 [6 favorites]


This means from now on we can never trust "the Left"'s electors to uphold their obligations to the Democratic candidate. The Washington delegation was threatening to refuse to vote Clinton when it looked like she would win in a landslide. If it's a close contest, 5 Bernie Bros or their intellectual descendants voting 'Harambe 2020' could swing the EC vote, and now that's a legitimate concern.

Because of Bernie.
posted by T.D. Strange at 12:40 PM on December 19, 2016 [18 favorites]


haha nice, scare quotes around an anti-DAPL activist's name because it sounds funny
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 12:40 PM on December 19, 2016 [11 favorites]


Republicans are so disciplined and fall into lock step with each other when the time comes

It doesn't have to be this way. The RNC had a similar problem with Ron Paul activists in 2012, and learned their lesson for this cycle.

This rebellion is happening because of the corrupt attempt to maintain top-down party discipline against the clear wishes of a huge segment of the Democrat rank-and-file.
posted by Coventry at 12:40 PM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


Electoral College now taking nominations for the four vacant seats on the Texan college.

ARE YOU SHITTING ME. That is not the procedure! God I hope those guys have a legal team, and God bless you, abstaining electors.
posted by corb at 12:43 PM on December 19, 2016 [17 favorites]


Yeah, they're taking votes on replacements. Seat 12 got one nomination which could not find a second.
posted by sciatrix at 12:45 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


The Democratic Party never has been and never will be as competent at Corruption as the Republican Party.
posted by oneswellfoop at 12:46 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


This rebellion is happening because of the corrupt attempt to maintain top-down party discipline against the clear wishes of a huge segment of the Democrat rank-and-file.

DRTP.
posted by Talez at 12:46 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


To be clear, rage is directed at shitty Texas procedural bullshit, not sciatrix who I am very grateful for the reportage of.
posted by corb at 12:46 PM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]




It doesn't have to be this way. The RNC had a similar problem with Ron Paul activists in 2012, and learned their lesson for this cycle.

This rebellion is happening because of the corrupt attempt to maintain top-down party discipline against the clear wishes of a huge segment of the Democrat rank-and-file.


Ummm, no, this is more like if Bernie Sanders were a full-on gulag-lovin' Stalinist who rode a undercurrent of piano-string-wielding Maoists primary voters to defeat Hillary, and the Dems couldn't muster a proper defense.

Call the DNC feckless if you like, they're not my favorite people at the moment. But they're less incompetent than the Republican leadership.
posted by tivalasvegas at 12:46 PM on December 19, 2016 [6 favorites]


They're now closing the position for nominations, but perhaps a challenger appears? I am... Confused.
posted by sciatrix at 12:47 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


Russian flag flies at Texas Capitol prior to #ElectoralCollege

They're gonna have to rename the amusement parks.
posted by tivalasvegas at 12:47 PM on December 19, 2016 [11 favorites]


Nominees are now being asked to report the districts they live in.
posted by sciatrix at 12:48 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


Okay, as far as I can tell there are three nominated replacements for district 12, of which only one lives in district 12.
posted by sciatrix at 12:49 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


That could be an avenue for challenge - the elector must be replaced by someone from their district and I believe that person must have been eligible as of the date of the Texas GOP Convention. This is the most exciting stuff out of today thus far!
posted by corb at 12:50 PM on December 19, 2016 [6 favorites]


District 12? A little on the nose there, 2016
posted by Brainy at 12:50 PM on December 19, 2016 [59 favorites]


This is the most exciting stuff out of today thus far!

Everything's better in Texas, apparently.
posted by soren_lorensen at 12:51 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


Was the Russian flag in Texas supposed to be in protest or support of Russia?
posted by C'est la D.C. at 12:52 PM on December 19, 2016




A showing of Rogue One starts in 50 minutes at my local cinema. I'm tempted to go and see it, fairly confident that by the time I get back Texas will still not have finished casting its Electoral College votes.
posted by Wordshore at 12:52 PM on December 19, 2016 [5 favorites]


I shouldn't be surprised that the Republicans have incorporated Russian iconography. But here we are. #fuck2016
posted by pxe2000 at 12:52 PM on December 19, 2016


Was the Russian flag in Texas supposed to be in protest or support of Russia?

I fervently hope so.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:53 PM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


One nominee for a seat I can't hear declared ineligible.

Also, I have no fucking idea about this Russian flag thing. I've been sitting in the main hall for two hours, not by the balconies, but... I saw no flag ever. And I don't know what is up with that.
posted by sciatrix at 12:56 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


Now taking nominations on seat 14. First nom has a second and is someone who lives in the district. There are two qualified nominations so far.

They haven't got to Art Sisneros, by the way. This is nominations on the third vacant seat for the first abstaining (as opposed to ineligible) elector.
posted by sciatrix at 12:58 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


From now on whenever I meet a Trump supporter I will greet them with a hearty "Comrade!".
posted by Justinian at 12:58 PM on December 19, 2016 [14 favorites]


Eight of the 12 [Washington EC] members voted for Hillary Clinton, three voted for former Secretary of State Colin Powell, and one voted for "Faith Spotted Eagle."

If SETI picks up any weird signals today, that's just me screaming into the void.
posted by C'est la D.C. at 12:59 PM on December 19, 2016 [18 favorites]


Not just you.
posted by prefpara at 1:00 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


Now taking nominations on the last seat. Am personally surprised that they haven't decided on replacements at least informally for people who have announced they're noping out months ago.
posted by sciatrix at 1:00 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


So my prediction that there would be more defections from Clinton than Trump is panning out. Fucking Democrats.
posted by Justinian at 1:02 PM on December 19, 2016 [25 favorites]


Public health crisis 2017: Vodka becomes even more super cheap.
posted by AlexiaSky at 1:02 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


@cd_hooks:
lib: delegates shouldnt be bound. that's what hamilton wanted
[half of clinton delegates vote for "stormin'" norman schwarzkopf]
lib: hmm
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 1:03 PM on December 19, 2016 [8 favorites]


Three nominations for this seat. These are not pro forma arguments; people have asked questions and made arguments. These replacements genuinely appear to be being chosen right now, in this room, and to have not necessarily been chosen ahead of time. One woman nominating a seat in district 36 could not pronounce or remember the name of the elector her candidate would replace.
posted by sciatrix at 1:04 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


Now voting on nominated candidates.
posted by sciatrix at 1:06 PM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


One thing to watch out for in the Trump presidency that happened in Wisconsin...

There were things Scott Walker said he specifically wouldn't do once elected, but people had printed up fliers warning that Walker would do those things. Walker than used those fliers as "proof" that the public knew he was going to do the things he specifically said he wasn't going to do.
posted by drezdn at 1:07 PM on December 19, 2016 [15 favorites]


So my prediction that there would be more defections from Clinton than Trump is panning out. Fucking Democrats.

Except for the couple that have tried voting Sanders, I'm personally not too upset because we knew about this in advance. The Washington state ones had already announced they were voting for "some other Republican." I was confused before when I read about it so I asked in a previous thread here for clarification. The idea, as I came to understand it, was there was obviously no hope of enough Trump electors voting Clinton to flip the election, so to offer them a non-Clinton alternative that they would be willing to pick instead of Trump.

Do I like that this lowers Clintons electoral vote count? No. But I'm also not going to deride these electors for trying it.
posted by dnash at 1:09 PM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


Georgia had one elector who declared that he could not vote for Trump weeks ago and did not show up today. The nominated replacement was the chair of the state party, who was nominated, seconded, and voted for in about 30 seconds. The only delay was that the governor was needed to finalize the vote and he was not available (based on the running cops and the noise elsewhere in the building, I think it's possible he wasn't allowed to leave his office because of the noisier among us protestors). That took a few minutes to straighten out, during which a representative lectured us all on civics (and gave a completely wrong description of the purpose of the electoral college). There was also a prolonged speech about how brave the electors had all been in the face of all the "harassment" they had received, which apparently meant that people had called and emailed them about the job they were elected to do and they didn't like it. Oh and a prayer in which God was asked to help us all understand that conservatives were acting in our best interests. It was a shit show. But I'm glad I was there.
posted by hydropsyche at 1:10 PM on December 19, 2016 [19 favorites]


GOP Rep's Vision Of Post-ACA World: You Wait To Treat Your Kid's Broken Arm
The example Rep. Bill Huizenga (R-MI) gave in an interview with MLive.com was from his own experience when he waited until the morning after to take his youngest son to the doctor with an injured arm, because he did not want to waste money on an expensive emergency room visit. The arm, it turned out, was broken.

"We weren't sure what was going on. It was in the evening, so I splinted it up and we wrapped it up, and the decision was, okay, do we go to the ER? We thought it was a sprain, but weren't sure," Huizenga said, adding that he and his wife "took every precaution and decided to go in the next morning."

"When it [comes to] those type of things, do you keep your child home from school and take him the next morning to the doctor because of a cold or a flu, versus take him into the emergency room? If you don't have a cost difference, you'll make different decisions," he said.

He offered the example to explain his view that health care consumers should shoulder more of the financial responsibilities, instead of the current health system, which he said "continue[s] to squeeze providers."
This Congressman put his kid to bed with a broken arm and used that to make some kind of point about how we should forgo health care to cut costs.
posted by zachlipton at 1:11 PM on December 19, 2016 [82 favorites]


I am getting the clear sense that many of the electors in Texas have no idea who the replacements they are voting on are.
posted by zachlipton at 1:11 PM on December 19, 2016


That's good for us for challenges later, zachlipton. More chance people are wrong about districts.
posted by corb at 1:14 PM on December 19, 2016


Have any Trump electors not voted for Trump?
posted by kirkaracha at 1:15 PM on December 19, 2016


hydropsyche: That's interesting, especially the bit about the prayer. Like I said, the invocation here was very different: lots of plausible deniability, sure, but also very "vote as you think best, and choose very wisely."
posted by sciatrix at 1:16 PM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


Kirkacha, Stephen "Chris" Christopher Jr here in Texas has pledged very firmly to not vote Trump.
posted by sciatrix at 1:17 PM on December 19, 2016




Mod note: A few comments removed and again boy fuckin' howdy let's not find a way to yank this in the direction of rehash #182 of "well but Bernie/Hillary".
posted by cortex (staff) at 1:22 PM on December 19, 2016 [22 favorites]


Remember when people used Clinton's relationship with Kissinger as a reason to vote for Trump? Such innocent times.
posted by drezdn at 1:22 PM on December 19, 2016 [20 favorites]


New delegates appointed. Chair now announcing a temporary recess.
posted by sciatrix at 1:22 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


> The "Rockefeller Republicans" who serve the interests of the billionaires are very much pro free trade and anti war. They are internationalists.

I'm puzzled by the fact that this sentence is written in the present tense. Rockefeller style moderate pro-business / neutral-to-progressive on social issues Republicanism was irrelevant during the Reagan years and simply non-existent in the present day. There are no more moderate Republicans. They're pro-billionaires, and they're anti-immigrant, and they're anti-non-discrimination statutes, and they're anti-LGTBQ, and they're against equal pay for women. Talking about Rockefeller Republicanism as if it's relevant to the present day political dynamic makes no sense. If war is good for business -- and it often is -- then there will be war.
posted by tonycpsu at 1:24 PM on December 19, 2016 [10 favorites]


2016: the year Franz Ferdinand was trending on twitter.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 1:25 PM on December 19, 2016 [13 favorites]


I hope they have enough time to get a game of Red Rover or Four Squares in.
posted by drezdn at 1:25 PM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


>There were things Scott Walker said he specifically wouldn't do once elected, but people had printed up fliers warning that Walker would do those things. Walker than used those fliers as "proof" that the public knew he was going to do the things he specifically said he wasn't going to do.

It absolutely amazes me that we live in a society where this kind of thing is going down (and not just Wisconsin! witness the shitshow in NC!) and people are not in the streets losing their minds and flipping the fuck out. This is our fucking shining city on a hill? This is the state of our democracy?

I give up. Between this kind of shit, and NC, and the unceremonious shutdown of any attempt at recounts (in many cases, *specifically* because anomalies were present), and our vaunted electoral safety net which is currently in the process of lining up to fellate a narcissistic gaslighting sociopath... fuck it. I fucking give up. I'm out.

Living in America in 2016 is like renting a house where you've got a legal lease and you're fully paid up on rent, but the landlord has just started letting themselves in and is brazenly packing all of your valuable shit up in boxes and hauling it away. It's not legal in the least, but they just don't care. The place is already mostly empty. They've already taken over the top floors and moved their own friends in. And we're just sitting around in the last couple of remaining chairs in the living room, eating Cheetos and watching reality TV, doing our best to ignore the noise while our home is taken apart bit by bit, and we'll continue doing that right up until somebody yanks the last chair out from under us and hauls the TV away.
posted by Two unicycles and some duct tape at 1:26 PM on December 19, 2016 [53 favorites]


Now sneakily eating a muffin in the middle of the hall, because I haven't eaten all day and I'm getting all light headed. Fellow protesters I'm sharing with agree that Costco makes a damn fine muffin.
posted by sciatrix at 1:27 PM on December 19, 2016 [10 favorites]


There are no more moderate Republicans.

They're called Democrats. Kirsten Gillibrand. Joe Donnelly. Chuck Schumer.
posted by Talez at 1:28 PM on December 19, 2016 [15 favorites]


I forgot to mention that the Georgia vote was held in the state Senate chamber, and no citizen observers were allowed in. As far as I can tell based on who came out afterwards, a lot of senators and members of the press were in the gallery. We were in the hallways throughout the capitol watching on monitors.
posted by hydropsyche at 1:33 PM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


This is a bit odd. Tom Arnold, the comedian, did a radio interview and claimed that there's a tape from The Apprentice of Trump using racial slurs, among other things, and that "hundreds of people" have seen it. Fahrenthold is interested.
posted by zachlipton at 1:37 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


Surely this (and a time machine)...
posted by tonycpsu at 1:38 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


If that tape existed, why didn't it come out during the election?
posted by pxe2000 at 1:38 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


Klan rally talk will be the new locker room talk.
posted by peeedro at 1:41 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


Clearly they need to identify themselves in some consistent way. Shirts in a low-key earth tone might do the trick.

Trump’s security director, Keith Schiller "is often misidentified as a member" of the Secret Service.
...Schiller looks the part, invariably sporting a uniform of dark suits and white shirts, along with a Secret Service-issued perimeter pin...
posted by kirkaracha at 1:41 PM on December 19, 2016


If that tape existed, why didn't it come out during the election?

Arnold claims that the tape wouldn't have alienated his supporters.

It might have further activated people to vote against him, though.
posted by Coventry at 1:41 PM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


Back from recess. Now nominating more people for something I'm not quite sure of? Oh, Chairman of the Meeting.

how are these things not settled
posted by sciatrix at 1:42 PM on December 19, 2016


You Must Make a Friend of Horror: What's the Worst That Could Happen to NYC in Trump's America
posted by Mchelly at 1:45 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


they are making arguments for which candidate should be chair

oh my god
posted by sciatrix at 1:45 PM on December 19, 2016 [5 favorites]


It absolutely amazes me that we live in a society where this kind of thing is going down (and not just Wisconsin! witness the shitshow in NC!) and people are not in the streets losing their minds and flipping the fuck out. This is our fucking shining city on a hill? This is the state of our democracy?

I give up.


I mean, I think part of the answer is right there.
posted by lazaruslong at 1:46 PM on December 19, 2016 [5 favorites]


That's interesting, sciatrix! There is usually one already chosen. If TX runs like WA, it may be that someone has called a vote for chairman in the hopes of getting a new one. (Which was another tactic planned for in some cases.) This is all potentially hopeful!
posted by corb at 1:46 PM on December 19, 2016


The tape of Trump saying racist stuff on The Apprentice was a hot rumor for a while in September/October, and Mark Burnett put a total clampdown on everyone who worked or ever had worked for him to shut up.
posted by Etrigan at 1:47 PM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


What is the best case scenario for what is going on in TX? Don't all roads still lead to a President Trump?
posted by prefpara at 1:49 PM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


One candidate now giving a speech about why he should be chair in which he starts with a tale of reading the Constitution age 12 and deciding he wanted to grow up to be a presidential elector.

I call bullshit.
posted by sciatrix at 1:49 PM on December 19, 2016 [23 favorites]


The idea, as I came to understand it, was there was obviously no hope of enough Trump electors voting Clinton to flip the election, so to offer them a non-Clinton alternative that they would be willing to pick instead of Trump.

If they were that determined to vote for Trump over Clinton, then I wish they would've. They don't deserve to salve their conscience with their empty gestures of moral purity. Narcissists the lot of them. They all belong together.

According to this piece at Vox today
Democrats lost the presidential election in three states; Clinton lost in Wisconsin by fewer than 23,000 votes and in Michigan by fewer than 11,000 votes. Votes afforded to Green Party candidate Jill Stein in either state were more than Trump’s margin of victory.
Which makes this the second election in US history where the Green Party helped to turn the country over to a man opposed to everything their constituency claims to hold dear. Congrats. I hope every Green voter gets just what they wanted—and gets it good and hard. And maybe Stein can get the Order of Russia the next time she's in Moscow with General Flynn.
posted by octobersurprise at 1:50 PM on December 19, 2016 [36 favorites]


> One candidate now giving a speech about why he should be chair in which he starts with a tale of reading the Constitution age 12 and deciding he wanted to grow up to be a presidential elector.

I call bullshit.


But there's tape.
posted by tonycpsu at 1:52 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


octobersurprise: Johnson/Weld got 106,442 votes in Wisconsin which probably mostly otherwise would have gone to Trump. Stein/Baraka got 30,980. In Michigan it was 172,136 vs 51,463. (Ballotopedia.)

I'm not sure what you're hoping for, here... a mandatory two-party system?
posted by Coventry at 1:56 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


While it's true that the Libertarian ticket usually draws more from the Republican side analysis showed that wasn't necessarily true this year. Lots of young ex-Bernie supporters flipped to Gary "What is Aleppo?" Johnson. For reasons.

a mandatory two-party system?

We already do in practice. There will never be a major third party unless the Constitution is changed. (If a major third party emerged it would promptly either be absorbed into or replace one of the existing two major parties).
posted by Justinian at 1:58 PM on December 19, 2016 [5 favorites]


Even if every Green voter had voted for Hillary, it would not have been enough.
posted by Apocryphon at 1:59 PM on December 19, 2016


I'm not sure what you're hoping for, here

A little goddamned common sense?
posted by octobersurprise at 1:59 PM on December 19, 2016 [15 favorites]




No candidate secured a majority, so Robert Bruce is stepping down and they're voting again. If no one gets twenty votes this time with three nominees, they're going to wash out the lowest one again and vote a third time.

I really hope Wordshore got to go to his movie...
posted by sciatrix at 2:01 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


I will not forgive Florida green party voters for 2000 but Stein and the Greens rank pretty far down on the "2016 enemies" list. Like really, really far down. This wasn't a Nader 2000 situation.
posted by Justinian at 2:03 PM on December 19, 2016 [10 favorites]


Numerically speaking, it doesn't matter. Clinton would still have needed all of the Libertarian votes to win the states needed to guarantee the e-votes to beat Trump. Many of those Libertarian voters were disaffected Republicans who wouldn't have voted for her or any other Democratic candidate anyway. 2000 was the year you could blame Nader, the Greens, third parties, whatever. But 2016 is not the year where you could use a stab-in-the-back-narratives to sweep under the crumbling of the Blue Wall under the Democrats' watch.
posted by Apocryphon at 2:03 PM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


2016 is the year of the Russian Useful Idiot and FBI quisling narrative.
posted by Justinian at 2:06 PM on December 19, 2016 [8 favorites]


No one got majority. VOTING AGAIN.

I, uh, may have snapped "oh, for god's sake" using my outside voice. Imma gonna hope that wasn't too audible outside my corner.
posted by sciatrix at 2:07 PM on December 19, 2016 [12 favorites]


I have PLENTY of blame for third parties of both stripes. They and the Bernie Bros were the ones loudly pushing the "they're both equally as bad" narrative to everyone they came in contact with. That shit mattered. And it wasn't remotely accurate.
posted by T.D. Strange at 2:07 PM on December 19, 2016 [38 favorites]


This election was Murphy's Law in action. Third party voters played a factor, but so did disaffected voters, "both sides are bad", electoral college shenanigans, voter suppression, Republicans running a "guy you can swish a cocktail with" lunkhead, Democrats running a burnished but not inspiring enough policy wonk, and then a lot of dirty tricks everywhere. It's the 2000 election on steroids. With the results of 2004, of Democrats waking up to a divided battleground nation with cries of "but of course he shouldn't have won, don't they see?"
posted by Apocryphon at 2:08 PM on December 19, 2016 [11 favorites]


PIZZAGATE FOREVER: His Fans Insulted the Alt-Right, So the Alt-Right Declared Him a Pedophile Ringleader

Cernovich is the world's biggest piece of shit.
posted by Talez at 2:09 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


I, uh, may have snapped "oh, for god's sake" using my outside voice.

I hope you were doing an Ultron impression.
posted by Servo5678 at 2:10 PM on December 19, 2016


Why Trump Had an Edge in the Electoral College
Liberals say Mr. Trump’s victory is proof that the Electoral College is biased against big states and undemocratically marginalizes urban and nonwhite voters. Conservatives say the Electoral College serves as a necessary bulwark against big states, preventing California in particular from imposing “something like colonial rule over the rest of the nation,” as the conservative analyst Michael Barone put it. California sided with Mrs. Clinton by a vote margin of four million, or 30 percentage points.

Both sides have a point. But in the end, Mr. Trump won for a simple reason: The Electoral College’s (largely) winner-take-all design gives a lot of weight to battleground states. Mr. Trump had an advantage in the traditional battlegrounds because most are whiter and less educated than the country as a whole.
...
The point is that the main bias of the Electoral College isn’t against big states or regionalism; it’s just toward the big battleground states. If they break overwhelmingly one way, that’s who wins. This is not exactly a high-minded Hamiltonian argument. There aren’t many justifications for letting a few close states decide a close national election. But that’s basically what the system does, and there’s nothing about those states that ensures they provide a representative outcome.
Contains lots of charts and some cool alternate history scenarios.
posted by kirkaracha at 2:10 PM on December 19, 2016 [16 favorites]


Cernovich is the world's biggest piece of shit.

It's going to be the Satanic Panic, but with government backing.
posted by OverlappingElvis at 2:11 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


The Electoral College’s (largely) winner-take-all design gives a lot of weight to battleground states.

That's a very polite way of putting it. What it was actually designed to do was give a lot of weight to racist whites in slave states. It just so happens that there aren't slave states anymore. But there are still a lot of racist whites and they still get a lot of weight.
posted by Justinian at 2:12 PM on December 19, 2016 [17 favorites]


They and the Bernie Bros were the ones loudly pushing the "they're both equally as bad" narrative to everyone they came in contact with.

While I'm sure Chomsky is not a fan of Clinton, even he knows in a system with an in built 2 party bias, you vote for the candidate closer to your views with an actual chance of winning.
posted by PenDevil at 2:12 PM on December 19, 2016 [8 favorites]


Successfully elected a chair. Now we can...

....nominate and elect the secretary of the Meeting oh Jesus Christ

when the new chair took over she thanked all of us in the cheap seats for being here and asked us to keep being polite and oh God I'm pretty sure that's my fault
posted by sciatrix at 2:14 PM on December 19, 2016 [13 favorites]


My God, what is this witchery? They're actually passing out the ballots
posted by sciatrix at 2:16 PM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


If it's stifling hot with a vexing odour of horse, the founders would find it familiar.
posted by petebest at 2:19 PM on December 19, 2016


ThinkProgress: A source tells ThinkProgress that the Kuwaiti embassy, which has regularly held the event at the Four Seasons in Georgetown, abruptly canceled its reservation after members of the Trump Organization pressured the ambassador to hold the event at the hotel owned by the president-elect. The source, who has direct knowledge of the arrangements between the hotels and the embassy, spoke to ThinkProgress on the condition of anonymity because the individual was not authorized to speak publicly. ThinkProgress was also able to review documentary evidence confirming the source’s account.
posted by everybody had matching towels at 2:20 PM on December 19, 2016 [19 favorites]


I can hear the protesters shouting. Not, admittedly, well enough to--oh my God I can hear their words now
posted by sciatrix at 2:20 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


The photos of the assassination of the Russian ambassador are chilling. here is one from moments before the assassination. The ambassador is the focus of the picture. The assassin looks like any other security guy. It's like one of those movies where an inside man on the secret service detail helps kidnap/assassinate the President.
posted by Justinian at 2:21 PM on December 19, 2016 [5 favorites]


Want to hate the Naked Cowboy even more? From The New Yorker Spectators Enjoy the Trump Tower Circus
The Trump Bar opened at noon, and one of the first customers was the street performer known as the Naked Cowboy. His normal turf is Times Square, but he’s been spending a lot of time at Trump Tower. He ordered—“Vodka with a splash of orange juice”—and took a corner stool. Over his shoulder were a TV and a magnum of Trump Champagne. He wore his signature getup—cowboy boots, cowboy hat, and Fruit of the Loom briefs with “trump” on the rear—plus a silk boxer’s robe decorated with the Stars and Stripes. “I wear it while I’m indoors, out of respect,” he said. “I have an affinity with Trump. I get him. We’re both media promoters, media whores, whatever you want to call it. People get hung up on political stuff, but I don’t care. Black, white, gay, transvestite—just stand up and make something of yourself. Look, my wife’s a Mexican immigrant. She still doesn’t have her papers. Maybe she’ll be the next to be deported, who knows? I don’t think he’d do that. But if he does, hey, that’s fate. Plus, it’s a nice thing to have hanging over her head—you know, ‘Do the dishes, or else.’ ”
And in other news: Under political pressure, Kuwait cancels major event at Four Seasons, switches to Trump’s D.C. hotel
A source tells ThinkProgress that the Kuwaiti embassy, which has regularly held the event at the Four Seasons in Georgetown, abruptly canceled its reservation after members of the Trump Organization pressured the ambassador to hold the event at the hotel owned by the president-elect. The source, who has direct knowledge of the arrangements between the hotels and the embassy, spoke to ThinkProgress on the condition of anonymity because the individual was not authorized to speak publicly. ThinkProgress was also able to review documentary evidence confirming the source’s account.
They apparently already had a signed contract with the Four Seasons and moved to the Trump Hotel.
posted by zachlipton at 2:21 PM on December 19, 2016 [15 favorites]


re: my previous link. If it isn't clear, the security guy in the picture is indeed the assassin.
posted by Justinian at 2:22 PM on December 19, 2016


The photos of the assassination of the Russian ambassador are chilling

The AP photographer, Burhan Ozbilici, wrote: "Guests ran for cover, hiding behind columns and under tables. I composed myself enough to shoot pictures." It's pretty amazing. I can't stop looking at the pair of glasses lying on the floor in the background of the shot.
posted by zachlipton at 2:23 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


Did Texas just collect all the ballots in a trash can? That looks like a trash can.
posted by zachlipton at 2:24 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


That looks like a trash can.

Technically that's called a metaphor.
posted by OverlappingElvis at 2:25 PM on December 19, 2016 [59 favorites]


A source tells ThinkProgress that the Kuwaiti embassy, which has regularly held the event at the Four Seasons in Georgetown, abruptly canceled its reservation after members of the Trump Organization pressured the ambassador to hold the event at the hotel owned by the president-elect.

SomethingsomethingClingtonFoundation! Something!
posted by T.D. Strange at 2:27 PM on December 19, 2016 [11 favorites]


Isn't it a similie if you use "like" or "as?"
posted by zachlipton at 2:27 PM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


That's all folks, it's been a fun ride I guess
posted by OverlappingElvis at 2:28 PM on December 19, 2016


Trump passed 270. It's official.

.
posted by Justinian at 2:28 PM on December 19, 2016 [11 favorites]


> Under political pressure, Kuwait cancels major event at Four Seasons, switches to Trump’s D.C. hotel

So, does this give Four Seasons standing to sue Trump for damages once he takes office and doesn't renounce his hotel lease? Not over the Emoluments clause, just plain "he's breaking the letter of his contract with the government, and it is costing us money"?
posted by RedOrGreen at 2:28 PM on December 19, 2016 [5 favorites]


Texas: 36 Trump, 1 Ron Paul, 1 John Kasich. That puts Trump over the top. God help us all.

.
posted by zachlipton at 2:28 PM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


So, does this Four Seasons standing to sue Trump for damages once he takes office and doesn't renounce his hotel lease?

And, if the company doesn't want to pick that fight, do its shareholders have the right to sue?
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 2:30 PM on December 19, 2016


.
posted by Brainy at 2:30 PM on December 19, 2016


.
posted by Gaz Errant at 2:32 PM on December 19, 2016


.
posted by Rykey at 2:32 PM on December 19, 2016


.

Hail Putin.
posted by sciatrix at 2:32 PM on December 19, 2016


We're fucked.

.
posted by vers at 2:32 PM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


.
posted by asteria at 2:33 PM on December 19, 2016


.
posted by rewil at 2:33 PM on December 19, 2016


.
posted by From Bklyn at 2:34 PM on December 19, 2016


Democracy died today.
posted by Yowser at 2:34 PM on December 19, 2016 [5 favorites]


.
posted by pemberkins at 2:34 PM on December 19, 2016


What a peaceful transfer of power!

from liberal democracy to kakocracy-kleptocracy
posted by mazola at 2:34 PM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


.
posted by supercrayon at 2:35 PM on December 19, 2016


Not that I expected anything different, but

WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK AMERICA?

Ok, back to organizing.
posted by aspersioncast at 2:36 PM on December 19, 2016 [7 favorites]


It's going to be the Satanic Panic, but with government backing.

The Gamergate model of targeted, persistent mass harassment (both online and off) is very effective and we're going to see it used more and more as a weapon against the administration's enemies - not only journalists and critics (like Kurt Eichenwald, who went dark on Twitter recently after his epilepsy was intentionally triggered by someone named @jew_goldstein) but blue-state bureaucrats, legislators, ACLU or SPLC staff, etc. Government backing isn't necessary - everything so far has happened under the Obama administration - but with tacit approval from above, it might get ugly.
posted by theodolite at 2:36 PM on December 19, 2016 [17 favorites]


*vomits*
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 2:36 PM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


Can a President Elect be impeached or do they have to take office first?
posted by mazola at 2:37 PM on December 19, 2016


Ya'll can post little dots all you want, I knew this was not gonna save us and none of my plans have changed for the future.

Though I won't say I haven't thought about how living close to an air force base means I get to go in a blinding flash if I have to go.

But I can't do anything about that, and those thoughts don't help me, so I'm keeping on.
posted by emjaybee at 2:39 PM on December 19, 2016 [17 favorites]


Can a President Elect be impeached or do they have to take office first?
The latter.
posted by aspersioncast at 2:39 PM on December 19, 2016


While I wasn't -expecting- a change today, I was still sort of hoping for one. Wish I still thought as well of the country's ability to resist the orange moron as I did 18 months ago.
posted by Archelaus at 2:41 PM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


So, does this Four Seasons standing to sue Trump for damages once he takes office and doesn't renounce his hotel lease?

It depends to some extent on the applicable law, but there is a cause of action for essentially interfering with a contract to get the business for yourself. I don't know a ton about it but there's some flavor of that knocking around the law. Chances of such a suit being brought are probably zero, even if I am remembering it correctly.
posted by prefpara at 2:42 PM on December 19, 2016


.
posted by Two unicycles and some duct tape at 2:42 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


My understanding is that he could be indicted or even jailed at this point but remain president.
posted by aspersioncast at 2:43 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


Tortious interference
posted by Turd Ferguson at 2:43 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


He's going to be violating the enoulments clause from the first moment he's sworn in, but Republicans DGAF.

He's their guy, they will never impeach for any reason.
posted by T.D. Strange at 2:46 PM on December 19, 2016 [11 favorites]


Can a President Elect be impeached or do they have to take office first?

Apparently there's something called debarment, though, which I don't entirely understand, but would be a way for Trump to be arrested and prevented from taking office if he were convicted of certain types of crime.
posted by Coventry at 2:47 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


.
posted by hydropsyche at 2:48 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


Yes. Now, I suppose, is time to rework my plans to march in Washington. I have lodging; I just need to work out exact dates, whether my partner is coming, and travel arrangements.

Beyond that, it's time to build networks of sustained resistance. Time to figure out how to make this life sustainable without actually tanking my career any more than this administration already has.

If I didn't have a family, well... But I have obligations to people who need me, so I'd better get used to balancing obligation to country and household as well as career.

Let's get to work.
posted by sciatrix at 2:52 PM on December 19, 2016 [32 favorites]


Very sad day for us all, even those too disconnected from reality to realize what kind of person the President Elect of the U.S. is and he will do to this country we love. I mourn.

.
posted by Silverstone at 2:53 PM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]




He's their guy, they will never impeach for any reason.

Depends. I can imagine scenarios where they impeach Trump in favor of Pence. But it won't be for penny ante stuff like, oh, violating the freaking Constitution of the United States on his first day in office.

Rather it would be for hilarious situations like Trump refusing to sign a Medicare dismantling Bill passed by Paul Ryan and his boys. So the House sends up a bill of impeachment using something like his violation of the emoluments clause as a pretext (I mean, he'll actually be guilty but they won't care unless he refuses to play ball). But Democrats in the Senate split because Pence will sign Medicare and Social Security gutting bills and there are enough Democratic and moderate Republican defectors to refuse to sustain the impeachment in the Senate, so Trump remains President.

That would indeed be hilarious. (note: not actually hilarious.)
posted by Justinian at 2:54 PM on December 19, 2016 [8 favorites]


I knew this was coming. It still feels like crap.
Good luck, all y'all. You're going to need it. In fact, we all are.
posted by Too-Ticky at 2:56 PM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


An interesting piece on how being used to chronic depression can be helpful in dealing with this presidency.

Depressed people are not ready to resume. “Normal” is a profane word. The status quo has teeth. The leftover tempura udon soup I ordered on Election Night is still in my fridge, a symbol of an old reality. There is no letting go.

Move on, we’re told.

Sometimes, we appear as if we’re adjusting, but inside we are screaming and throttling something. You know what we easily forget? How exactly to be whatever alive is.

posted by emjaybee at 2:57 PM on December 19, 2016 [18 favorites]


.
posted by litleozy at 3:00 PM on December 19, 2016


FOrget silver lining #23561947567015y671t369: They will never impeach him. They have all the keys. We just have to figure out what we have.
posted by yoga at 3:05 PM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


Millions more people than they do. That's what we have.
posted by schmod at 3:07 PM on December 19, 2016 [22 favorites]


Impeaching Trump in favor of Pence wouldn't actually be a silver lining... well, I guess we'd be less likely to die accidentally.
posted by Justinian at 3:08 PM on December 19, 2016 [7 favorites]


I don't even care that this outcome was totally predictable.

.

anyways.
posted by XtinaS at 3:08 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


.
posted by glhaynes at 3:12 PM on December 19, 2016


Millions more people than they do. That's what we have.
...which has never been enough to dislodge Tyrants and Fascists or even prevent them from taking power. It takes millions and millions and millions more.
posted by oneswellfoop at 3:13 PM on December 19, 2016 [7 favorites]


More Electors Tried to Defect from Clinton than from Trump

Good job, America. /s

It probably would have had more of a chance if a: Clinton hadn't conceded (or if she had retracted her concession) and B: she hadn't disappeared and instead fought for it.

I certainly don't blame her for not fighting any more, but I do wish we had a candidate who would.
posted by mrgrimm at 3:16 PM on December 19, 2016 [5 favorites]


Millions more people than they do. That's what we have.

That count for nothing because our system is designed to discount their votes.
posted by T.D. Strange at 3:17 PM on December 19, 2016




Yes, the failure of the Electoral College to not perform as usual for the first time ever is Hillary's fault
posted by theodolite at 3:19 PM on December 19, 2016 [39 favorites]


Yes, the failure of the Electoral College to not perform as usual for the first time ever is Hillary's fault

Not at all. But be honest: she had many flaws as a candidate that hurt her popular appeal, including her age and ties to the existing DC power structure. I can't imagine a younger candidate giving up and disappearing after that election. I dunno.

I don't blame her for the EC operating normally. The odds of a EC overturn were >0.01% or whatever. I do wish that she had tried.

Honest question: Why not? (I haven't heard an answer I like yet.)
posted by mrgrimm at 3:22 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


"IT'S OFFICIAL: Ron Paul has been a more successful Libertarian candidate this year than Gary Johnson, despite not running."

But Gary Johnson beat Ron Paul in the popular vote by prolly over 4 million! Unfair
posted by save alive nothing that breatheth at 3:25 PM on December 19, 2016


I can't imagine a younger candidate giving up and disappearing after that election.

What the fuck is she supposed to do? She holds no public office. She's a private citizen.
posted by asteria at 3:28 PM on December 19, 2016 [20 favorites]


One guess is that she figured the basically 0% chance of changing the outcome was lower than the chance a campaign to change the electoral result could hurt the Democrats in 2020.
posted by thefoxgod at 3:29 PM on December 19, 2016 [18 favorites]


Apparently there's something called debarment, though...

Apologies: I think this is bogus.
posted by Coventry at 3:30 PM on December 19, 2016




I certainly don't blame her for not fighting any more, but I do wish we had a candidate who would.

I get it, but honestly I can't think of a candidate who fought harder for the Presidency. She was extraordinarily well-suited to the job and white Republicans voted for a braggadocious lout who doesn't understand what he's supposed to do besides enrich himself. I think she's allowed to let it go.

Nothing on the recounts? Overturned, eh? What about the direct and agreed-upon hacking and interfering in a United States Presidential Election by Russia? No? (Really? 'Cause I would have thought that- okay). Any chance that his refusal to be briefed, disengage his obvious financial dependence on Russia, China, and Taiwan, or indeed to prepare to run this country have swayed the public to act? No? Mmmmmhmm.

Y'know what, let her sleep in. We got choppers.
posted by petebest at 3:34 PM on December 19, 2016 [12 favorites]


re: the Ron Paul e-vote- at least that means Ted Cruz still won nothing.
posted by Apocryphon at 3:35 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


.
posted by saulgoodman at 3:35 PM on December 19, 2016


.

So here's the report from South Carolina: it was bitterly cold (for South Carolina) and rainy, we had about 100 protestors max. The chamber where the electors voted was filled with friends and family while protestors were only allowed in the overflow chamber, where we could watch the election on TV and our boos would not be heard on the mics. The TV kept freezing so we had to resort to live streaming on our phones. Some of the electors gave speeches about how happy they were to vote for Trump while the protestors in the room where the mics weren't shouted Shame! and booed.
posted by rabbitrabbit at 3:36 PM on December 19, 2016 [13 favorites]


I don't blame her for the EC operating normally. The odds of a EC overturn were >0.01% or whatever. I do wish that she had tried.

The minuscule chance it worked is not worth the barn door opening it would give Trump in 4 years to contest/ignore results of a lost election. He may very well anyway, but this would fucking guarantee it.
posted by chris24 at 3:36 PM on December 19, 2016 [7 favorites]


Bleargh. I allowed myself to get hopeful for the abstention challenge, but if (as looks likely) Texas stands alone in Republican land, it doesn't actually matter in the long run. I even knew this outcome was more likely, it's just still somehow very sad.
posted by corb at 3:39 PM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


Honest question: Why not? (I haven't heard an answer I like yet.)

Because Donald Trump won more electoral votes. Electors were about as likely to vote their conscience as throw away their guns because Federalist No. 29 says a "well-regulated militia" obliges the great body of the yeomanry to go through military exercises and evolutions.
posted by theodolite at 3:41 PM on December 19, 2016


Metafilter: I haven't heard an answer I like yet
posted by threeturtles at 3:42 PM on December 19, 2016 [18 favorites]


One guess is that she figured the basically 0% chance of changing the outcome was lower than the chance a campaign to change the electoral result could hurt the Democrats in 2020.

That's really the only argument I've heard--that a campaign to pressure electors to honor the popular vote would make the Democrats look bad. I don't buy that. Also, a good candidate (who is almost certainly departing the scene anyway) could take most of the heat herself. It would be HER campaign financing any efforts (she had a LOT of money), not the DNC. Anyway, spilt milk.

The other argument is that the Dems like the EC because they think it helps them. Ridiculous Part II, Electric Booger!

The minuscule chance it worked is not worth the barn door opening it would give Trump in 4 years to contest/ignore results of a lost election. He may very well anyway, but this would fucking guarantee it.

I would say it's guaranteed regardless. Are you kidding me? These are people SPENDING lots of money to stop recounts. Why?
posted by mrgrimm at 3:43 PM on December 19, 2016


Because Donald Trump won more electoral votes. Electors were about as likely to vote their conscience as throw away their guns because Federalist No. 29 says a "well-regulated militia" obliges the great body of the yeomanry to go through military exercises and evolutions.

Wait, the Electoral College is a good thing?

If Electors had gone faithless and elected Clinton, the EC would have been done forever.
posted by mrgrimm at 3:44 PM on December 19, 2016


If Electors had gone faithless and elected Clinton, the EC would have been done forever.

Oh well thank god it lives to see another day.
posted by mazola at 3:53 PM on December 19, 2016 [10 favorites]


We did it! Thank you to all of my great supporters, we just officially won the election (despite all of the distorted and inaccurate media).
--@realDonaldTrump

This man is incapable of gracefully uttering more than two sentences without lashing out at someone.
posted by zachlipton at 3:53 PM on December 19, 2016 [34 favorites]


Mod note: Couple deleted. Again, not with the Bernie etc.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 3:54 PM on December 19, 2016 [5 favorites]


Okay, so the EC went for Trump. Bless everyone who protested and beared witness. That was the last Hail Mary pass before inauguration and now it's gone. Let's mourn one last time tonight.

But tomorrow we organize. Because there isn't going to be a single hero coming to make it better, it's going to be all of us together working from the ground up. Let's start the conversation about what that can look like.
posted by C'est la D.C. at 3:55 PM on December 19, 2016 [17 favorites]


Depressing but somewhat useful historical-perspective-wise column from Paul Krugman; How Republics End. Not a new parallel between the end of our Republic and that of Rome.

But what directly drives the attack on democracy, I’d argue, is simple careerism on the part of people who are apparatchiks within a system insulated from outside pressures by gerrymandered districts, unshakable partisan loyalty, and lots and lots of plutocratic financial support.

For such people, toeing the party line and defending the party’s rule are all that matters. And if they sometimes seem consumed with rage at anyone who challenges their actions, well, that’s how hacks always respond when called on their hackery.

posted by emjaybee at 3:58 PM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


In other news, Trump is describing what happened in Berlin in these terms: "ISIS and other Islamist terrorists continually slaughter Christians in their communities and places of worship as part of their global jihad."

German officials have yet to blame a specific group, but here he is shooting his mouth off.
posted by zachlipton at 3:58 PM on December 19, 2016 [8 favorites]


I'm sure it's just a typo.
posted by petebest at 4:01 PM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


@SenSanders
Trump received 2.5 million fewer votes than Clinton, yet he'll soon be president. Clearly, in a democratic society, this shouldn't happen.
posted by chris24 at 4:04 PM on December 19, 2016 [13 favorites]


That's really the only argument I've heard--that a campaign to pressure electors to honor the popular vote would make the Democrats look bad.

Jeez, no. That's not the reason. It's because 46% of the country would see that as a coup. And they are armed. And they already believe Democrats are evil.
posted by OnceUponATime at 4:07 PM on December 19, 2016 [14 favorites]


But Democrats in the Senate split because Pence will sign Medicare and Social Security gutting bills and there are enough Democratic and moderate Republican defectors to refuse to sustain the impeachment in the Senate, so Trump remains President.

The JPL used to be measuring Justinian's panic. Now it measures the panic he causes.
posted by Joey Michaels at 4:09 PM on December 19, 2016 [5 favorites]


I wonder how much it would take for Trump's "vicious, violent" followers to turn against him.
posted by tel3path at 4:12 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


Justinian is the Metafilter Panic Vector.
posted by Superplin at 4:12 PM on December 19, 2016 [10 favorites]


That's really the only argument I've heard--that a campaign to pressure electors to honor the popular vote would make the Democrats look bad.

The argument against a campaign to get electors to become faithless is that it would be a direct assault on probably the most critical norm or understanding that makes American democracy halfway-functional. Electors being mere ciphers for the votes of their states is the thing that lets us talk in not crazy ways about voting for president within the constitutional structure the framers stuck us with.

You do not want to live in a world where electors are elected to act on their own judgment, where they are expected to be wooed and lobbied and threatened, where -- because their vote isn't set in stone -- they are eminent targets for bribery and coercion.

The people who had it right this time where the ones who couldn't stomach being one of the ones who was going to cast the actually-deciding votes for Donnie Bumblefuck, so they let someone else take that cup from them.

Jeez, no. That's not the reason. It's because 46% of the country would see that as a coup.

They would be right. It would be like the ongoing bullshit in NC, but vastly, vastly worse.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 4:12 PM on December 19, 2016 [14 favorites]


This man is incapable of gracefully uttering more than two sentences without lashing out at someone.

I think he genuinely believes that the media's job is to repeat his utterances and admire them
posted by thelonius at 4:16 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


Democratic faithless electors were the equivalent of Iowa.
posted by T.D. Strange at 4:18 PM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


Wait, the Electoral College is a good thing?

If Electors had gone faithless and elected Clinton, the EC would have been done forever.


I don't like the EC. It's a weird relic that accidentally empowers a handful of states to decide every election, and depresses turnout in safe (or "safe") areas. But it's the shitty system we have, and the fact that electors rubber-stamp their state's results has been a necessary part of that system since very early on. The idea that a mass uprising of woke electors would flip the election to Clinton was a complete fantasy. It's about as likely as Obama simply refusing to yield the office.
posted by theodolite at 4:19 PM on December 19, 2016 [5 favorites]


I'd love to hear what the Bernie electors were thinking as it may be more evidence that Russia's DNC hack did some real damage toward rigging the election and polluting the left with cynicism.

I'd assumed that anyone well-versed in politics would see the DNC "scandal" as simply politics as usual, which is how Bernie himself seemed to see it. But these few EC protest votes suggest that even some of the electors couldn't get past it. And so much so that they'd rather both destabilize the EC and implicitly support a Russian puppet toddler man.
posted by p3t3 at 4:24 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


Politico Gingrich: Congress should change ethics laws for Trump
Gingrich[...] says Trump should push Congress for legislation that accounts for a billionaire businessman in the White House.

“We’ve never seen this kind of wealth in the White House, and so traditional rules don’t work,” Gingrich said Monday[...] “We’re going to have to think up a whole new approach.”

And should someone in the Trump administration cross the line, Gingrich has a potential answer for that too.

“In the case of the president, he has a broad ability to organize the White House the way he wants to. He also has, frankly, the power of the pardon,” Gingrich said. “It’s a totally open power. He could simply say, ‘Look, I want them to be my advisers. I pardon them if anyone finds them to have behaved against the rules. Period. Technically, under the Constitution, he has that level of authority.”
Sure. Why not. Let's just rewrite all the rules to make Trump comfortable. While we are at it let's tear up the Constitution because clearly it is no longer relevant.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:24 PM on December 19, 2016 [38 favorites]


It probably would have had more of a chance if a: Clinton hadn't conceded (or if she had retracted her concession) and B: she hadn't disappeared and instead fought for it.

I'm as gutted by the election outcome as anyone, but I think Clinton handled this absolutely correctly. She lost the electoral vote on November 8 and conceded. She should have; there wasn't any evidence of hacking or fraud.

It would have been inappropriate for her to interfere with the electoral college in any way. In my opinion the only legitimate alternate course for Trump electors would have been to reject him as being inappropriate. Clinton prosecuted Trump as well as anyone could have during the election, and I believe she proved he was completely unsuitable to be president, but almost all of the Trump electors decided to vote for him anyway.

I would've had a problem with them voting for anyone who wasn't on the ballot on November 8 because anyone else would not have been vetted by the electorate during this election. I also don't agree with the idea of her "releasing" "her" electors since they aren't hers.
posted by kirkaracha at 4:27 PM on December 19, 2016 [14 favorites]


Look, I want them to be my advisers. I pardon them if anyone finds them to have behaved against the rules.

Can I get one of these preemptive pardons for anything I'm later found guilty of? I could make some serious hay with that.
posted by diogenes at 4:28 PM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


I remember a year or so ago when my evangelical mother told me that Obama was "worse than Putin." I clearly misinterpreted what she meant by that.

What a horrible year this has been.
posted by birdheist at 4:31 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


The Lies at the Heart of Our Dying Order by Ian Welsh
"I don’t, myself, think Trump is fascist, let alone Hitler reborn ... In terms of actual speeches I judge Trump as LESS likely to start a major war, because Trump has gone out of his way to be conciliatory with Russia and Putin ..."
Dude's going to love the Age of Trump. Everything Trump does is going to prove that everyone who isn't Ian Welsh is wrong and everyone who is Ian Welsh is right*. It might almost be worth watching the world burn just to enjoy that kind of special self-satisfaction.

(*Ian Welsh says "And if you need an intellectual mentor, I can help with that too. My model of the world and of intellectual history is broad, multidisciplinary and shared by almost no one else.")
posted by octobersurprise at 4:32 PM on December 19, 2016


And yet again I wonder what horrific crime I must have committed in a past life to be regularly coated in this one with whatever un-American bilge gurgles forth from the suppurating maw of Newton Leroy Gingrich.
posted by aspersioncast at 4:34 PM on December 19, 2016 [9 favorites]


Can I get one of these preemptive pardons for anything I'm later found guilty of? I could make some serious hay with that.
December 3, 1627

It is by my order and for the good of the state that the bearer of this has done what he has done.

Richelieu
posted by kirkaracha at 4:35 PM on December 19, 2016 [7 favorites]


This was George W. Bush's ethics lawyer's response to that Gingrich quote:

"The pardon power can not be used by the president to pardon himself, or to cause other members of his administration to engage in illegal conduct or unconstitutional conduct and then simply use the pardon power in that way. If the pardon power allows that, the pardon power allows the president to become a dictator."

He says that last sentence like that isn't exactly what's going to happen.
posted by diogenes at 4:35 PM on December 19, 2016 [42 favorites]


Re Berlin
Germany’s interior minister, Thomas de Maizière, has said he is not yet ready to call the incident at Breitscheidplatz an “attack” but added that there are indications that it was intentional.
Trump statement blames 'Islamist terrorists'
posted by adamvasco at 4:38 PM on December 19, 2016


"[...] If the pardon power allows that, the pardon power allows the president to become a dictator."

Well, maybe it does. There's no suggestion that a President can't pardon members of the Administration, even for crimes carried out under the President's orders; the idea that President couldn't pardon themselves is only a small step further.

The Constitutional remedy for a President's misdemeanours is impeachment, not sticking your fingers in your ears and refusing to believe that they could possibly do such a thing.
posted by Joe in Australia at 4:42 PM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


Jeez, no. That's not the reason. It's because 46% of the country would see that as a coup

I took German once, in undergrad. My professor was quite old and at a certain point in the class he broke down into tears describing things.

They've certainly been talking the talk (week 1 justifications via Internment Camps!) and have no shortage of red meat to toss to the base for four years.

It may be that we are more tolerant of horror than old Klaus. They'll be no shortage of nightmares if the fascists choose that road, regardless, any well-intentioned revolt would have the inertia of the army careerists against it now.

God fucking help us.
posted by Slackermagee at 4:44 PM on December 19, 2016 [8 favorites]


@realDonaldTrump Today there were terror attacks in Turkey, Switzerland and Germany - and it is only getting worse. The civilized world must change thinking!

Sure Donald. And how would you like us to change our thinking? To see the world as Us against Them? Black and white with no shades of grey? Are we to group all of humanity into the categories you deem appropriate and then crush the people in your disfavored group? Waiting to be told how to think...
yours, Secret Life of Gravy
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:44 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


I'm never going to get used to the president tweeting like he's brain damaged.
posted by diogenes at 4:49 PM on December 19, 2016 [39 favorites]


"The civilized world" is just code for white people, right? I'm trying to keep my dog whistle detector as finely honed as it was during campaign season.
posted by xyzzy at 4:51 PM on December 19, 2016 [13 favorites]


"Like"?
posted by uosuaq at 4:51 PM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


He won't need to use dog whistles once all of our ears are bleeding.
posted by ian1977 at 4:51 PM on December 19, 2016


I'll never get used to the brain-damaged president, tweeting?
posted by aspersioncast at 4:56 PM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


"The civilized world" is just code for white people, right?

White Christians. Here and in Russia.
posted by T.D. Strange at 4:57 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


Check out sex tape
posted by petebest at 4:58 PM on December 19, 2016 [8 favorites]


Somehow, "change thinking" lacks the charm of "think different." But I kinda get the feeling that's what he was going for. The question is, would he have won without badly remembered, vague marketingese via twitter? I not think.
posted by valkane at 5:00 PM on December 19, 2016


I really hope this isn't a franz ferdinand moment of some sort.

We've got so many Franz Ferdinand moments it's like 2003 in here
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 5:03 PM on December 19, 2016 [20 favorites]


Michelle Obama's interview with Oprah is showing right now on CBS.
posted by triggerfinger at 5:04 PM on December 19, 2016


I remember a year or so ago when my evangelical mother told me that Obama was "worse than Putin." I clearly misinterpreted what she meant by that.

There's also an element of 2008 to this year. I think one way to try to see it from the other side is that to a hefty segment of the electorate, Obama was their George W. Bush. Trump is their Obama. Then you begin to understand the chasm of difference.
posted by Apocryphon at 5:10 PM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


I really hope Wordshore got to go to his movie...

Yep; just back. Lots of "hope" e.g. "We have hope. Rebellions are built on hope!" and rebellion talk and fighting against the odds. But also those same rebels divided and, because they aren't unified and do not have faith in each other, they are unable or unwilling to coalesce around a single plan. And some choose to retreat or surrender. While on the other side, lots of backstabbing and treachery and aspirational power-climbing, and justifying the evil of their ways as being for some kind of common good.

I also went to see Rogue One, and it was pretty good.
posted by Wordshore at 5:11 PM on December 19, 2016 [45 favorites]


Josh Marshall on Franz Ferdinand: The History You Know Is Wrong
posted by zachlipton at 5:16 PM on December 19, 2016 [6 favorites]


One thing's clear: All those years of Republicans yelling and screaming about the urgent need to protect the Constitution? That was ALL BULLSHIT. Bunch of shameless gaslighters.
posted by Lyme Drop at 5:21 PM on December 19, 2016 [42 favorites]


Everything Trump does is going to prove that everyone who isn't Ian Welsh is wrong and everyone who is Ian Welsh is right*. It might almost be worth watching the world burn just to enjoy that kind of special self-satisfaction.

Can you expand on this? I don't understand why you'd dismiss him as a narcissist if you think Trump is going to prove him right.
posted by Coventry at 5:21 PM on December 19, 2016


This election, what Rs have been doing for decades...Trump; they all remind me of the book and film Catch 22.

Everything is upside down, wrong, not getting any better and there is no hope in sight.

Gen. Dreedle (Orson Welles) is Trump. His not well thought out comments (and everything else about the character), "Well, take them out and shoot 'em!", are totally Trump.

Dreedle's minions are morons seeking promotion and wealth by any means and Yossarian is US...witnessing the horror and have nowhere to turn...we have no recourse. We can only try to survive.

One of my favorite scenes (youtube/shameless opportunist) is the one with the old man philosophizing to Art Garfunkel's character about going with the flow and flying under the radar, so to speak.

I thought that bit of philosophy was great for about a minute until I realized that it would only work for straight white males.

(If you have any suggestions for a new handle/user name feel free to me-mail me.)
posted by 1980sPunkersForHillary.com at 5:32 PM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


Keep the name. Wear it with pride.

Trump is their Obama

I totally understand what you're staying and I still want to claw my own face off at that comparison.
posted by asteria at 5:33 PM on December 19, 2016 [11 favorites]


Keep the name!
posted by zutalors! at 5:36 PM on December 19, 2016 [5 favorites]


Per CNN, the final electoral vote tally:
Trump 304 (winner)
Clinton 227
Powell 3
Sanders 1
Kasich 1
Paul 1
Spotted Eagle 1
Having 7 candidates receive at least 1 EV is the most since 1796.
posted by zachlipton at 5:40 PM on December 19, 2016 [7 favorites]


Spotted fucking eagle.

And I'd just gotten a new shipment of evens in, too, but very well -- defenestrated they fall, fluttering downward toward the flaming dumpster's waiting embrace.
posted by tivalasvegas at 5:46 PM on December 19, 2016 [8 favorites]


If there's a history book in 200 years, the AP US History question asking kids to explain the electoral vote of "Spotted Eagle" is going to be the most difficult ever.
posted by T.D. Strange at 5:48 PM on December 19, 2016 [8 favorites]


Analysis of Obama's press conference remarks about his labor secretary Tom Perez last Friday: Obama All But Endorses Tom Perez Against Keith Ellison For DNC Chair.
posted by Coventry at 5:50 PM on December 19, 2016


Just for clarity, Faith Spotted Eagle is a Native American activist. She has been vocal in the fight against the Dakota Access Pipeline.
posted by zachlipton at 5:50 PM on December 19, 2016 [45 favorites]


Have any of you folks see this?
Journalist Glenn Greenwald appeared with Tucker Carlson on Fox News tonight to criticize Democratic hysteria over Russia.
Glenn Greenwald getting chummy with Tucker Carlson, WTF?
posted by dougzilla at 5:50 PM on December 19, 2016 [12 favorites]


If there's a history book in 200 years, the AP US History question asking kids to explain the electoral vote of "Spotted Eagle" is going to be the most difficult ever.

Because "economic anxiety" will be the only acceptable answer?
posted by peeedro at 5:51 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


Because "economic anxiety" will be the only acceptable answer?

I'm struck by the thought that in 200 years, late 20th-century racial categories will be nearly as unintelligible as a late medieval hierarchy of angelic beings seems to modern Westerners -- whether for better or for worse, I haven't quite decided yet.
posted by tivalasvegas at 5:57 PM on December 19, 2016


Trump got 304 EVs. Spotted Eagle really really isn't the problem here.
posted by TwoStride at 5:57 PM on December 19, 2016 [7 favorites]


Mod note: Several comments deleted. Spotted Eagle is a person's name, not literally a vote for the animal the spotted eagle, and with that misunderstanding averted, let's just let the name thing drop.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 5:57 PM on December 19, 2016 [14 favorites]


So what's up with Glenn Greenwald? He's gone full on "establishment Democrats are the TRUE enemy" or what?
posted by Justinian at 5:58 PM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


I don't fucking care what you're doing, using the Electoral College for your own particular soap box is a really bad precedent.

Like, voting for Elizabeth Warren as VP? Why?

(I get it. Sanders mumble-mumble something. But bad idea all around.)
posted by steady-state strawberry at 6:00 PM on December 19, 2016 [6 favorites]


The American Vichy press is shaping up nicely I see.
posted by emjaybee at 6:00 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


So what's up with Glenn Greenwald? He's gone full on "establishment Democrats are the TRUE enemy" or what?

I wasn't aware he had any other position. It's been clear for a while that Wikileaks was a tool of the Kremlin, and Glenn is a de facto member of that organization.
posted by T.D. Strange at 6:01 PM on December 19, 2016 [8 favorites]


He's gone full on "establishment Democrats are the TRUE enemy" or what?

My new rule: when establishment Democrats say "xyz is not on your side," BELIEVE them.

It was true for Assange. It's apparently true for Greenwald.
posted by steady-state strawberry at 6:01 PM on December 19, 2016 [10 favorites]


It's weird because very recently, it used to actually be BS to drum up Russia hysteria. We're basically in the boy who cried wolf, playing the part of some totally other boy who is actually seeing a wolf.
posted by prefpara at 6:02 PM on December 19, 2016 [6 favorites]


Obama All But Endorses Tom Perez Against Keith Ellison For DNC Chair

You know some of those (possibly fictional) former-democrat WWC who voted for Trump did so because they're super-scared of the Boogeyman of Islam, and that even if they don't exist it's something the establishment part of the party is gonna be thinking about.
posted by aspersioncast at 6:02 PM on December 19, 2016


Also everyone has forgotten that the boy who cried wolf story has two lessons, only one of which is "don't tell lies." The very important second lesson is SOMETIMES THERE IS A WOLF
posted by prefpara at 6:03 PM on December 19, 2016 [62 favorites]


Josh Marshall on Franz Ferdinand: The History You Know Is Wrong

This is probably the version of events you know. But it is almost certainly wrong. Since the 1960s, it has been widely understood among historians that far from being a collective failure of diplomacy or the result of entangling alliances, World War I was engineered deliberately by Germany.

I mean, this is a developed historiography, but I wouldn't exactly call it a historical consensus.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 6:04 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


So what's up with Glenn Greenwald? He's gone full on "establishment Democrats are the TRUE enemy" or what?

Not establishment Dems per se, but the deep state, which he probably sees as inextricably allied with DC establishment politics of all stripes.
posted by Coventry at 6:05 PM on December 19, 2016


Trump has made me feel I've been crying wolf about all the previous Republican candidates. I mean, I wasn't really crying wolf, it's just that our language lacks a word for narcissisti-psychopathi-armageddapocalypta-wolf.
posted by uosuaq at 6:05 PM on December 19, 2016 [20 favorites]


Obama All But Endorses Tom Perez Against Keith Ellison For DNC Chair

I'm a big fan of Obama, but given that he's been the one picking DNC Chairs since 2009, I'm not sure we should take his advice on this one.
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 6:07 PM on December 19, 2016 [18 favorites]


"Communism was just a red herring." –Glenn Greenwald, apparently
posted by entropicamericana at 6:08 PM on December 19, 2016 [5 favorites]






You know some of those (possibly fictional) former-democrat WWC who voted for Trump did so because they're super-scared of the Boogeyman of Islam, and that even if they don't exist it's something the establishment part of the party is gonna be thinking about.

Yeah, and fuck 'em. First of all, 90% of Dems do not care about who the head of the DNC is - even with the emails bringing the DNC into focus this year, I doubt many of them could tell you who the current interim head of the DNC is. Second of all, I'm willing to cut out members of the party that are so racist that they can't abide the fact of non-Christians in America, much less any policies surrounding them. I'm for a big tent party, but part of being a big tent party is not kicking out minorities.
posted by dinty_moore at 6:13 PM on December 19, 2016 [6 favorites]


Also everyone has forgotten that the boy who cried wolf story has two lessons, only one of which is "don't tell lies." The very important second lesson is SOMETIMES THERE IS A WOLF

Never tell the same lie twice.
posted by the man of twists and turns at 6:13 PM on December 19, 2016 [10 favorites]


I know this is inside baseball for most folks, but it's really interesting to look at which unions are backing Ellison and which are backing Perez.
posted by mostly vowels at 6:19 PM on December 19, 2016 [5 favorites]


I'm for a big tent party, but part of being a big tent party is not kicking out minorities.

I basically agree, although I worry that this basically dooms us to repeatedly losing like this year (especially given Electoral College demographic issues mentioned upthread).

I used to believe that we could do both (not pander to racists/bigots/etc and still win), but that didn't work out this year and its only going to be worse in the future as voting restrictions will intensify and redistricting/gerrymandering will get worse under the next round of largely GOP-dominated legislatures.
posted by thefoxgod at 6:20 PM on December 19, 2016


For people who are looking for action items, there are lots of good tips here: The voting rights manifesto: a state-by-state plan to defend democracy (with a focus on state-level possibilities). A high level overview:
- Implement automatic voter registration (AVR): Since March 2015, six states have adopted legislation to automatically register citizens when they come into contact with governmental agencies, notably a Department of Motor Vehicles. Oregon, the first state to adopt this reform (after years of advocacy by the Oregon-based Bus Federation), has registered 225,000 people this way since the start of this year. The payoff: 43 percent of those new voters cast ballots on November 8.

Automatic voter registration can be passed immediately in Democratic-controlled states like Delaware, Hawaii, and Rhode Island, and in any state that falls under Democratic control in coming years.

- Enable same-day voter registration (SVR): Sixteen states currently allow same-day registration, though the number could shrink if North Carolina and New Hampshire Republicans have their way and reverse existing policies in those states.

Here, again, there are opportunities to champion same-day voter registration in states in which Democrats have or may soon have power or in states in which public referendums are readily available. Delaware, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, and Washington all lack same-day registration, for instance.

-Prepare for natural disasters: Absent same-day voter registration bills, rules should provide for the automatic extension of voter registration deadlines in counties where a natural disaster is declared in the weeks leading up to an election.

- Allow online voter registration: Many states still provide no procedure by which residents can register to vote or update their voter registrations online. Remedying this situation is very feasible since Republicans have been willing to get on board with adopting online registration systems, as they did in Florida in 2015. Moreover, this is one innovation that would not necessarily require legislative action...

- Restore felons’ voting rights

- Give noncitizens a voice in local elections

- Implement all-mail voting

- Enable no-excuse absentee voting

- Create long-term mailing lists for absentee voters: The idea behind absentee ballot standing requests is that when a voter requests an absentee ballot in a given year, authorities then continue to automatically send them absentee ballots into the future.

- Enable in-person early voting

- Enable weekend voting and extended hours

- Guarantee an adequate number of voting locations
posted by triggerfinger at 6:20 PM on December 19, 2016 [37 favorites]


I know this is inside baseball for most folks, but it's really interesting to look at which unions are backing Ellison and which are backing Perez.

Oh, good. The 2020 circular firing squad has already started.

He's going to win reelection. Just book it.
posted by T.D. Strange at 6:23 PM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


Oh yeah, totally. Greenwald, Snowden, and Assange not liking Clinton is 100% because of Russia. Nothing at all in the post-Bush era helped them nurse a grudge against Clinton, Obama, and the democrats. Nothing that we can fault a presidential candidate with. 100% sweet sweet rubles and asylum promises.
posted by Slackermagee at 6:25 PM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


Trump 304 (winner)
Clinton 227
Powell 3
Sanders 1
Kasich 1
Paul 1
Spotted Eagle 1


where have you gone deez nuts
a nation turns its lonely eyes to you
posted by nubs at 6:25 PM on December 19, 2016 [33 favorites]


From the TPM piece just above,
I remember thinking of this ominous parallel as the US forced its war in Iraq, even after the notional premise for threatening war - the return of weapons inspectors - had been conceded.

Yes. I remember that too! And now, as we hurtle through the cosmos with Captain Turdfungus, I hasten to remind the NYT, CNN, *BC, and all local opinion coverage; F@&K YOU. I ain't doing this again. You blew it so bad last time - and this, already - I want no news from you. You're switched off, thrown out d'ya hear?! Now f**k off and don't trouble me no more!

/slams_receiver
posted by petebest at 6:26 PM on December 19, 2016


Purely shallowly here, Perez is about as exciting as a mayo sandwich, Ellison has already articulated a strong vision and gotten people excited. And we are talking about the DNC, not the presidency.

It bears repeating: the Republicans are going to accuse us of eating babies roasted over a fire made of Bibles while chanting Allah Akbar no matter what we do. We cannot appease them. We need to build a party based on what puts fire in our people's bellies. Especially for internal party leadership.

I promise you if we select Perez simply becaus he's safer, our people will be discouraged and Republicans will still tell their folks he's the devil's fishing buddy.
posted by emjaybee at 6:28 PM on December 19, 2016 [47 favorites]


I know this is inside baseball for most folks, but it's really interesting to look at which unions are backing Ellison and which are backing Perez.

Oh, good. The 2020 circular firing squad has already started.


We can have an election without having a circular firing squad. Really, if anything, the circular firing squad was last month.
posted by dinty_moore at 6:29 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]




Oh yeah, totally. Greenwald, Snowden, and Assange not liking Clinton is 100% because of Russia. Nothing at all in the post-Bush era helped them nurse a grudge against Clinton, Obama, and the democrats. Nothing that we can fault a presidential candidate with. 100% sweet sweet rubles and asylum promises.

Sure, the US deep state is problematic and Obama didn't fix it. But Trump is going to help any of that ...how. That's why it's never made sense for Glennwald et al to relentlessly attack Clinton based on Russian sponsored leaks. To help elect Trump. What?
posted by T.D. Strange at 6:31 PM on December 19, 2016 [7 favorites]


"Deep state" is the Illuminati with a grad degree
posted by theodolite at 6:36 PM on December 19, 2016 [16 favorites]


T.D. Strange: Why do you believe The Intercept's reporting on Clinton had a substantial impact on the election outcome?
posted by Coventry at 6:37 PM on December 19, 2016


and in any state that falls under Democratic control in coming years.

Hah like thats going to happen... the chance of fair elections in non-Democratic-controlled states was already way down after the Voting Rights Act was gutted, without the Justice Department or federal action to protect it there's little chance of states flipping in the future with all the levers the GOP will have to prevent it.
posted by thefoxgod at 6:38 PM on December 19, 2016


The JPL used to be measuring Justinian's panic. Now it measures the panic he causes.

Throughout this entire election, since the primaries and right through today's electoral college election, Justinian has been the biggest downer: always panicking, even maintaining a catalog of different levels of panic, never trusting the polls that Hillary had it in the bag, preemptively certain that jack shit would happen at the electoral college vote. I would get freaked out and depressed just by looking at their posts. It was the worst.

Or, in other words: Justinian was right about everything. Sigh.
posted by Joey Buttafoucault at 6:42 PM on December 19, 2016 [42 favorites]


Conservatives say the Electoral College serves as a necessary bulwark against big states, preventing California in particular from imposing “something like colonial rule over the rest of the nation,” as the conservative analyst Michael Barone put it. ... Both sides have a point.

What kind of both sides horseshit is this? The Greeks invented democracy over 2500 years ago. They also invented geometry. But the Greeks weren't so stupid as to confuse the two and base democracy on square footage.
posted by JackFlash at 6:42 PM on December 19, 2016 [53 favorites]


T.D. Strange: Why do you believe The Intercept's reporting on Clinton had a substantial impact on the election outcome?

I don't except to the extent it helped drive coverage of EMAILS by bigger media like the NYT. Which it probably did to some extent. Intercept is a small outlet on its own. But they do a lot of original reporting that drives other narratives. And the constant cloud of BS "scandal" certainly did affect the outcome, which the Intercept undeniably contributed to. That doesn't negate their questionable motives, or the province of the leaked emails evidence which is still yet to be adequately explained, or justify their one sided coverage undeniably weighted against Clinton with minimal scrutiny of Trump.
posted by T.D. Strange at 6:46 PM on December 19, 2016 [10 favorites]


Charles Pierce: Donald Trump Is President Because We Cannot Face the Truth: Our nation can't stomach the stark reality of its history.
There are terrible truths about this nation that the public cannot be allowed to know, lest it act on them in ways that disturb the horses.

It was this terror out of which the Warren Commission was formed. It was this terror that kept Lyndon Johnson from revealing Richard Nixon's treason to the world and to Hubert Humphrey. It was this terror that engendered Nixon's pardon. It was this terror that allowed the Reagan campaign to dodge how it may have fudged the release of the hostages in Iran, and it was this terror that allowed Reagan himself to skate on Iran-Contra. It was this terror that welcomed the meddling of the Supreme Court in the Florida recount of 2000.

It was this terror that allowed the Bush administration to elude its accountability regarding the events of September 11, 2001, or to be called to account entirely for how and why it ran the country into war in Iraq. It is this terror from which comes the impulse to look forward and never back.
I completely agree. And note that, with the exception of the Warren Commission, every instance listed has been by a Republican administration. Every Republican administration in my lifetime (all the ones listed) has been actively criminal.
posted by kirkaracha at 6:51 PM on December 19, 2016 [37 favorites]


Faith Spotted Eagle getting an e-vote must be the first time in all of American history that an actual native received an endorsement for president of the United States. For that alone, I cannot and shall not hate on the faithless elector who cast that vote.
posted by Apocryphon at 6:55 PM on December 19, 2016 [68 favorites]


What kind of both sides horseshit is this? The Greeks invented democracy over 2500 years ago. They also invented geometry. But the Greeks weren't so stupid as to confuse the two and base democracy on square footage.

For real though a re-read of Plato's Republic and Aristotle's Politics would disabuse you of the notion that the Greeks were ever in favor of direct democracy. In general they hate the masses and want a small elite to make decisions. Can't say I disagree with them, what with the masses in WI, MI, and PA.
posted by dis_integration at 6:57 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


the masses are the asses
posted by entropicamericana at 6:59 PM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


The masses? What masses? The masses couldn't fucking vote, there was six years of GOP cheating in WI and MI seeing to that. In PA, I have no idea what happened.
posted by Slackermagee at 7:00 PM on December 19, 2016 [10 favorites]


> I'm never going to get used to the president tweeting like he's brain damaged

I am literally brain damaged and I Tweet much better than that, thankyouverymuch.
posted by The corpse in the library at 7:14 PM on December 19, 2016 [50 favorites]


Greenwald, Snowden, and Assange not liking Clinton is 100% because of Russia. Nothing at all in the post-Bush era helped them nurse a grudge against Clinton, Obama, and the democrats

In each case, that's exactly what it is: a personal grudge. Which, maybe, is understandable, given their experiences, but which is a long way from fighting the noble fight for freedom and justice that they (and many of their fans) like to imagine themselves doing. None of them seem to care nearly as much about the abuses of "the deep state" as they do about their personal grudges. And if they have to aid, abet, or apologize for any enemy of those they hold their grudges against, they'll do so, despite knowing that doing so won't mitigate—and will likely exacerbate—the very abuses they have claimed to oppose.

Can you expand on this? I don't understand why you'd dismiss him as a narcissist if you think Trump is going to prove him right.

Well, there's Trump proving Ian Walsh right and then there's Ian Walsh saying that Trump's proved him right. I'm looking forward to lots of the latter.
posted by octobersurprise at 7:15 PM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


Every Republican administration in my lifetime (all the ones listed) has been actively criminal.
So Trump is really NOT much of an outlier.

The masses couldn't fucking vote, there was six years of GOP cheating in WI and MI seeing to that.
The long-term good news is that the GOP can't do very much more electoral ratfucking to neutralize the demographic changes happening in this country, but the damage won't be undone for a couple more decades; not in my lifetime (measured as 2-3 years after my Medicare coverage disappears... on the good side, their war on Medicare will kill more of their supporters than their opponents)
posted by oneswellfoop at 7:23 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


on the good side, their war on Medicare will kill more of their supporters than their opponents)

I'm feeling like this is the most depressing sentence I've read all day, and given that the sentences I've read today included "Donald Trump wins the electoral college vote" along with Turkey and Berlin and Zurich and Aleppo and a whole bunch of other things, that's surely saying a lot.
posted by zachlipton at 7:31 PM on December 19, 2016 [6 favorites]


Mod note: Couple deleted; I know it's not serious but in general let's bypass the kinda-distasteful jokes about fates that could befall political opponents.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 7:43 PM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


I completely agree. And note that, with the exception of the Warren Commission, every instance listed has been by a Republican administration. Every Republican administration in my lifetime (all the ones listed) has been actively criminal.

"Let's look forward and not backward" was Obama's creation.
posted by indubitable at 7:47 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


BERLIN — The leader of the Austrian far-right Freedom Party has signed what he called a cooperation agreement with Russia’s ruling party and recently met with Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn, the designated national security adviser to President-elect Donald J. Trump of the United States ...

The Freedom Party leader, Heinz-Christian Strache, reported the signing of the agreement with United Russia, Mr. Putin’s party, on Monday on his Facebook page, where he also disclosed that he had visited General Flynn a few weeks ago in Trump Tower in New York.

“Internationally, the Freedom Party continues to gain in influence,” wrote Mr. Strache, a dental technician who has led the party since 2005.

Austria’s Far Right Signs a Cooperation Pact With Putin’s Party
Great. Another racist mad dentist.
posted by octobersurprise at 7:56 PM on December 19, 2016 [9 favorites]


Great. Another racist mad dentist.

"They used to be called torturers. But ever since they got organized, it's 'pain technicians.'"
posted by mordax at 8:01 PM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


Great. Another racist mad dentist.

I thought that was going in a very different direction
posted by indubitable at 8:07 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


the constant cloud of BS "scandal" certainly did affect the outcome, which the Intercept undeniably contributed to. That doesn't negate their questionable motives, or the province of the leaked emails evidence which is still yet to be adequately explained, or justify their one sided coverage undeniably weighted against Clinton with minimal scrutiny of Trump.

Except they made an excellent case that there were actually scandals revealed by the emails. As an investigative news outlet with a focus on US corruption, they had a responsibility to report that.

They weren't shy about criticizing Trump, either, but larger news outlets were all over that anyway.
posted by Coventry at 8:16 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


"Nazis Sign Agreement with Trump, Russia"

That's [fake] . . . Right?
posted by petebest at 8:17 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


Except they made an excellent case that there were actually scandals revealed by the emails.

[citation needed]
posted by T.D. Strange at 8:19 PM on December 19, 2016 [18 favorites]


They weren't shy about criticizing Trump, either, but larger news outlets were all over that anyway.

[citation also needed]
posted by Rust Moranis at 8:20 PM on December 19, 2016 [8 favorites]


"Let's look forward and not backward" was Obama's creation.

Yeah but Gerald Ford set the template. Credit where it's due.
posted by emjaybee at 8:22 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


I worry that this basically dooms us to repeatedly losing like this year (especially given Electoral College demographic issues mentioned upthread)

I wish I could find it again, but I'd swear I'd seen estimates where people took the voting patterns from the 2016 election and applied them to the estimated electorates for 2020 and the GOP loses WI/MI/PA again because valar morghulis.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 8:23 PM on December 19, 2016 [2 favorites]


Does that take into account four years of innovative voter suppression from the Republican Congress/White House/Supreme Court/state governments, though?
posted by Rhaomi at 8:26 PM on December 19, 2016 [9 favorites]


innovative

They don't need to be clever about it anymore.
posted by Slackermagee at 8:30 PM on December 19, 2016 [5 favorites]


Wikileaks DNC Hacked Email Scandals Revealed:

1) HRC receives "tip" that town hall in Flint will ask about the water system fiasco in Flint. (The question is not asked)

2) Debbie Wasserman-Schultz really wanted HRC to get the nom, suggested disadvantaging Sanders. (That's the scandal, nothing illegal actually took place despite chair-throwing)

3) Pizzagate*
* not a scandal

4) ???
posted by petebest at 8:32 PM on December 19, 2016 [25 favorites]


I wish I could find it again, but I'd swear I'd seen estimates where people took the voting patterns from the 2016 election and applied them to the estimated electorates for 2020 and the GOP loses WI/MI/PA again because valar morghulis.

No I saw that too, but I only remember a tweet so I can't find the link either. Basically the same % of the same demographics for 2020 would swing the "blue wall" states back.

But...

Does that take into account four years of innovative voter suppression from the Republican Congress/White House/Supreme Court/state governments, though?


No. I highly doubt it. No one can project the effects of 4 years of unfettered Wisconsin/NorthCarolina/JimCrow suppression going federal.
posted by T.D. Strange at 8:33 PM on December 19, 2016 [4 favorites]


T.D Strange and Rust Moranis: I'm on my phone atm but if google "site:theintercept.com clinton sanders email scandal" you can find instances of both on the front page.
posted by Coventry at 8:38 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]




So the Baltic states, Turkey, Syria, and Iran are the new frontline states, and they are just going to push...why? Just oil contracts and money or lazy minded bigotry gaining ground in human brains?
posted by vrakatar at 8:39 PM on December 19, 2016


Disagree. And now, Trump.
posted by petebest at 8:42 PM on December 19, 2016 [12 favorites]


Go long on Shitty Behavior Detector recalibration futures.
posted by tonycpsu at 8:44 PM on December 19, 2016 [6 favorites]


Mod note: Don't make me turn this car around.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 8:46 PM on December 19, 2016 [57 favorites]


I really don't think he's going to get impeached. Before impeachment becomes a concern, someone has to go through the process of actually charging him. I'm not that familiar with the law, however a judge has to formally lay charges, right? Someone also has to present evidence or a case in order for those charges to be formally lain. Lots of people would be involved, big and small. I feel like whoever takes part in such a process will be either literally or metaphorically lynched by congress, other legal figures, or "militia". Some minor functionary would suddenly have ponce lawyers suing them, their house'd be swatted, and a "concerned citizen" or two, worried about the "pedophile ring coverup" would be clacking on the living room window with the barrel of their rifle.

If anything, I think being caught or indicted on criminal wrongdoing is precisely what will make him run straight for a coup. A case in which I would hope there would be enough of those who refuse in the upper echelons of the military that it would crumble and then we'd get to see a lot of republican heads roll.

But hey, maybe I'm just daydreaming about a world where being a white supremacist earns you a nameless grave without ceremony.
posted by constantinescharity at 8:56 PM on December 19, 2016 [6 favorites]


Alexandra Petri, WaPo: The gathering of the electors

At first, their purpose was to protect the people from themselves. At first, they employed their wisdom to select a leader. George Washington. But gradually, state by state, they bound themselves to serve the people’s will. No longer do the electors speak in their wisdom. Now they merely channel the people’s wishes, twisted, state by state. “You wished to bind us,” they whisper. “And since you no longer defer to us alone, we shall give you what you asked for, but not what you wanted.”
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 8:56 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


I really don't think he's going to get impeached. Before impeachment becomes a concern, someone has to go through the process of actually charging him. I'm not that familiar with the law, however a judge has to formally lay charges, right? Someone also has to present evidence or a case in order for those charges to be formally lain.

The House does it. I think it's plausible that they turn on him if his approval rating plummets (I mean really plummets), because they get Pence, who probably actually agrees with more of their goals, and won't be such a source of chaos. (On the other hand, they'd be stuck with an irate ex-President Trump who still has a Twitter account.)
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 9:01 PM on December 19, 2016 [6 favorites]


I'm not that familiar with the law, however a judge has to formally lay charges, right?

Nooooooooo. The House is prosecutor and judge, the Senate is judge and jury. Impeachment can be a one-line "the president is hereby impeached for various things he can be impeached for" as long as the votes exist to do it. Remember that the constitution is not self-executing. All that's needed is the will to do the stuff it stipulates, and a thin veneer of popular consent; conversely, if the will's not there, the constitution is toilet paper.
posted by holgate at 9:05 PM on December 19, 2016 [12 favorites]


The House does it. I think it's plausible that they turn on him if his approval rating plummets (I mean really plummets), because they get Pence, who probably actually agrees with more of their goals, and won't be such a source of chaos. (On the other hand, they'd be stuck with an irate ex-President Trump who still has a Twitter account.)

Two, at least. I wonder how he'll manage Twitter under his own name, as well as the official POTUS account.
posted by ZeusHumms at 9:09 PM on December 19, 2016


The House draws up Articles of Impeachment, and puts them to a vote, to start the prosecution.

Interestingly the "high crimes and misdemeanors" also don't technically have to be illegal - in large part because laws aren't written with the President in mind.
posted by Rainbo Vagrant at 9:13 PM on December 19, 2016 [3 favorites]


Oh, good. The 2020 circular firing squad has already started.

You appear to want to join in, or at least cheerlead it. That is a familiar Dem approach, but it is not a given. I refer you to those "Ripley in early 2016 / late 2016 / 2017" memes that have been circulating. If you feel disempowered, then empower your fucking self and seek out others who wish to do the same in similar fashion.
posted by holgate at 9:18 PM on December 19, 2016 [7 favorites]


As an investigative news outlet with a focus on US corruption, they had a responsibility to report that.

Oh, fuck that shit. The Intercept may not have disappeared up Putin's arse as Assange and his acolytes have done, but they're still reflexively willing to argue that all Deep States are equally bad when some Deep States have sufficiently more form at suppressing media outlets and assassinating investigative journalists.
posted by holgate at 9:22 PM on December 19, 2016 [6 favorites]


Benjamin Franklin asserted that the power of impeachment and removal was necessary for those times when the Executive "rendered himself obnoxious,"

Sounds like a slam dunk of a case!
posted by vrakatar at 9:23 PM on December 19, 2016 [16 favorites]


You appear to want to join in, or at least cheerlead it.

Observation is not cheerleadering, and as far as I can tell, I don't get a vote on the DNC chair. Although I bookmarked the organizing page mentioned upthread and looked into my local Democratic party apparatus, for all the good that will do anyone living in the 11th most liberal county in America. So, point taken.
posted by T.D. Strange at 9:28 PM on December 19, 2016


Oh, good. The 2020 circular firing squad has already started.

I think Ellison may be the best shot to squelch the circular firing squad. The vision he's been articulating has been pretty inclusive, even though his biggest fans on reddit are thoroughly obnoxious. (Seriously, try to have a discussion about the pros and cons of Perez and you get downvoted.) The Bernie dead-enders get to feel like they got their pound of flesh, but Ellison is intending to do the pragmatic grassrootsy party-building that the Democrats really do need. And he's orders of magnitude more tuned into the "civil rights" side of the Democrats' equation than Bernie seems to be.

Also! If you want to talk economic issues, Hillary was a little hamstrung by sort-of running for Barack's third term. She could talk about her infrastructure plan, etc., etc., but she couldn't outright say anything too negative because she was the continuity candidate.

But in 2020? Hell, in 2018? Economic gloves are off for the Dems. Is America great again yet? What's that, Appalachia? Automation and economic realities are still hurting the coal industry? How about you, Detroit? Great again yet? No, not so much, you say? Iiiiinteresting!

DNC Chair doesn't set the platform. But whoever gets the job is going to be involved in making sure there are candidates running for every seat all up and down the ballot. And having a chair who's clearly articulating the notion that social and economic justice are flip sides of the same coin, and that one reinforces the other, is going to help the rest of the party do the same thing.
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 9:36 PM on December 19, 2016 [24 favorites]


Purely shallowly here, Perez is about as exciting as a mayo sandwich,

So? Tom Perez has a great relationship with Labor and is loved by unions.
posted by asteria at 9:46 PM on December 19, 2016 [1 favorite]


DNC chair doesn't need to be exciting. If you're reading about the DNC chair it's because something has gone wrong somewhere (cf DWS).

Our next candidate for President will, one hopes, be at least a little exciting. That's the difference between the candidate and a behind-the-scenes official.
posted by Justinian at 9:51 PM on December 19, 2016 [5 favorites]


>Purely shallowly here, Perez is about as exciting as a mayo sandwich,

So?


I think folks in the broader left are feeling pretty starved for charismatic leadership from someone who won't pull any punches on progressive values. Current Obama is too careful (we'll see if he livens back up on Jan 21). Hillary has to spend her post-loss metaphorical 40 years in the desert. Bernie puts his foot in his mouth any time the topic veers too far away from economic issues. Even if you assume the best from Schumer and Pelosi, they're going have to play 11-dimensional chess to restrain the shitshow in Congress...

DNC chair doesn't need to be exciting. If you're reading about the DNC chair it's because something has gone wrong somewhere (cf DWS).

It did! Hillary lost in a surprise upset, Donald "Putin's Poodle" Trump is going to be president, and Congressional Democrats are making us all nervous! :D

Grar! (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 9:59 PM on December 19, 2016 [21 favorites]


So? Tom Perez has a great relationship with Labor and is loved by unions.

Yea well, 30 years ago that would've mattered. The labor vote has been devastated in no small part due to Clinton inspired shunning and triangulation with Wall Street interests supplanting Labor's traditional role in the party since approximately 1993. Half of labor in the midwest voted Trump. Labor is effectively dead everywhere else.

DNC chair doesn't need to be exciting. If you're reading about the DNC chair it's because something has gone wrong somewhere (cf DWS).

Our next candidate for President will, one hopes, be at least a little exciting. That's the difference between the candidate and a behind-the-scenes official.


The Democrats biggest problem has been candidate recruitment and development. That's the number one mission. We need relatable, intelligent people to advocate for actual progressive values and solutions. Obama's biggest failure has been translating his popularity to Democratic popularity, and his DNC/DSCC chairs have not recruited remotely inspiring candidates, see: Patrick Murphy, and basically every 2016 Democratic Senate candidate not named Jason Kander. What they need is a director of recruitment and messaging. And a lot less sabotage from the Chuck Schumers of the party to undermine those candidate's potential in favor of more Patrick Murphy's.
posted by T.D. Strange at 10:18 PM on December 19, 2016 [7 favorites]


Obama's biggest failure has been translating his popularity to Democratic popularity

I think Obama fundamentally misunderstands just how special he was as a candidate.

I mean, he's exactly the opposite of what would have come out of a focus group for the 2008 election. A black guy? Whose last name sounds an awful lot like "Osama"? And middle name is "Hussein"? Less than a decade after 9/11 and the Iraq war?! That's bonkers. I mean, we joke about the terrible writing in 2016: America's Final Season, but a person of that description getting elected president is like a pandering-to-our-idealism movie-of-the-week on LiberalTV.

So I suspect he's honestly somewhat baffled that everyone else running on the Democratic ticket can't just frame their life in an inspiring way in a fifteen minute speech and have half the country go absolutely gaga over them. Whereas for most federal-level elected officials, maybe you win by the skin of your teeth the first time, and then it's an endless grind of constituent services, re-applying for your job every two years, a little bit of insider trading, fundraising, and watching like a hawk for any threats in your district.
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 11:14 PM on December 19, 2016 [8 favorites]


If you're reading about the DNC chair it's because something has gone wrong somewhere (cf DWS).

I don't think this is true. I heard a lot of positive coverage about Dean's 50-state strategy, both when he was DNC chair and afterwards.
posted by en forme de poire at 12:36 AM on December 20, 2016 [7 favorites]


Regarding mrgrimm's earlier question about Clinton pushing for the electoral college vote, even setting aside how that would be a dangerous precedent (or is that president nowadays?), it wouldn't have made much sense as Republican electors weren't reasonably seen as potentially switching their vote to Clinton, the goal was more to get them to vote for anyone but Trump. Clinton fighting for the vote would have made it a partisan issue, more likely to convince the Republicans it was just an attempt to win by other means rather than it being what it was, that Donald Trump poses a very real and serious threat to the nation, something that was hoped to be evident to people regardless of party. That it didn't work in the end, I don't think invalidates that idea, it just shows how conventional behavior is and how adversarial the divide between parties remains. Nothing was really likely to change the outcome, but some understandably felt the need to try anyway, and keeping Clinton out of it was the best way to proceed.

Regarding Greenwald, I'm not really willing to just shunt him off as a Russian pawn. I lean more to the distrust of the so-called deep state and establishment politics. There are a lot of journalists and other pundit types that have spent a lot of energy pushing for or just suggesting their preferences for a Sanders type to take over. That likely did help get Trump elected, since much of the effort was not about Sanders, but about distrust of the government as is and its history, often tying Clinton to that legacy, rightly or wrongly. That the CIA was involved in naming Russia as the source of the hacks immediately set off the alarms of those who distrust government, making them focus more on their distrust of the CIA than the legacy of the KGB. The Nation, for example, had an article last week about that very issue, suggesting if the CIA is involved the information can't be trusted. That really leaves no good way for proceeding, but it is definitely a real issue for some and short circuits some of the complaints about Trump and Russia in those circles.

It's pretty evident by now that there is a concerted effort by Sanders supporters to adopt tea party tactics and force the Democrats to adopt their interests. I don't say that as suggesting something good or bad necessarily, since I imagine it'll be a mix of the two, but it does seem clear that is going to have a big effect on what happens in the party going forward, with the potential for internal party fights becoming more likely, such as may be the case with Ellison and Perez.

One of the dangers of this is that which dogged Clinton, where there may be no compromise available where can be satisfied, so no agreement will be reached and a divide will deepen in some areas of the Dem map, just as happened with the Republicans and the Tea Party. That this may also lead to elections with an enormous divide between the two candidates, one on the far right vs one on the far left is interesting and I'm not sure how that will play out overall since it will depend on who these candidates are, how many there are in the movements, and where their candidacies will arise. This could also leave space for third party moderates, which is itself kinda weird, to take votes if the two further out candidates appear out of bounds for convention. Given the push for McMullinites, that could become a factor if Trump disappoints the more indecisive middle that gave him a chance due to his being a Republican. It should all be pretty interesting if you can find a safe distance to watch everything unfold, for those of us who can't, it will likely be a very unstable time.
posted by gusottertrout at 1:10 AM on December 20, 2016 [7 favorites]


It should all be pretty interesting if you can find a safe distance to watch everything unfold

I'm not convinced that such a thing exists.
posted by Too-Ticky at 1:52 AM on December 20, 2016 [5 favorites]


In PA, I have no idea what happened.

I don't know either, but I know that every time I show up to vote in my precinct, I get slightly special screening for having a D next to my name.

I also know that the last two times I showed up to vote in this precinct, I saw two different black men getting special screening to a greater degree than I did.

On Voting Day, I ran into someone that was dressed nicer than usual. He explained, "I voted today. If you dress up, they don't harass you so much." He's black. Another black man in the room laughed at him and said "That's why I don't vote."

I know that in my last precinct, I watched elderly nuns being helped to vote. I don't know what election law is, so I guess it's OK if you push the touch screen button with someone else's hand over yours?

We had to vote in a convent in my old precinct. Tell me that doesn't intimidate voters to some degree.

In someone's precinct in another state, all the not-Rs get put on their "own machine," and it's a very, very small town where the the not-Rs get selected for special extra tax assessments. We've always wondered if the cartridge from that machine makes it into the final tally. How would you know?

There doesn't have to be legal voter suppression for lots of individual decisions about "defending against voter fraud" to add up. It feeds back into the general narrative that one side is just more willing to use its power to make sure that the "wrong" people don't vote.
posted by arabelladragon at 4:08 AM on December 20, 2016 [57 favorites]


Regarding Greenwald, I'm not really willing to just shunt him off as a Russian pawn

What this election taught me is that you don't have to *be* an (intentional) pawn to do very real and very significant damage. My acquaintances who went from Wikileaks to borderline Breitbart conspiracy weren't pawns per se, they were just played. But people who are played are dangerous, particularly when they fail to admit the ways they've been played.

One thing that's really turned me off about the Net Neutrality/ EFF-ish activists is that I've seen several of them insist that their concerns are the same for Trump as they would be for Clinton. None of them seem to have given a thought about whether both would cause equal damage to net neutrality, or whether both present equal threats to practical privacy concerns (eg, I'm not so concerned about being tracked as I am about retaliation for my views). And, for people on the left, that's a pretty damn privileged place to be in. There's a danger with the talk of the deep state to convince yourself that tracking itself is the only problem -- and not that, given that the attempt to have real privacy is pretty much dead (hey, people with uteri won't be the only people hurt by losing Roe!), the ways in which that data is used can be an equal problem in practice.

So Greenwald isn't your friend. He's got his own set of priorities, which overlap quite well both with those (allegedly) of Assange et al and of those privileged enough (and with niche enough concerns) to effectively equate both parties. But listening to what the man says without realizing what he's doing can still do damage.
posted by steady-state strawberry at 4:30 AM on December 20, 2016 [25 favorites]


I woke up this morning thinking about all those post-election "Where did we go wrong?" pieces.

Like "Were we not leftish enough? Did we pick a candidate that was too unpopular? Did we not spend money in the right states?" I could link to a bunch of them, but I'm sure you've all read them alread.

I've been reading all those without reaching any particular conclusions of my own, but today I feel like I have come to a conclusion.

We lost because Trump lied.Every speech was a character assassination. "Crooked Hillary" "Lock her up." He even hinted at "Second ammendment solutions."

And because he had credibility with his voters, they believed she was corrupt and dangerous. And even though she got good turn out, he got better turn out, because they had to STOP HILLARY.

He won because he violated all the conventional norms of campaigning. Because he refused to release his tax returns, refused to talk policy, and just doubled down again and again and again on the lies about his opponent. He lied so constantly and so boldly that people (primed partisan biases) believed him. It couldn't ALL be lies, right? No candidate has ever lied like that. Even smart people thought "there must be some truth in it." Because they just weren't used to the idea that people could lie like that.

I think Hilary Clinton ran a good campaign. I think Trump won by violating all the norms of decent behavior. No one was prepared for that.
posted by OnceUponATime at 5:01 AM on December 20, 2016 [66 favorites]


And Trump didn't start from zero - the campaign against Hilary Clinton began in 1992
posted by thelonius at 5:15 AM on December 20, 2016 [57 favorites]


Is Trump Hitler? Probably Not — And Other Notes From Today’s Electoral College Circus
In an election season suffuse with ironies, today did not disappoint. Despite a crusade mounted by people like Larry Lessig to deprive Trump of 270 electoral votes, substantially more electors ended up defecting from Hillary, which is almost too amazing for words.

I for one think @lessig ought to issue a public apology for misleading his followers. A number of protesters I spoke to showed up to Harrisburg, PA under the sincere assumption that a critical mass of GOP electors were likely to abandon Trump and throw the election to the House of Representatives. Even though the coup idea did gain significant elite support, it was never a serious possibility, and Lessig is responsible for deluding people into buying his fantasy.

posted by Noisy Pink Bubbles at 5:18 AM on December 20, 2016 [3 favorites]


This morning, Donald is tweeting about Bill Clinton, and how the campaign went to the wrong states. Which, whatever, fine, but I think that it's Trump's insistence on litigating the election over and over that makes this all the more difficult to deal with.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 5:29 AM on December 20, 2016 [8 favorites]


A number of protesters I spoke to showed up to Harrisburg, PA under the sincere assumption that a critical mass of GOP electors were likely to abandon Trump and throw the election to the House of Representatives.

For this to happen, there would have had to have been a strong consensus among GOP leaders that Trump had to go for reasons of being dangerously unsuitable to be President, and there clearly was not.
posted by thelonius at 5:31 AM on December 20, 2016 [1 favorite]


I think that's the idea, roomthreeseventeen.
posted by notyou at 5:40 AM on December 20, 2016


Blaming Clinton for the Electoral College doing their jobs and not starting a coup is sexist. She did her job. She got a historical level of votes. And yet we constantly hear that she wasn't the right candidate, didn't do a good enough job, didn't totally rewrite the Constitution. Everyone says she wasn't a good enough candidate but holds her personally responsible for not saving the Republic. And if she can't do it, you say, why doesn't Michelle run for office? We all want Hermione to save the day while Harry and Ron mope around, I get it, but this isn't a movie.
posted by tofu_crouton at 5:41 AM on December 20, 2016 [35 favorites]


Matt Yglesias, Vox: The boring reason policy to help struggling regions won’t win “Rust Belt” votes
The results of the 2016 election have led to a renewed surge of interest in the idea of regional development and the notion that policymakers ought to pay more attention to the specific dynamics of place and community and not just individuals or broad national averages.

This newfound enthusiasm for regional focus is in many ways welcome, but its specific connection to the presidential election is a little bit odd because the main region of electoral interest — a string of industrial or post-industrial swing states bordering on the Great Lakes — simply isn’t a particularly poor region of the United States. One could, of course, choose to ignore that fact and focus national policymaking on economic development in hotly contested swing states rather than in needy areas (politicians do lots of weird things, after all).

But a policy to promote targeted economic growth in America’s most struggling regions won’t do much for voters in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, since those states aren’t America’s most struggling regions. If anything, such a policy would likely only increase those voters’ sense that America’s political elites are ignoring them in favor of other people.
posted by tonycpsu at 5:52 AM on December 20, 2016 [14 favorites]


Is Trump Hitler? Probably Not — And Other Notes From Today’s Electoral College Circus

Who is this horribly condescending Michael Tracy person and why does anyone read him? I could use his medium posts as case studies for a class on logical fallacies and (a lack of) critical thinking. Also he sounds like a smug jerk.
posted by dis_integration at 6:04 AM on December 20, 2016 [7 favorites]


"Trump's insistence on litigating the election over and over that makes this all the more difficult to deal with."

"Ahh, but the strawberries that's... that's where I had them. They laughed at me and made jokes but I proved beyond the shadow of a doubt and with... geometric logic...that a duplicate key to the wardroom icebox DID exist..."
posted by klarck at 6:09 AM on December 20, 2016 [6 favorites]


Realized today that any problems with the Republican "answer" to Obamacare will be blamed on Obamacare.
posted by drezdn at 6:15 AM on December 20, 2016 [9 favorites]


If a Hitler-like figure is about to take the reins of the most powerful state in world history, all of us should be flipping the F out right now, and doing whatever we can to organize some kind of last-minute resistance

Is this not what a lot of the groups most likely to be targeted by the administration are doing? Whether he intends to or not, this guy sounds like marginalized people are essentially non-existent in his circles, let alone as an opposition to Trump. He also complains a lot about conflating of groups and issues for someone who seems to think "fascism=Hitler" and that's that. There were more fascists than the Nazis, and there are plenty of autocrats who aren't regularly referred to as fascist. Not coincidentally, the (over a year old) Jamelle Bouie piece he links to actually covers this. The conclusion of the piece even says as much:
Alone and disconnected, this rhetoric isn’t necessarily fascist. Some of it, in fact, is even anodyne. But together and in the person of Donald Trump, it’s clear: The rhetoric of fascism is here. And increasingly, the policies are too. The only thing left is the violence.
It's almost as if he didn't bother to read it, not even to see when it was published. Also, Bouie has been researching and covering the various ways conservatives have edged towards oligarchy and autocracy over the last several decades, and the language they've used to mainstream acceptance. Seems like that should count for something.
posted by zombieflanders at 6:16 AM on December 20, 2016 [13 favorites]


He also complains a lot about conflating of groups and issues for someone who seems to think "fascism=Hitler" and that's that.

My favorite bit from the piece:

Her friend did chime in to predict that Trump will launch World War III, so that’s something, but still — not Hitler.

That's got to be one of the silliest "gotcha" moments I've ever seen. Okay, maybe he'll start WWIII and slaughter millions through nuclear warfare, but that still isn't what Hitler did, so gotcha! I'm just surprised he didn't go that extra step and mention Hitler being dead for 70 years, so obviously Trump can't be him, gotcha!
posted by gusottertrout at 6:24 AM on December 20, 2016 [19 favorites]


More on that non-profit selling the huntin 'n fishin trip with the Trump boys:

Center for Public Integrity: Donald Trump's sons behind nonprofit selling access to president-elect
A Center for Public Integrity review of Texas incorporation records found the Opening Day Foundation was created less than a week ago, on Dec. 14. Unlike political committees, such nonprofits aren’t required by law to reveal their donors, allowing sponsors to write seven-figure checks for access to the president while staying anonymous, if they choose.[...]

“This is problematic on so many levels,” said Larry Noble, the general counsel of the Campaign Legal Center, a nonpartisan campaign reform organization. “This is Donald Trump and the Trump family using a brand new organization to raise $1 million contributions for a vague goal of giving money to conservation charities, which seems a way of basically just selling influence and selling the ability to meet with the president.”
This is reminding me of the event to raise money for vets. No details on which charities were chosen and no details on how the money was to be divided, just a vague "give money to us and we will donate it to vet groups." If you recall several news organizations-- including the Washington Post-- put pressure on Trump to disburse the reported $6 million he raised and to this date I'm not sure all of it was.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:27 AM on December 20, 2016 [11 favorites]


Realized today that any problems with the Republican "answer" to Obamacare will be blamed on Obamacare.

Nah, only 80 percent. The rest will be blamed on abortion and/or gun control.
posted by Etrigan at 6:30 AM on December 20, 2016 [2 favorites]


I'm going to try reclaim my German citizenship and get the fuck out of dodge.

My feeling is, yeah, if you can vote with your feet, do so now and beat the rush. Most people can't - it's not like there's going to be some kind of shortage of dissenters around here if the people who can take off do so. Also, it doesn't hurt anyone who has to stay here (which would include me) to know citizens of other countries. I think this country is going to be a hideous mess and people are going to have their lives shortened in all kinds of ways, and I don't blame anyone for noping the fuck out of, like, losing ten years off their life because they won't be able to afford medical care after they retire, etc.

To me it seems pretty clear that the wheel is only going to turn again after some huge disaster of the magnitude of WWII - something which destroys enough capital and weakens elites enough, creates enough labor shortages and creates enough new forms of social organization that there's traction for real social change. There is no going back. We can certainly organize to try to stave off the very worst, but we're looking at ten or twenty years of very bad times indeed, at best. When really bad times arrive, they tend to stay a while.

I am confident that my life is substantially shorter now than it would have been - I won't have healthcare when I'm old, if I get too sick to work I'm screwed, I probably won't be able to stop working when I'm old unless I want to starve in the street. And that's on the assumption that no other form of violence or disaster sweeps over us - no badly handled pandemic, no natural disaster we could have prepared for but did not, no actions against GLBTQ people, no suddenly becoming unemployable because of my sexual orientation, no work camps, no dissident camps, no blacklists, etc. Nope the fuck out, that's my recommendation, especially if there's kids in the picture.
posted by Frowner at 6:32 AM on December 20, 2016 [12 favorites]


And all this "oh Trump isn't Hitler" business: look, we're not going to get, like Literally Hitler twice, but what you do notice about Literal Hitler is that the Nazis' efforts grew more and more violent and terrible over time, as it became clearer and clearer that there was no real force that could oppose them. "Right now Trump has not actually said that he'll be [doing really terrible Hitlerian stuff]" indicates absolutely nothing to me - he hasn't even been sworn in. After a year or so of Democrats doing what Democrats do best and rolling over on every issue that matters to anyone who is not a wealthy Democratic politician - remember that these people go to each others' parties; they're not enemies - and the media spanielling around as they are now, I expect that the Republicans will realize that their reach and grasp are a lot greater than they think.

This will all be incremental and each time some new horror happens we'll all try to rationalize it away and remind ourselves that, like, Literal Hitler literally burned degenerate books rather than just targeting GLBTQ publishers for harassment (or whatever).
posted by Frowner at 6:41 AM on December 20, 2016 [26 favorites]


Realized today that any problems with the Republican "answer" to Obamacare will be blamed on Obamacare.

I am doing my best to inoculate my inner circle of Trump voters against the poison that the Republicans will be feeding them as they cut all the safety nets. I am saying things like "Remember that when Paul Ryan announces cuts to Social Security because it is running out of money he will be lying to you. It is easily fixable but he prefers to get rid of it entirely, just as he plans to get rid of MediCare, MediCaid and Food Stamps." I am trying to plant a seed of doubt and suspicion so that they don't buy into Republican propaganda.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:44 AM on December 20, 2016 [14 favorites]


Mod note: A couple deleted. Let's try to avoid a personal referendum / judgment on what any particular person in the thread should do in terms of residency, etc, please (also, better to keep more to the topic than get into unrelated personal matters. Thanks.)
posted by taz (staff) at 6:46 AM on December 20, 2016


Yeah, even Hitler wasn't Hitler until he was, so I wouldn't feel too confident.

Regarding moving, I don't think of it at all as abandoning the fight to return to Germany. They'll need all the help there they can get with their own elections getting close. The EU and German people are going to need support just like the rest of us. There is nowhere really safe anymore, so all you can do is find the place that feels the closest to what you hope for. Sorry if that seems a like a downer attitude, but I really do mean that leaving the US is not something anyone should feel guilty about right now, even as some of us won't be able to go ourselves. We'll all have our own battles to fight if the world is going to remain even relatively stable.
posted by gusottertrout at 6:46 AM on December 20, 2016 [4 favorites]






But a policy to promote targeted economic growth in America’s most struggling regions won’t do much for voters in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, since those states aren’t America’s most struggling regions

As Matt Iglesias decides to double down on idiocy and decide you can relieve economic anxiety by just deciding people aren't that badly off after all because others have it worse! Man, who knew it was that easy?

If people are voting because they are not satisfied with what they perceive to be economic hard times, to argue that improving their lives won't affect their votes because they're not really poor is almost at this point irresponsible.
posted by corb at 7:04 AM on December 20, 2016 [3 favorites]


If people are voting because they are not satisfied with what they perceive to be economic hard times, to argue that improving their lives won't affect their votes because they're not really poor is almost at this point irresponsible.

If

The question, of course, is whether Those People's lives will also be improved and how much influence that will have on the anxious Homo economicus voterus.
posted by Etrigan at 7:13 AM on December 20, 2016 [3 favorites]


I dunno that Yglesias is just arguing that simply re-analyzing certain areas as "not really poor" will fix things, but he does seem to be kind of straw-manning; I don't think that anyone is suggesting that we target the Rust Belt because it's the poorest area of the US.
posted by soundguy99 at 7:20 AM on December 20, 2016 [3 favorites]


Actually, Hitler did pretty solidly foreshadow what he intended to do; most of his plans were laid out pretty clearly in Mein Kampf, but nobody noticed them because (at least according to William Shirer) it was so badly written that even though everyone had it on their coffee table nobody actually read the damn thing. He was pretty clear that it was a priority for Germany to seize land in the East and to drive out or exterminate the Jewish menace.

Trump has also done us the favor of writing a few badly written books, and if we take him similarly at his word we would see that his priority will be to use other peoples' money as a lever to loot the country for himself and whichever rich friends he wants to impress. Not a lot in there about blood and violence, but you might as well plant some banana trees now.
posted by Bringer Tom at 7:21 AM on December 20, 2016 [9 favorites]




Actually, Hitler did pretty solidly foreshadow what he intended to do; most of his plans were laid out pretty clearly in Mein Kampf, but nobody noticed them because (at least according to William Shirer) it was so badly written that even though everyone had it on their coffee table nobody actually read the damn thing.

Literally but not seriously / seriously but not literally, v1.0
posted by Etrigan at 7:24 AM on December 20, 2016 [8 favorites]


I think Obama fundamentally misunderstands just how special he was as a candidate.

At the time, some saw him as a "visionary minimalist" (coined by Cass Sunstein), a view which had its critics.
posted by ZeusHumms at 7:25 AM on December 20, 2016


As Matt Iglesias decides to double down on idiocy and decide you can relieve economic anxiety by just deciding people aren't that badly off after all because others have it worse! Man, who knew it was that easy?

I feel like that's an uncharitable interpretation. I read it as "the practical outcome of policies aimed to help the least fortunate will not substantially change the lives of people in those states who voted for Trump because they believe THEY are the worst off." That is not the same thing as saying trying to help those same people isn't worthwhile.
posted by C'est la D.C. at 7:26 AM on December 20, 2016 [3 favorites]


In other news, Matt Yglesias is still a blinkered neoliberal.

In Re the Ellison v. Perez thing - I actually think they're both good. But as a dedicated atheist I'd sure like to see some representation in the party, and I'd like to see someone in the running who isn't, you know, a dude.
posted by aspersioncast at 7:29 AM on December 20, 2016 [3 favorites]


My feeling is, yeah, if you can vote with your feet, do so now and beat the rush.

I am so torn on noping out, as someone for whom it will be comparatively easy. I almost certainly will, in the long run, for a variety of reasons centering around my family: it isn't as if I wasn't already planning to leave eventually, after getting my PhD, in order to resolve certain issues of citizenship that might let me live permanently in the same place as my family of choice. My partner doesn't feel safe here at all, and I promised that if Trump won we would leave as soon as we humanly could; their feelings are as implacable as mine that the best thing to do is to cut ties, save ourselves, and invest as much as we can directly in people of color and local neighborhood people while we're here. And I--the plan was for us to try and have a kid as I was graduating, and that damn well doesn't feel safe now, not in a queer household and certainly not with me as.... disinterested in toeing party lines as I am*. I have promises to keep, promises I made years ago, and obligations to people who love me.

And at the same time--I am so, so angry. I'm--I'm good at framing my honest emotions in service of political agendas I truly believe in, and I'm good at rhetoric, and--well, I get angry when someone threatens someone else, and the more shameless bullies and thieves and scoundrels get, the more white-hot angry desire I feel to make the shame they should feel present. I'm still processing (when will I not be?), but the cocktail of emotions powering me right now is being driven nearly as hard by anger and rage as fear. Simultaneously, I feel pretty strongly that my career as a budding scientist is really, really fucked; the US was for decades the place with the most funding and worldwide, at least in the English-speaking countries in my discipline whose research politics I follow, nations are taking huge cuts to academic basic research. So it's hard for me to feel like I should continue on in my career because in my bones I feel like even if everything stayed the same worldwide, the influx of fleeing or broken US scientists would flood the job markets to the extent that I don't have future there anyway.

(I had just resolved to try to stay because I loved it, just a few weeks before the election results came in. I'd thought hard and looked into my soul and apologized to my partner for the sacrifices I had to make. I had just resolved to stay, and now I don't know that there will be anything there no matter how badly I want it and how badly I try. Science hasn't prospered under Obama, mostly because there is only so much you can do with a hostile Congress.)

Things that are not helping with that anger: watching the people who taught me those best principles and that vision for what my country and political institutions could be rushing to drop them in order to lick the boots of the fascist brownshits selling us down the river. Even if it's out of fear--well, I've never tolerated willful blindness well; nor have I ever been good at understanding either dishonesty or lack of self-awareness in people I know have the resources to know better. I have lost a lot of tolerance for those things in my tangle of emotional reactions.

So I'm angry. I'm more than a little adrift, and I have the personal connections to get a leg up pretty easily into DC-level politics; god knows my grandmother has been trying to convince me to go into politics since I was perhaps sixteen, and now that she's finally given up on convincing me to go into the Department of Defense she's trying to push me to go into lobbying for education or science. If I was unencumbered--if I didn't have promises to keep--it would be so tempting to do that. But I don't think I'm a particularly electable candidate--I'm female, I'm visibly queer and gender-non-conforming, I have no deep roots in a community to compensate for those and worst of all I am still trying to manage my poly triad and I don't want to give my family and the people I love up for the sake of an even more uncertain political career that's even less likely to take care of me in return than the one I've been trying to dedicate myself to for the past five years. Policy seems more viable, but I need to be portable because fuck knows what nation will let the three of us just live in one damn place, even if I allow for a multi-year immigration process and leveraging any thread of privilege I can.

I feel torn between a nation I love, ideals I can't shake, the optimism about people that forms the core of my motivation to get up in the morning... and the people I've loved for coming up six years, who love me truly, who I want to form my family around. I feel torn between going and staying because I am torn between nation and household; I feel too much pulling need for my skill and talents and work, and whatever I choose I feel like I'm going to feel a yawing void where something I loved deeply was ripped away. And of course, I'm a control freak, which ain't helping here but also informs half the skills I have to bring to the table.

(Sometimes I hate my country for suddenly screaming loudly enough that it needs anyone who will roll up their sleeves right as I was looking forward to forging a path to personal happiness.)

Wherever I go, I'm watching for this shit and I won't tolerate it or let it slide. I agree: fascism and hatred is cropping up worldwide, and while the EU looks like our most likely destination right now (or Scotland), both of those places need people taking principled stands against those movements nearly as badly as the States. But this--shit, this is my home, the nation is my home more than any one community, which is I guess what you get when you've had multiple generations of moving across states repeatedly in your family. And the only city I have lived in that still feels like coming home when I go to visit is... Washington, DC.

No glib answers. No answers at all. We've only got hard choices left stretching out in front of us, and all we can do as people is make the best choice we can according to our own situations. And try not to be too innervated by the coming despair.

*I guess it's a good thing to know about yourself that when shit gets more overtly threatening you get a lot fightier? Fuck, it would have been more convenient if I could react a little differently, kthnx self. Apparently multiple friends of mine were legitimately concerned I might actually get myself arrested yesterday, and my partner had actually made me promise not to do so because I had a package to send that needed to go out last night if it was going to get to the tiny children of their chosen-sister before Christmas Eve. I kept that promise, but it was... harder to keep in mind at a few moments than it should have been.
posted by sciatrix at 7:31 AM on December 20, 2016 [30 favorites]


But a policy to promote targeted economic growth in America’s most struggling regions won’t do much for voters in Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, since those states aren’t America’s most struggling regions

I think looking at this at a state level is maybe... not so relevant? It's averaging together the parts of the state that are doing well and the parts of the state where the bottom has fallen out of the economy. I think you'd have to look a election results vs. hard times county-by-county.

I'd like to see someone in the running who isn't, you know, a dude

Illyse Hogue from NARAL might run and Sally Brown from the Idaho Dems is officially running.
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 7:33 AM on December 20, 2016 [2 favorites]


Right, but I don't think anyone is seriously arguing that policies should be aimed at the poorest areas in order to help the Rust Belt, nor do I think anyone is seriously arguing that the Rust Belt is full of the poorest people in the nation. What people are arguing is that Rust Belt voters are less well off than they feel they should be, and they want economic policy aimed at them.

What this reminds me of very strongly is my time in housing advocacy, where I was trying to prevent homelessness. Even though it was not ostensibly in the name of our program, and even though the qualifications for our program were supposed to be only income-based, in practice, in our rules, we were not allowed to help homeowners. If someone was getting foreclosed on, if someone's mortgage had gone up, if they had lost their ability to pay, none of that was something we could help with. And I didn't know a single social service agency that did. I knew many agencies that could pay several months worth of rent, but not a single agency that could pay months of mortgage.

And yes, in real terms, someone who owns a home, even with a mortgage, is better off than someone who does not. but at the same time, those clients I had to turn away were really hurting. And I had nothing to offer them.

And that's kind of the Rust Belt problem. In real terms, they're way better off than areas of the country that don't have large rates of homeownership, that have less assets. But that doesn't make it any easier for them to live day to day..
posted by corb at 7:34 AM on December 20, 2016 [8 favorites]


> If people are voting because they are not satisfied with what they perceive to be economic hard times, to argue that improving their lives won't affect their votes because they're not really poor is almost at this point irresponsible.

His argument is nothing of the sort, of course.

There is an argument about the best allocation of resources to help people, and there is an argument about the best allocation of resources to have your political team win elections, in this case, Presidential elections based on Electoral College math.

On the first argument, nobody I'm aware of, including Yglesias, wants to harm people in the Rust Belt, but it's very dangerous to privilege their interests by giving them help that isn't going to others just because they're politically useful to your team.

And on the second argument, I've made the case several times in these threads that there are many other paths to victory that don't rely on a monomaniacal focus on the interests of Rust Belt voters based on the results of a single election, and that such a strategy risks de-energizing other components of the progressive coalition that are necessary to win despite the many systemic advantages Republicans enjoy in Congressional and Presidential elections. North Carolina and Florida equal the votes of Michigan, Wisconsin, and Ohio, and the county-level map shows that they're at least as in need of assistance. But we're not talking about how to help those voters, because the pundit class has decided that Rust Belt non-college whites are the voters that matter.
posted by tonycpsu at 7:38 AM on December 20, 2016 [11 favorites]


That's not what Yglesias is saying. He's saying that if you want to focus on the midwest, you have to admit that it's just because of electoral reasons, because any objective program focusing on regional economic development would have to start with Appalachia and the rural south, because that's where the poverty is concentrated. He's saying that following the electoral incentives to focus on midwestern swing states leads to bad policy, and he's right.

Even rural areas in MI/PA/WI/OH aren't totally fucked, because they get to tap into the relative economic health of metro Detroit and Philly/PGH and Milwaukee and Cleveland/Columbus, no matter how loudly they insist that they're subsidizing those city folk. You want to see totally, completely, over the top *fucked* and fucked forever with no hope of reprieve? Go to West Virginia. Totally and completely fucked, no cities to tap into except *laughs* Wheeling. And WV is fucked forever because nobody gives a fuck about WV and nobody will *ever* give a fuck about WV, because it votes reliably Republican at the presidential level and because Byrd is dead. And WV is so homogeneous that the only other thing it could ever reasonably do is vote reliably Democratic at the presidential level, in which case still nobody would care.

In any case, there's precious little evidence that the rural and exurban anglos that put Trump over the top in MI/PA/WI were voting on the basis of perceived hard times and lots that they were voting on the basis of racial and ethnic animus or larger animus against changing American society. You could give these people money until it was falling out of their assholes and all the economic opportunity in the world and they'd still hate hate hate that the America they see on the tv and movies doesn't look like their little dead-end town.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 7:39 AM on December 20, 2016 [36 favorites]


> I think looking at this at a state level is maybe... not so relevant?

Then I would encourage you to Read The Fine Article, in which he cites county-level data.
posted by tonycpsu at 7:39 AM on December 20, 2016 [1 favorite]


And that's kind of the Rust Belt problem. In real terms, they're way better off than areas of the country that don't have large rates of homeownership, that have less assets.

AFAIK the actually broke-ass areas of the US mostly have high rates of homeownership.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 7:43 AM on December 20, 2016 [3 favorites]


Go to West Virginia. Totally and completely fucked, no cities to tap into except *laughs* Wheeling. And WV is fucked forever because nobody gives a fuck about WV and nobody will *ever* give a fuck about WV, because it votes reliably Republican at the presidential level and because Byrd is dead

P&G just threw half a billion into Martinsburg.
posted by Talez at 7:45 AM on December 20, 2016 [1 favorite]


Then I would encourage you to Read The Fine Article, in which he cites county-level data.

Ha! Got distracted by the state-by-state maps.
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 7:46 AM on December 20, 2016


NYTimes: "Austria’s Far Right Signs a Cooperation Pact With Putin’s Party"

Nazis sign a cooperation pact with Russia. Now where have I heard that before...

As as mentioned above, Michael Flynn met with said Nazis in Trump Tower a few weeks ago. Apparently losing the Cold War wasn't enough, and now we're going to retroactively lose World War II.
posted by jedicus at 7:46 AM on December 20, 2016 [28 favorites]


> And yes, in real terms, someone who owns a home, even with a mortgage, is better off than someone who does not. but at the same time, those clients I had to turn away were really hurting. And I had nothing to offer them.

OK, but where does this "it only matters what people are feeling" logic end? Someone with a 3-bedroom home may say they want a 6-bedroom McMansion just as much as someone who's living on the street wants a home of any kind, but the state has no obligation to treat their requests as equal. Taxes that are collected to help people should go to where the money is most needed. The state has to make these sort of judgements about who deserves help more, and the point of the Vox piece is that doing it based on electoral college math is terribly cynical and counterproductive.
posted by tonycpsu at 7:46 AM on December 20, 2016 [6 favorites]


What people are arguing is that Rust Belt voters are less well off than they feel they should be, and they want economic policy aimed at them.

What people are arguing is that Trump supporters in the Rust Belt are not suffering from economic anxiety per se. They are actually much better off than the majority of Americans. Trump supporters as a group have much higher incomes than the majority of Americans. What they are suffering from is social anxiety because racial minorities are catching up with them. In other words, plain old racism. What they want is not so much policies that will help them but policies that will keep the others down. This economic anxiety argument is pure Republican bullshit. It's class and privilege anxiety painted with a polite veneer by calling it economic anxiety.
posted by JackFlash at 7:47 AM on December 20, 2016 [20 favorites]


What will the US look like in a year? let's look at Poland.
posted by dirigibleman at 7:50 AM on December 20, 2016 [10 favorites]


P&G just threw half a billion into Martinsburg.

That is sincerely good news for the people in WV and nearby areas of VA and MD, but I should have been clearer that I meant that nobody gives a fuck about WV in terms of setting governmental policy, not private economic actors.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 7:52 AM on December 20, 2016 [3 favorites]




That is sincerely good news for the people in WV and nearby areas of VA and MD, but I should have been clearer that I meant that nobody gives a fuck about WV in terms of setting governmental policy, not private economic actors.

Oh yeah. It's basically "fuck you I've got mine" as a statewide policy.

Trump condemns the assassination of Russian Ambassador, describes the terrorist as "radical Islamic"

Dumb shit doesn't know the difference between radical Islam and plain old sectarian violence.
posted by Talez at 7:58 AM on December 20, 2016 [2 favorites]


Nazis sign a cooperation pact with Russia. Now where have I heard that before...

Well at least we're not the only ones who can't learn a damn thing from history.

Apparently losing the Cold War wasn't enough, and now we're going to retroactively lose World War II.

Well a lot of people of Trump's class and the class to which he aspires would be quite happy with a do-over. And as I mentioned with regard to his books, those are the people he's going to be working for according to his own stated philosophy.
posted by Bringer Tom at 7:59 AM on December 20, 2016


Realized today that any problems with the Republican "answer" to Obamacare will be blamed on Obamacare.

Right. Also, the lie that Obamacare bankrupted Medicare.
posted by thelonius at 8:00 AM on December 20, 2016 [4 favorites]


Eh, you guys know they're going to just blame Obama for every damn thing.
posted by Fleebnork at 8:03 AM on December 20, 2016 [9 favorites]


They'll still blame Clinton for some stuff, just to keep Chelsea in her place.
posted by Etrigan at 8:03 AM on December 20, 2016 [9 favorites]


it is entirely possible that we may soon see an honest-to-god plague in the US

Ed Yong: How a Pandemic Might Play Out Under Trump
Bioethicist Art Caplan from the New York University School of Medicine envisages a quick slide towards isolation and authoritarianism. In a blog post that can only be described as pandemic fan-fiction, he imagines that a lethal mutant strain of H7N9 flu emerges in China and spreads to America. A hypothetical President Trump responds with a quick succession of moves: He seals the borders with Canada and Mexico; he quarantines sick Americans; he declares martial law, builds detention-style camps for quarantine-defiers, and uses epidemic conspiracies to launch a trade war with China.

Future years will reveal whether the story is prophetic or far-fetched. For now, we can only speculate, using the president-elect’s own words and actions to predict how he might fare in an outbreak.

We know that international diplomacy is essential during large-scale epidemics. During the Ebola outbreak, the U.S. had to coordinate its aid with the WHO, other donor countries, and hospitals and laboratories in the affected countries. “The rhetoric about building walls and reneging on NATO calls into question how willing the administration would be to work with other countries,” says Elizabeth Radin from Columbia University, who works to improve health in poor nations. “And the phone calls to Taiwan and Pakistan call into question how effective they would be.”
And let's not forget that this isn't something confined to the Trump inner circle, this is basically the American conservative movement as a whole. The Congressional GOP (including NeverTrumpers and supposed "moderates") held up funding to combat Zika because flying the Confederate flag, defunding all Planned Parenthood services, and gutting the EPA were all more important than saving lives. And what kind of response did his kind of crazy, bigoted, and completely one-sided politicization get? If you guessed "but both sides do it!" come down and collect your winnings.
posted by zombieflanders at 8:06 AM on December 20, 2016 [24 favorites]


What people are arguing is that Rust Belt voters are less well off than they feel they should be, and they want economic policy aimed at them.

Only the problem is is that they have just demonstrated by for-real voting that they are less interested in actual policy than, basically, having someone promise a nice simple pie in the sky. Regardless of how they feel about their economic stability or how that stability measures up against other areas of the state/country, the action they actually took was to vote for the guy who promised them ice cream for breakfast every day. What policies or policy promises are going to reach people who are either incapable of or unwilling to consider voting at a level of sophistication beyond that of a cranky toddler?
posted by soundguy99 at 8:08 AM on December 20, 2016 [13 favorites]


And WV is so homogeneous that the only other thing it could ever reasonably do is vote reliably Democratic at the presidential level, in which case still nobody would care.


Or they can stop being reliable voters.

The Reverend Martin Luther King advised against letting the democrats think "that they own the Negro vote."

West Virginians would be well advised to think about that.
posted by ocschwar at 8:14 AM on December 20, 2016


Here's today's dose of "everything is looking like the 30s again" news.
posted by C'est la D.C. at 8:16 AM on December 20, 2016 [6 favorites]




Rev. Barber seems to exemplify the phrase "doing God's work"
posted by zutalors! at 8:23 AM on December 20, 2016 [23 favorites]


Seems like the Democrats would do well to make the names of the good Reverend and those like him household names.
posted by zombieflanders at 8:27 AM on December 20, 2016 [11 favorites]


Seems like the Democrats would do well to make the names of the good Reverend and those like him household names.

They already did, at least for me. Without the DNC I'm not sure I would have ever heard of the guy.
posted by aspersioncast at 8:37 AM on December 20, 2016 [10 favorites]


But not racist at all. No siree.

Trump Voters Think African Americans Are Much Less Deserving Than ‘Average Americans’

"Perhaps most importantly, the display shows that the main dividing line between Clinton and Trump voters was on the question black deservingness. Most voters, regardless of who they supported in the presidential election, thought that average Americans are getting less than they should. Yet, Clinton’s voters were a great deal more likely than Trump’s to say that blacks have also gotten less than they deserve (57 percent to 12 percent respectively).

It appears, then, that Trump voters weren’t simply motivated by their widespread belief that average Americans are being left behind. Rather, their strong suspicion that African Americans are getting too much—a belief held by the overwhelming majority of Trump voters—was a much stronger predictor of their vote choices in last month’s election."
posted by chris24 at 8:37 AM on December 20, 2016 [37 favorites]


Moral language gives you new metaphors. You can say, I’m against this policy not because it’s a conservative policy or a liberal policy, I’m against this policy because it’s constitutionally inconsistent, it’s morally indefensible, and it’s economically insane."

Yes--this was a conversation I was having with another protester and her dad yesterday, actually. We need to not let our moral reasoning slide unarticulated under our policy arguments; it needs to be front and center in our arguments. "Oh? Even if kids are making bad decisions, you want to let a girl fuck up her entire future--or worse, die--because she had sex before marriage? That's seriously the position you're arguing?" "Excuse me, are you seriously advocating that we close needle exchanges because you think it is more important to punish addicts and people you think might choose to become addicts then to keep diseases in check so they don't kill our youth? And you're claiming to be the party of Christian compassion, plague-bearers?"

She asked me--very thoughtfully, I thought--about then falling down a slippery slope, when parties are arguing purely on moral grounds without reference to potential workability of the plans we're pushing. But like witchen is saying, you don't need to argue purely on moral grounds--it's just that the moral values of your arguments ought to be front and center, because the values you're arguing from are emotionally charged. That emotional charge fires up your base and helps deflate the people you're arguing from. It's not what you want to use for governing, no, but you need to build the enthusiasm first--and that's what the left has been lacking.
posted by sciatrix at 8:37 AM on December 20, 2016 [31 favorites]


Along with adopting a moral framing in discussion, it might be good to discuss appointments in terms of competence, rather than ideology. Rock on Rev. Barber
posted by stonepharisee at 8:38 AM on December 20, 2016 [4 favorites]


On a different note about language and ideas, this Huffpost essay on people "getting in line" beind a fascist is worth reading.

What Those Who Studied Nazis Can Teach Us About The Strange Reaction To Donald Trump

“The problem, the personal problem, was not what our enemies did, but what our friends did. Friends ‘coordinated’ or got in line.” And this coordination was not necessarily due to the “pressure of terror,” said Arendt, who escaped Germany in 1933. Intellectuals were particularly vulnerable to this wave of coordination. “The essence of being an intellectual is that one fabricates ideas about everything,” and many intellectuals of her time were “trapped by their own ideas.” Hannah Arendt
posted by gusottertrout at 8:42 AM on December 20, 2016 [10 favorites]


If you want more reasons to hate Comey.

@NateSilver538
Here's more evidence, from a panel survey, of a late shift to Trump during final 2 weeks of campaign. http://53eig.ht/2h8fxz8 [chart]

@NateSilver538
Overall, it shows a ~4 point net shift to Trump from Oct. 24 onward (Fiesta del Comey began Oct. 28) between switchers & late-deciders.

@NateSilver538
These were the same voters being re-surveyed, so data suggests Trump win wasn't "baked in" -- something changed at the end of the campaign.
posted by chris24 at 8:46 AM on December 20, 2016 [21 favorites]


Along with adopting a moral framing in discussion, it might be good to discuss appointments in terms of competence, rather than ideology.

You're talking about people who voted for literally the least qualified candidate in history, right? The ones who think "draining the swamp" will result in a better government?
posted by Etrigan at 8:49 AM on December 20, 2016 [4 favorites]


If you want to know who's selling you out.

@daniloalfaro
UPDATE: Have identified 10 reporters in the pic w/ Trump at his holiday party. There are 12 more unidentified people in it. Anyone else? [list]
posted by chris24 at 8:55 AM on December 20, 2016 [7 favorites]


@daniloalfaro
UPDATE: Have identified 10 reporters in the pic w/ Trump at his holiday party. There are 12 more unidentified people in it. Anyone else? [list]


Brian Kilmeade, a reporter? LOL
posted by zakur at 9:03 AM on December 20, 2016 [2 favorites]


More on the media's failures to report, well, anything honestly or accurately: Iowa State University political scientist "admits no formal focus groups informed his insights" in his published hot takes on Hillary's campaign...
posted by TwoStride at 9:07 AM on December 20, 2016 [2 favorites]


I mean, look - I realize that my previous comment can certainly read as snobbish and snarky and dismissive, but this is on-the-ground "embedded" reporting, here. I live in Cleveland, yes my actual address is "Cleveland, OH"; while I personally am kind of an arty weirdo with a bachelor's degree and I work in a kind of arty weirdo environment, I travel all over Northern Ohio for my job, interact with all sorts of people from all sorts of socio-economic environments, and . . . . it's just a for-real problem. Fucking TONS of white blue-collar workers (many of whom are making a thoroughly decent middle-class income) here in Ohio listen to Rush Limbaugh and watch Fox News and either simply haven't the intellectual capacity or are too damn stubborn to examine the "information" they are being fed about why and how their lives aren't what they were "supposed" to be. It's not even a question of "lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink", it's that you can't even lead them to water. Even suggesting that, say, we could cut military spending by a third and still have the world's most powerful armed forces gets you at best a blank look, and far more likely a simple, "But we need to Defend America!" If people cannot or will not consider that we are facing complex problems that may require complex solutions, if they cannot or will not consider that these solutions may not benefit them immediately or may require them to change their lifestyles or even their visions of a perfect life - then, bluntly, they are not participating in modern society in good faith, or they are intellectually or psychologically incapable of it.

They are, for real, Know-Nothings, and altering or watering down progressive or liberal goals and positions to capture votes from such people might win elections in 2018 or 2020, but will do far more damage in 2022 and beyond. You could make the argument that realpolitik suggests that better to pander to get votes to regain Dem majorities in Congress and/or on the state level, and then there's a stable base for enacting other policies. But they're not voting from positions of actually considering real economic policies, they're voting from their vague feels, from a resentment stoked by the media they consume - so there's no guarantee whatsoever that pandering to their desires will actually win votes.

If (IF) there really were a significant number of these white blue-collar voters who switched from Obama to Trump - and I have serious doubts about this; while the demographics may suggest it, I'm not at all sure that we've yet had a deep enough or complex enough analysis to prove this rather than the strong possibility that a bunch of Bush/McCain/Romney voters sat out one or more of the previous elections and showed back up for Trump - then the most likely reason for this is that they were aware that Bush had just driven the economy off the cliff and were hoping Obama could fix it. But again, the actual real world requires complex solutions to complex problems, and if they switched to Trump because Obama & the Dems didn't fix it exactly the way they wanted it - well, how the hell do you address this? It's a childish way of looking at the world, and you can't run a country according to the whims of people with arrested development, as we're about to experience for the next four years.

I guess the Dems might get those votes back if Trump & his cronies manage to do their own "drive the economy off the cliff" in the next couple of years, but chasing the votes of the Know-Nothings is a fool's errand and an exercise in frustration. Sooner or later it's better for everyone to just DTMFA.
posted by soundguy99 at 9:20 AM on December 20, 2016 [42 favorites]


@ezlusztig
Today is an awful day. But Resistance fighters, take heart: The GOP has now fully outed itself as the party of racism, sexism, and bigotry.
2. The GOP will pay an enormous price for the short-term mobilization of hatred that won them this awful election.
3. Republicans are now the party of pussy grabbing and rape culture. They decided to ride with that. Talk about the wrong side of history.
4. Republicans are the party that says hispanic immigrants are rapists and gay people should be threatened with conversion therapy.
5. Incredibly, the GOP is now the party that betrayed our country. They sold out our democracy to a foreign dictator to win an election.
6. Younger Americans aren't having it. Check out how skewed the age cohorts were in this election.
7. We won this election by 3 million votes, and all the fastest growing demographics are on our side. Their strength will dwindle.
8. Plus, they are now on the hook for all of Trump's corruption and madness for the next four years. The toll of that will be incredible.
9. For 3 decades the GOP won elections by dog whistling their racism, until finally their base got fed up and demanded they front it.
10. Now they are OPENLY the party of white nationalism. Of anti-semitism. Of misogyny and rape culture. That will have great consequences.
11. To win one election, the GOP erased its own horizon. Destroyed its own future. I truly believe this. The arc does bend toward justice.
12. That the present is fully theirs just ensures the future will be ours. Just by being on the side of basic decency we inherit the future.
posted by chris24 at 9:28 AM on December 20, 2016 [64 favorites]


My feeling is, yeah, if you can vote with your feet, do so now and beat the rush.

I was never intending to leave, but the only other place that I could quickly flee to in an emergency was Taiwan.

Thanks Trump!
posted by FJT at 9:29 AM on December 20, 2016


They are, for real, Know-Nothings

But what if Know-Nothingism is a virus that can spread? What if our whole problem here is an epidemic of Know-Nothingism? How then can we win without chasing the votes of the Know-Nothings?

I guess the answer is, we have to stop the spread of Know-Nothingism. But that's so hard to do when there are people out there deliberately spreading it, to serve their own interests.
posted by OnceUponATime at 9:29 AM on December 20, 2016 [4 favorites]


They conceded premises to faulty arguments. They rejected the “facts” of propaganda, but not the impressions of it. The new paradigm of authoritarianism was so disorienting that they simply could not see it for what it was, let alone confront it.

Yes, this is what happened on the Assange / Greenwald / Green / Berniebro left, as far as I can tell. People were often willing to concede "Ok, yeah, this specific fact is kind of bullshit or is backed up by a propaganda article or by an article that doesn't really prove the sensationalist clickbaity headline... but still SHE SEEMS CORRUPT, etc. (I still see it from a few posters even here...).

And so the conversation ends, swallowed up into the creeping miasma of misogyny, post-truthism and authoritarian apologetics.

The way forward, as Rev. Barber points out in the summons posted above, is a moral movement that isn't afraid to say: it is wrong to take health care away from people. It is wrong to deny aid to people who are poor. It is wrong to deport immigrants and turn away refugees. It is wrong to dismantle the rule of law -- and we will put our minds, our hearts and our bodies in the way if you try.
posted by tivalasvegas at 9:30 AM on December 20, 2016 [23 favorites]


I was never intending to leave, but the only other place that I could quickly flee too in an emergency is Taiwan.

Yeah, it's Israel for me. Although I looked it up and a one-bedroom in downtown Jerusalem is cheaper than I pay for my one-bedroom in Minneapolis. I bet it's even cheaper in the Ultra-Orthodox enclave of Mea Shearim, which is where I would have to live, because I have spent the past year learning Yiddish instead of Hebrew.

I'll stay here. I don't want to be an Israeli.
posted by maxsparber at 9:34 AM on December 20, 2016 [6 favorites]


Now they are OPENLY the party of white nationalism. Of anti-semitism. Of misogyny and rape culture. That will have great consequences.

I hope so someday, but so far right now that behavior has literally given them everything they ever wanted. They have been rewarded beyond their wildest expectations and there is literally no reason for them to not get worse because of the awesome payoff.
posted by jenfullmoon at 9:38 AM on December 20, 2016 [17 favorites]


> I mean, look - I realize that my previous comment can certainly read as snobbish and snarky and dismissive, but this is on-the-ground "embedded" reporting, here.

I'm a couple of hours East here in Pittsburgh, but the dynamic is much the same. My father-in-law works for a metals and alloys company that's had some really tough times lately, and we've witnessed his transformation from solid Democrat to Trump-curious Republican. He says he didn't vote for him, but defends him constantly and hates Hillary for the usual reasons and the usual convenient excuses to avoid admitting what those reasons are.

He's right to say that things have been bad for his business, but he also lives in a big house with a big yard in a suburban neighborhood. His mother, my wife's grandmother, has had to move in with them because she didn't save enough for retirement, so now they're struggling to take care of her and eventually find a facility for her if her medical needs become too much of a burden, but they're making ends meet. They had to borrow some money from me and my wife for a few years, but they paid that back and things are manageable. They have health insurance, and they've always been able to afford to go on a two-week vacation to a sunny place every year. He's right to say that his family could use some help, but if there's a line for help, they belong way toward the back of it, picking up whatever is left when the people without health coverage and without jobs have taken theirs.

A Trump-style regionally-targeted program of assistance to the Rust Belt would greatly improve things for him, and it would improve things for us. But it's still a misallocation of resources if there are other people who have greater needs but haven't been deemed politically useful. That was my point, so please forgive me if I scoff at someone who lives outside the region telling me I'm not being respectful of their needs.
posted by tonycpsu at 9:41 AM on December 20, 2016 [15 favorites]


I will also admit to being a bit worked up about this because I'm in the middle of reading "Locked In The Cabinet" by Robert Reich who was pointing out TWENTY-FOUR FUCKING YEARS AGO - even before NAFTA - that good-paying blue-collar jobs were disappearing due to automation and advances in technology and corporations seeking ever-higher profits and stock prices and that Republican/conservative economic policies were creating not only greater income inequality but also greater economic instability for everyone but the richest.

So my patience for all the 40-50-something blue-collars who voted for Trump is extremely low because YOU WERE FUCKING TOLD THIS WAS A PROBLEM WHEN YOU WERE GODDAMN TWENTY-FIVE MAYBE YOU SHOULDA WATCHED A NEWS SHOW OR TWO ON SUNDAY INSTEAD OF THE BROWNS SNATCHING DEFEAT FROM THE JAWS OF VICTORY FOR THE UMPTEENTH TIME.
posted by soundguy99 at 9:42 AM on December 20, 2016 [49 favorites]


the moral values of your arguments ought to be front and center

Absolutely. Particularly the well-informed, progressive folks I know have a tendency to assume that their core values are universal and self-evident. Things like the rule of law, due process, non-discrimination... But they're not universal or self-evident at all. Our best ideas and highest ideals frequently clash with common sense and expediency and even morally they're not always entirely satisfying. This is why they constantly need to be articulated and defended, with vitality and verve, or they become bloodless abstractions that protect nothing and compel nobody. Have faith and fight. Roaring, stampeding ovation for sciatrix in this thread.
posted by dmh at 9:42 AM on December 20, 2016 [16 favorites]


"but still SHE SEEMS CORRUPT"

The thing is, she probably is a little bit. Who isn't? Seriously, who here has never done anything morally questionable in their whole life? Who wouldn't mind having all their e-mails made public and their fights with their spouse made public and the performance reviews from all their jobs made public?

And it is indeed journalists' job to point out her mistakes, to hold her accountable. Or if she had been elected, it would be their job to continue to do that. The mistake wasn't in pointing out Clinton's flaws... It was in ignoring Trump's.

I've said it before, I think Greenwald &co were just so convinced she would win (because the establishment always wins! The system is rigged! They can't lose!) that they were willing to ignore Trump as a sideshow. What does it matter how horrible he is? He can't win. He's not part of the establishment. Speaking truth to power means holding Clinton's feet to the fire, because she was obviously going to win.

"The establishment" really is flawed. Clinton is flawed. America is flawed. Humans are flawed. But we have to consider 1) perfect is impossible and 2) What alternatives are on the table right now? We HAVE to be willing to vote for lesser evils, because there will never be anyone who is 0% evil. Not any human being. But there are a few who are 99% evil, and there is a real difference between 99% and say 10%, that matters to people's lives.

And I don't think Greenwald et al really disagree with that, even. I just think they were sure Clinton would win. And it turns out that the establishment is a lot more fragile than they thought.
posted by OnceUponATime at 9:43 AM on December 20, 2016 [26 favorites]


"but still SHE SEEMS CORRUPT"

The thing is, she probably is a little bit. Who isn't?


I like this line:

"Hillary Clinton is an ordinary liberal politician. She has her faults, easily described, often documented—though, for the most part, the worst accusations against her have turned out to be fiction. No reasonable person, no matter how opposed to her politics, can believe for a second that Clinton’s accession to power would be a threat to the Constitution or the continuation of American democracy. No reasonable person can believe that Trump’s accession to power would not be."
posted by diogenes at 9:52 AM on December 20, 2016 [48 favorites]


And I don't think Greenwald et al really disagree with that, even.

While I agree with much of what you said regarding Clinton and flaws, I kinda disagree on Greenwald. I actually think Greenwald & Co see Democrats as their real enemy. Because sure, Republicans are the other side, but it's Dems/liberals who are keeping them/leftists out of primary position as the alternative to conservatism. They're sometimes more interested in fighting to be the left representative than fighting Republicans.
posted by chris24 at 9:53 AM on December 20, 2016 [6 favorites]


But that's so hard to do when there are people out there deliberately spreading it, to serve their own interests.

Yeah. I'm increasingly of the opinion that Reagan's elimination of the Fairness Doctrine was probably his single greatest accomplishment in advancing the conservative cause long-term.
posted by soundguy99 at 9:53 AM on December 20, 2016 [32 favorites]


Yeah. I'm increasingly of the opinion that Reagan's elimination of the Fairness Doctrine was probably his single greatest accomplishment in advancing the conservative cause long-term.

Yep.
posted by maxsparber at 9:59 AM on December 20, 2016 [2 favorites]


Any time someone says that our institutions will protect us from Trump, I think about how, right after he became Chancellor, Hitler passed the Enabling Acts, which (lawfully) gave him absolute power. Laws won't protect us because Trump will just make new laws.

Sort of like what is happening in NC right now. You can bet we'll see more of this.
posted by staggering termagant at 9:59 AM on December 20, 2016 [12 favorites]


Vanity Fair/Nick Bilton: Inside the Desperate, Year-Long Hunt to Find Donald Trump's Rumored Apprentice Outtakes
As he enters the White House with the lowest approval rating of any president-elect in recent history, re-writes the rules of diplomacy, and sides with Vladimir Putin over the C.I.A., Trump appears to have his hands full. Not only is he about to run the country, he’s also still the executive producer of The Apprentice. And while Burnett has vehemently denied that he was “pro-Trump” before the election, he is now meeting with the president-elect about his inauguration. (After requests for comment, the Trump transition team responded with a fuzzy photocopy of Nielsen ratings from April 21, 2004, indicating that The Apprentice was No. 1 in the 18-to-49 demographic. As the spokesperson wrote to me, “This speaks for itself.”)
Still obsessing over 12 year old ratings.
posted by zachlipton at 10:04 AM on December 20, 2016 [9 favorites]


Laws won't protect us because Trump will just make new laws.

Yup. People are all spun up about the GSA contract for the Old Post Office building, and how the day he takes office Trump will be in violation of the terms of the contract. Big whoopee: he won't be held accountable, he won't be penalized, he won't even lose the building. He'll just insist they renegotiate the contract and strike that clause. Problem solved.

And he'll probably take the opportunity to insert new terms that give him even more financial benefit somehow.
posted by suelac at 10:06 AM on December 20, 2016 [16 favorites]




How a Pandemic Might Play Out Under Trump

I'm actually reading How to Survive A Plague right now. The past is prologue.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:12 AM on December 20, 2016 [3 favorites]


Any time someone says that our institutions will protect us from Trump, I think about how...

...none of them has yet?
posted by Etrigan at 10:12 AM on December 20, 2016 [19 favorites]


the problem is is that they have just demonstrated by for-real voting that they are less interested in actual policy than, basically, having someone promise a nice simple pie in the sky

I don't think we can tell that, though, because none of the actual policies offered were what they wanted. If it's a choice between stuff people don't really care about, or pie in the sky, people will choose pie in the sky every time, because a the least the person promising pie knows what they want, even if they can't deliver it.

There's a lot of moral and philosophical arguments about "where should you spend your resources, policy and time: the most needy, or everyone regardless of need?" But I think in the end, a practical consideration really does need to come into play: if you tell people they are unimportant or less important to you, they will believe you. And nothing is a greater predictor of sectarian strife and violence than a culturally distinct group having a justified feeling that their wants, desires, and dreams don't matter to the powerful.

If you tell people, "forget the thing you say you want, I know much better what you need", they are going to feel disrespected and unheard even if you are right.

Politics is a matter of compromises and promises. It's a matter of promising distinct things to distinct groups in the hope it motivates them enough to support you or at least tolerate your rule. This happens with many groups of all political stripes. People may make decisions based on their moral compasses, but what they choose to publicize shows what groups they are trying to cater to and benefit even if it's the morally right thing to do.

Rust Belt voters - personally, I think accurately - didn't feel catered to under Clinton at least. She proposed a lot of policies that would also somewhat benefit them, but no arguments or offers targeted specifically to them. And so they turned the person who did promise them unique benefits - even if that person was lying.

If you want to fix this problem, then you need to come up with targeted benefits that respond to actual asks. Not "this thing I came up with for a different constituency will also benefit you."
posted by corb at 10:13 AM on December 20, 2016 [3 favorites]


I don't think we can tell that, though, because none of the actual policies offered were what they wanted.

"Rewind the calendar to 1957" isn't actually on the table, you realize.
posted by Etrigan at 10:15 AM on December 20, 2016 [13 favorites]


the moral values of your arguments ought to be front and center

Moral arguments are sometimes persuasive, but then you bump into folks saying it's immoral to take away other people's resources and give them to other people who didn't earn it. That voluntary charitable giving should be enough. They might even accuse you of having a heart that bleeds.

At best it can be interpreted as just being plain selfish, and at worst it's an argument in support for racism because the folks that don't deserve help just happen to be minorities or from marginalized groups.

I've always found it more convincing to just say, you provide universal health care because it makes it easier to move to another city or state if you want to change jobs or to get a job. That the government is best positioned to take advantage of economies of scale to deliver essential services to people who most need it. That charity is at best a band-aid, and is a band-aid that shrinks when the economy is doing badly because less people donate in an economic slump. And that the United States is a huge economy that is still growing, so it can actually help multiple groups at once without having to pit one against the other.
posted by FJT at 10:21 AM on December 20, 2016 [11 favorites]


Rust Belt voters - personally, I think accurately - didn't feel catered to under Clinton at least. She proposed a lot of policies that would also somewhat benefit them, but no arguments or offers targeted specifically to them. And so they turned the person who did promise them unique benefits - even if that person was lying.

If you want to fix this problem, then you need to come up with targeted benefits that respond to actual asks. Not "this thing I came up with for a different constituency will also benefit you."


I'm sorry, but the idea that a comprehensive economic plan that benefits all isn't good enough because it benefits blacks as well, so we have to come up with some special appeal just for whites - which is basically what this amounts to - is ridiculous. If that's the case then they're beyond help because as the study I linked above says, the biggest determinant of a Trump vote wasn't feeling left behind economically, it was feeling that blacks weren't being left behind enough. That is what Trump offered them, the promise to leave blacks behind, to maintain their white privilege. And we should not be a party that does that. I'd rather lose elections than be racist to win. But we don't need to. We got more votes and were close enough in the states that mattered to make up that deficit with other votes than fickle racists.
posted by chris24 at 10:22 AM on December 20, 2016 [56 favorites]


There's a lot of moral and philosophical arguments about "where should you spend your resources, policy and time: the most needy, or everyone regardless of need?" But I think in the end, a practical consideration really does need to come into play: if you tell people they are unimportant or less important to you, they will believe you. And nothing is a greater predictor of sectarian strife and violence than a culturally distinct group having a justified feeling that their wants, desires, and dreams don't matter to the powerful.

Simple, universal benefit programs, you say?

Sure. Come join the left, then.
posted by tivalasvegas at 10:23 AM on December 20, 2016 [1 favorite]


I am so fucking sick of the prevailing idea that voting is like some sort of Letter to Santa or Amazon wishlist or whatever. God forbid anybody should give a shit about the public good or civic responsibility.
posted by FelliniBlank at 10:29 AM on December 20, 2016 [61 favorites]




> If it's a choice between stuff people don't really care about, or pie in the sky, people will choose pie in the sky every time, because a the least the person promising pie knows what they want, even if they can't deliver it.

In addition to what others have said, this is patronizing as fuck. A lot of voters actually can distinguish empty bullshit promises from keepable ones. Some of them didn't show up, some weren't energized by Clinton, some were disenfranchised, some were discouraged by the Comey EMAILS bullshit... These are all factors that either won't be in play in 2020 or can be worked on between now and then at the state and local levels. One lost election doesn't prove that Democrats have to follow Trump's example of tailoring policy to regional interests at the expense of others.
posted by tonycpsu at 10:33 AM on December 20, 2016 [6 favorites]


I stopped caring about Pantsuit Nation the moment they incorporated as a 5013c and started sending down the message that they couldn't be associated with any tangible political change now because of the tax shit. Fuck that in the goddamn ear. I don't care about your heartwarming middle-aged white woman feel-good stories; I care about doing something about this bullshit and actually making people fucking safe. Get off my damn feeds and make space for someone who will do something.

The Texas chapter appears to have had the same feeling and immediately rebranded to call itself Pantsuit Republic, where it has cheerfully formed as a political action group helping people stay informed on local causes. I think the Austin chapter either renamed itself to something I can't work out entirely or self-immolated in irritation.
posted by sciatrix at 10:34 AM on December 20, 2016 [42 favorites]


Rust Belt voters - personally, I think accurately - didn't feel catered to under Clinton at least. She proposed a lot of policies that would also somewhat benefit them, but no arguments or offers targeted specifically to them. And so they turned the person who did promise them unique benefits - even if that person was lying.

This kind of emotional Calvinball is why I'm totally over the demand for Democrats to have more empathy with Trump voters. I've come to see this as basically another tactic of emotional abuse by a party that specializes in that sort of thing. Empathy is hard, painful work, and engaging in it is a draining. But why in god's name would I bother trying to understand from the inside what these people are feeling when it's clear that they will just repay my efforts with moving the goalposts yet again and retreating deeper into their private world of endless grudges and self-aggrandizing reveries?

These are, let's not forget, people who feel no pressure at all to empathize with anyone outside of their wounded little enclaves, and who have--by the logic outlined above--simply rejected the social contract that says we all accept as legitimate others' demands on our limited shared resources. No, it's us first, all the time. This is the mindset of a spoiled child or a psychotic, not a grown-ass citizen. We've been playing an iterated Emotional Prisoner's Dilemma with these people for decades and they're rats all the way down the line. And I'm not going to be bullied into playing another round.

And nothing is a greater predictor of sectarian strife and violence than a culturally distinct group having a justified feeling that their wants, desires, and dreams don't matter to the powerful.

This, right here, this is just the sort of bullying, abusive, grudge-suckling, mindset that I'm talking about. It might be an accurate representation of how some of these folks feel, but if so it only reveals how deeply screwed up their demands are. They don't want help when it's offered (because of "pride" or "bootstraps" or some other fundamentally bogus reason), and they don't want anyone else to get help either (because they have false and unjustified beliefs about their special plight)? Pardon me if I suspect that someone like this is not entirely sincere about what is driving their attitudes.
posted by informavore at 10:37 AM on December 20, 2016 [75 favorites]


the idea that a comprehensive economic plan that benefits all isn't good enough because it benefits blacks as well, so we have to come up with some special appeal just for whites -

Let me be clear, that is not at all what I'm saying. I'm saying that each distinct group in this country has at least one issue that matters more to them than others, even if it benefits them both.

For example: I believe immigration prospers this country and everyone inside it in many ways. I think it can be an economic and intellectual boon for many people, not just immigrants. But immigration reform is a platform that primarily appeals to immigrants and people with immigrants in their families. It is a plank that is most deeply felt - and thus more catered to - the needs of immigrants.

Likewise, we all lose when a policeman's word is counted equivalent to five witnesses. We all lose when police are allowed and encouraged to continue in brutality. But police reform is primarily an issue with emotional import to minorities, because they encounter the police most and are most negatively affected by those encounters. Thus meeting it - moral as it is - is still meeting the needs of primarily minority groups.

We all lose when religious bigotry prevails; that said, countering Islamophobia is an issue that primarily directly affects the needs of Muslim communities.

We all gain when women have access to reproductive freedom - men and women - but it is still primarily a women's issue - one that targets the needs of women.

Even though every American benefits from fixing these things, that doesn't mean these policies are targeted at every American.

So yes, I think if you want to convince rural/Rust Belt voters that you care about them, you need to offer at least a few policies that will primarily impact rural/Rust Belt areas. And they don't have to be - and shouldn't be - policies that throw other people under the bus. What about, for example, a specifically rural infrastructure program, that expects to hire from within the communities it is doing these works through?
posted by corb at 10:39 AM on December 20, 2016 [8 favorites]


I just got off another conference call of activists. There are definitely folks mobilizing. I'll be asking for cities that you want contacts in shortly. Los Angeles and New York folks, if you want to start mobilizing, memail me and I'll send you the meeting places via email.
posted by Sophie1 at 10:40 AM on December 20, 2016 [14 favorites]


There's a lot of moral and philosophical arguments about "where should you spend your resources, policy and time: the most needy, or everyone regardless of need?" But I think in the end, a practical consideration really does need to come into play: if you tell people they are unimportant or less important to you, they will believe you. And nothing is a greater predictor of sectarian strife and violence than a culturally distinct group having a justified feeling that their wants, desires, and dreams don't matter to the powerful.

The problem though, as Yglesias points out, is that the only real practical consideration that wins is to target the swing states that make the difference in the electoral college. And of all the moral, philosophical, and practical ways to decide how to allocate limited resources, that's a super-crappy one.

Because for all the talk about how the Electoral College gives small states power and protects the rest of the nation from being subject to California's dominion, that's not what it does. Really, it takes away power from solidly red/blue states and hands it to states on the edge of the partisan divide. Campaigns have to focus on the perceived problems of these states regardless of what's going on anywhere else, because that's the only way to win elections.

And the side-effect of that is that all you do is create other culturally distinct groups with justified feelings that their wants, desires, and dreams don't matter to the powerful. Because that's how you feel right now if you want more equality and civil rights and efforts to not destroy the planet and fewer hedge fund guys in government and think some regulation and enforcement can help protect consumers from the worst ravages of capitalism. That's how you feel right now if what you need from and want for the country doesn't particularly correspond to the desires of white subruban and exurban homeowners with above-average incomes in Rust Belt states. That's surely how you feel right now if the state of, say, North Carolina is trying to disenfranchise you on account of your race. The entire electoral system is designed around creating groups of people who are told they are unimportant, but it just so happens that the people deemed important are the same people we create hagiographies about as the Real Americans, so we pretend everyone else doesn't exist.
posted by zachlipton at 10:40 AM on December 20, 2016 [10 favorites]


Sometimes I am just amazed at how much I hate Trump. I don't think I've ever hated anyone so much in my life.

And then I think this is how those crazy anti-Obama people have felt for 8 years but instead of gaining any sympathy for them it just makes me more angry at them.
posted by asteria at 10:41 AM on December 20, 2016 [41 favorites]


Any time someone says that our institutions will protect us from Trump, I think about how, right after he became Chancellor, he passed the Enabling Acts, which (lawfully) gave him absolute power. Laws won't protect us because Trump will just make new laws.

One of the few things that gives me... not necessarily a sliver of hope, but maybe marginally less panic? is his weird little "oh yeah, if I mess with the libel laws somebody could sue me!" thing being enough to get him off of that idea, and his backing off of prosecuting Hillary. These are areas where he drew boundaries around himself that I really didn't expect, because there's not a whole lot stopping him from going after Clinton or pushing for one-sided libel laws that he could weaponize. It doesn't even remotely make me breathe easier about the threats he represents, but it gives me pause because I can't figure out why he'd back off of pursuing these integral parts of the authoritarian toolset when there's no indication congressional Republicans would push back if he wanted them.

It's frustrating, because it prevents me from getting a clear picture of what we're facing. And it's one of the things that makes me wonder if we're not just fighting Pence and Priebus, and Trump is useful to them as cover and as a distraction as long as he toes their line. I mean, Pence was literally told he'd be the one with the power while Trump's job will be simply to MAGA, which is something that I kind of didn't think too much about because it seems like nonsense, until I realized that maybe that's exactly the point, Trump's job is slinging nonsense as cover for Cheney 2.0.

The silver lining there would be that it's a fight we know how to fight, that the people really fucking don't like the policies of Brownbacks and McCrorys when they see them in action, and that the Republican playbook in NC has shown us their plans and the Rev. Dr. Barber has shown us how to fight them.

Thanks, 2016, for putting me in a position where I'm hoping we're merely up against nationalized North Carolina politics because that's the comforting option.
posted by jason_steakums at 10:43 AM on December 20, 2016 [11 favorites]


Several state governors (including Scott Walker) have started signalling support for an Article V Constitutional Convention. Currently, they say they're looking to pass a national balanced budget amendment and congressional term limits. I'm guessing there will be more enthusiasm on the right for the first item than the second.
posted by drezdn at 10:45 AM on December 20, 2016 [1 favorite]


Sophie1, I'm plugged into like eight things in Austin and I'm pretty sure I'm burning the wick at both ends and the middle besides. How do we centralize the mobilization, and should we? What are you listening to?

I'm genuinely curious--there's a lot of will out there right now, and one of the big reasons I'm hitting up the protests and pushing myself to hit the ground running is that every time I do--every time I go to an ACLU meeting or I go to the Electoral College protest--then I plug into someone else or a couple of someones, usually someone else local, who badly wants to get involved and hasn't seen the things I have. (I actually directed one person here the other day!) And then I friend her on Facebook and can keep checking in and chatting and reminding her that hey, I'm a person who supports her feelings; and often she supports me right back in comments. It's building networks, both social and otherwise, and building communication.

But also, it can be pretty distracting and oh god there is so much to do and, uh, it's probably obvious that shit is overwhelming. Especially with those Pantsuit Nation traitors fucking breaking the biggest centralized network I had access to and decentralizing it in favor of "stories" because some asshole got greedy. So your network of activists--what are their plans? How do we catch all the people who want to do something but are intimidated by the things they see?
posted by sciatrix at 10:46 AM on December 20, 2016 [9 favorites]


As much as I agree with the sentiment of knowing who in the press is "selling us out", not all of the people in the Trump Press Dinner photo are journalists - some are support people, like videographers and audio engineers, and these people are usually contract with the networks, not employees. They are bound by their contract, and have zero control of the editorial stance of their employer.

Source: I am friends with a couple (as yet non-listed) people in that photo.
posted by tomierna at 10:48 AM on December 20, 2016 [13 favorites]


Get off my damn feeds and make space for someone who will do something.
Beckys with the book deal. Sigh.
posted by TwoStride at 10:49 AM on December 20, 2016 [4 favorites]


As much as I agree with the sentiment of knowing who in the press is "selling us out", not all of the people in the Trump Press Dinner photo are journalists - some are support people, like videographers and audio engineers, and these people are usually contract with the networks, not employees. They are bound by their contract, and have zero control of the editorial stance of their employer.

Good point. Thanks for clarifying.
posted by chris24 at 10:50 AM on December 20, 2016 [2 favorites]


It might be an accurate representation of how some of these folks feel, but if so it only reveals how deeply screwed up their demands are.

Their demands? Hell, their perceptions. There has been no group more specifically catered to in election after election than the middle class white voter. The problem is that they keep falling for the same Republican shtick over and over and never actually much in benefits because they are more keen on hearing how others will be kept down than in improving their own lot, much less the lives of anybody else. When you keep hearing the same lies and keep believing them without benefit, it means either you're being willfully blind or that you actively do want to harm others more than help those you know and your own families.

How many Republican presidents have to tank the economy and how many Democrats have to fix it before they see a causal relationship? The same could be wondered about those homeless folks they don't want around them, but somehow grow in number when Republicans are in office. Those jobs they want that are harder to find when big R is on top. Immigration, crime rates, foreign entanglements, pretty much anything other than religion mixing in government gets worse when they get what they want, yet they keep asking for more. They must love praying a lot, which makes sense I guess since everyone needs to pray more when Republicans rule as there sure isn't any other solutions being presented.
posted by gusottertrout at 10:50 AM on December 20, 2016 [16 favorites]


Let me be clear, that is not at all what I'm saying.

But that was what Trump was saying, which was your argument. The claim that he would make a lot of people's lives better at the cost of groups they saw as undeserving was basically his entire campaign. If you just separate and decontextualize this and call it "economic anxiety" then you're making excuses for a lot of people who really don't need anyone defending them.
posted by zombieflanders at 10:51 AM on December 20, 2016 [9 favorites]


So yes, I think if you want to convince rural/Rust Belt voters that you care about them, you need to offer at least a few policies that will primarily impact rural/Rust Belt areas. And they don't have to be - and shouldn't be - policies that throw other people under the bus. What about, for example, a specifically rural infrastructure program, that expects to hire from within the communities it is doing these works through?

Or how about, say . . . . . . a 5-year $275 billion National Infrastructure Plan? Which I guess wasn't good enough because it wasn't aimed like a laser beam at the Rust Belt? Or at rural areas?
posted by soundguy99 at 10:53 AM on December 20, 2016 [28 favorites]


Several state governors (including Scott Walker) have started signalling support for an Article V Constitutional Convention. Currently, they say they're looking to pass a national balanced budget amendment and congressional term limits. I'm guessing there will be more enthusiasm on the right for the first item than the second.

HEY GOV WALKER AND THE REST OF YOU CHUCKLEFUCKS. Will this national balanced budget amendment have an exception for defense spending? Because I know y'all GOP motherfuckers want to starve all the grandmas and make all the black babies homeless, but even if you cut social security and medicare we'd still need to run a deficit to maintain our two-front-capable military, you fucking morons.
posted by dis_integration at 10:53 AM on December 20, 2016 [30 favorites]


America's Biggest Crisis Has Nothing to Do With Donald Trump
What isn’t often discussed is how this crisis of despair emerged at the behest of corporate America. Companies gleefully outsourced jobs to take advantage of lower costs of production. They endorsed the Walmart-ization of small-town America that crippled the vitality of countless Main Streets. And when this transformation left a gaping wound, they filled it with drugs.
posted by T.D. Strange at 10:59 AM on December 20, 2016 [5 favorites]


HEY GOV WALKER AND THE REST OF YOU CHUCKLEFUCKS. Will this national balanced budget amendment have an exception for defense spending?

Ha. It won't even need to. It'll be so generically written and easy for any trained accountant to get around that it will curb not a dollar of federal spending, so Walker will be able to campaign on both pushing the Balanced Budget Amendment and how he'll stop those Washington fat-cats from spending us into debt.
posted by Etrigan at 10:59 AM on December 20, 2016 [2 favorites]


What about, for example, a specifically rural infrastructure program, that expects to hire from within the communities it is doing these works through?

Gee, that's a pretty good idea, I wonder if—Well, whaddya know? It's right here:
Democrats.org: Investing in Rural America

I mean, honestly, I haven't heard much about rural infrastructure investment either. But, I don't live in a rural or rust-belt area. So, I don't know if I'm not hearing about it because the Democrats suck at messaging or because they're just super specific in their targeting of the message.
posted by FJT at 11:00 AM on December 20, 2016 [13 favorites]


That Drone Skirmish With China? It Was Over Before Donald Trump’s First Mean Tweet.
Donald Trump launched his Twitter campaign against China’s seizure of a U.S. Navy research submersible last week to great fanfare ― and, as it turns out, hours after the crisis had already been defused.

It’s unclear whether the president-elect or his aides knew that fact ― it would have been included in the intelligence briefing available to him each morning ― before he sent out his misspelled missive of outrage at 7:30 a.m. Saturday.
Ambassador Baucus was informed China would return the thing four hours before Trump started talking tough on Twitter about it.
posted by zachlipton at 11:01 AM on December 20, 2016 [46 favorites]


The Elusive Definition of 'Fascist'; Fascism is in the running to be Merriam-Webster’s Word of the Year. But it’s not the right word for the current moment.

I find this article's argument very unconvincing. He lists a 5-step roadmap to fascism and then does a crap job arguing that Trump doesn't meet the definition because "while appeals to nativism and nostalgia were hallmarks of fascism, they are also perennial hallmarks of liberal-democratic vote-seeking" and proclaiming that Barack Obama in 2008 was "promising a delirious crowd not just hope and change, but a vision of a purified world.". I'm honestly not sure what he means by "vision of a purified world". That's just tossed off without explanation.
posted by Green With You at 11:06 AM on December 20, 2016 [4 favorites]


It’s unclear whether the president-elect or his aides knew that fact ― it would have been included in the intelligence briefing available to him each morning

So, no.
posted by Etrigan at 11:07 AM on December 20, 2016 [14 favorites]


Hey, you guys remember last thread when we discussed the Freedom Caucus's weirdo list of regulations to repeal and how it just seemed to random and slapped together and like nobody had any idea what the regulations they wanted to repeal even did?

Freedom Caucus's list of rules to repeal is plagiarized from other groups.
posted by zachlipton at 11:10 AM on December 20, 2016 [16 favorites]


Trump adviser: Don't take Trump literally, 'take him symbolically'
“Hold on. If he’s a detail-oriented guy, then how does this statement that we’ve been hearing for months — don’t take him literally, take him seriously — make sense?” anchor Stephanie Ruhle asked. “Because that’s sort of the opposite.”
...
“No, no, no, no, don’t take him literally, take him symbolically,” Anthony Scaramucci told MSNBC. “See, it’s different.”
...
“You should definitely take him seriously because he’s a man of his word, but I do think that some of the things that happens with the media is when he’s sending out tweets or he’s speaking in a certain way that sets the hair on fire of the nation’s media — particularly the left-leaning media — I think his supporters see that more as symbolism and a rejection of sort of that egg and tomato throwing that he’s experienced from June of 2015 when he announced his campaign.”
posted by kirkaracha at 11:11 AM on December 20, 2016 [7 favorites]


And even if Dem messaging about rural/blue-collar concerns sucks, it still doesn't justify blue-collar workers choosing to vote for the guy who lies to them, especially if they know or suspect he's lying. So we're right back to the "Person Who Votes for Face-Eating Leopard" problem, where the only way to guarantee votes from one group is to promise to throw another group to the Face-Eating Leopards. Which is not exactly a tenable position for Democratic politicians.
posted by soundguy99 at 11:14 AM on December 20, 2016 [5 favorites]


We also haven't discussed the Weiner/Abedin warrant yet, which was finally unsealed.
Emails between Clinton and top aide, but little else, spurred FBI to resume controversial probe
(copy of the warrant, with a fairly ridiculous number of redactions). The FBI appears to have not really known anything at the time of Comey's statement.
posted by zachlipton at 11:21 AM on December 20, 2016 [13 favorites]


I find this article's argument very unconvincing. He lists a 5-step roadmap to fascism and then does a crap job arguing that Trump doesn't meet the definition because "while appeals to nativism and nostalgia were hallmarks of fascism, they are also perennial hallmarks of liberal-democratic vote-seeking" and proclaiming that Barack Obama in 2008 was "promising a delirious crowd not just hope and change, but a vision of a purified world.".

Yeah, the people who dismiss those comparisons by saying, hey, hold up, we've always had those strains of thought in our culture always conveniently overlook that those same strains in American culture also inspired and fueled American support for the kind of historical fascism no one disputes is named correctly. It's a real persistent blind spot, America's collusion with and financial support for European fascism.
posted by saulgoodman at 11:28 AM on December 20, 2016 [2 favorites]


And (one more), concentrating too heavily on a discussion of the economic concerns of white blue-collar Midwestern voters results in simply ignoring issues of racism and sexism that were also a factor in their voting choice, even if they choose not to believe it themselves.
posted by soundguy99 at 11:33 AM on December 20, 2016 [5 favorites]


My feeling is, yeah, if you can vote with your feet, do so now and beat the rush.

I really don't like this "Well, we could all just leave" idea. Could we?

I mean, where would I go? My national background can best be described on a good day as hillbilly, but probably more accurately as Mutt. Appalachia is where Trump is popular. They're not going to enact a Law of Return for people like me. Hey, I'm like 25 percent Welsh, technically. Maybe 25 percent of me can go to Wales.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 11:33 AM on December 20, 2016 [5 favorites]


Where would be better anyway? Trumpism (or alt-rightism? know-nothingism?) seems to be a global phenomena that is spreading.
posted by ian1977 at 11:36 AM on December 20, 2016 [3 favorites]


My feeling is, yeah, if you can vote with your feet, do so now and beat the rush.

I really don't like this "Well, we could all just leave" idea. Could we?


Frowner pretty clearly said "if" there.
posted by Etrigan at 11:36 AM on December 20, 2016


The Elusive Definition of 'Fascist'; Fascism is in the running to be Merriam-Webster’s Word of the Year. But it’s not the right word for the current moment.

I still stand by my take that Trump is a caudillo and not an actual fascist, so I like counter-narratives, but this article wasn't that great.

Like the communists, the fascists were radically unprincipled opportunists, contemptuous of democratic norms.

For all the opportunism that the Bolsheviks and other revolutionary groups harbored, they were hardly unprincipled. Unless ideology and principles aren't synonymous. Moreover, while fascism is a less cohesive and more contradictory ideology (or rather, family of ideologies- Italian Catholic corporatism was actually quite different from German national socialism) than Marxist-Leninism, it was still an ideology. Which, presumably, has principles.
posted by Apocryphon at 11:37 AM on December 20, 2016 [5 favorites]


Ray Walston, Luck Dragon: I mean, where would I go?

Go to Pennsylvania or Florida. And then vote there in the next election. :-)
posted by clawsoon at 11:39 AM on December 20, 2016 [6 favorites]


So in other words...say what you want about the tenets of national socialism, dude, at least it's an ethos?
posted by zombieflanders at 11:40 AM on December 20, 2016 [6 favorites]


I really don't like this "Well, we could all just leave" idea. Could we?

See, my point isn't that everyone should leave, but that people who can leave may as well. I can't leave - I don't have anywhere to go, I have a pink collar job and I'm kind of old. But seriously, I really don't believe in all that "your obligation is to stay and fight" line.

First off, think about all the people who left Chile, Germany, Spain, Italy, etc when fascists took power. Lots of artists and writers left, for pete's sake - surely it was the job of the Frankfurt School to stay and die on their feet, right? And they didn't do anything, they just went to Hollywood. Second, people leave their countries because they hate the political conditions all the time. My own people left Prussia because they didn't want to be conscripted and left Sweden because they couldn't stand the sway of the church. They were ordinary farmers, nothing particularly much, and they just left because they wanted to have lives that were not totally squashed down by terrible social forces. Should the Frowner ancestors have stayed and fought? I mean, maybe, I don't know - but that seems like a weird metric. So surely anyone whose ancestors came from Europe should be back in Europe, fighting, by all the laws of justice?

Little, ordinary people get crushed by larger social forces all the time and go down nameless into history. Holding them up to some standard of "you have the opportunity for a less horrible life elsewhere but be sure to stay and be a footsoldier in a largely unsuccessful left or else you're a bad person abandoning your companions" seems really unfair. The rich and powerful - or even members of the professional class - can move fairly freely and have a lot more security. But they're the ones who, like, take teaching fellowships in Bonn or become consultants in Denmark or whatever. But since that's only business and not fleeing, it's okay I guess?
posted by Frowner at 11:44 AM on December 20, 2016 [39 favorites]


It's cliche, but it's true. The way I see it, when a caudillo turns back on his economic populist promises and gets into bed with big business, it's for self-enrichment. Fascists, at least, could claim some sort of ideological basis- whether because it would be more efficient for the organic corporatist body of the state to function or whether it helped in class collaborationism to reduce class conflict, or whatever. A caudillo is just making things up as he goes along, playing with dangerous forces and cynically indulging hateful passions to stay in power. Not that there isn't a significant overlap between populist strongmen and true believer fascists, of course.
posted by Apocryphon at 11:45 AM on December 20, 2016 [2 favorites]


I vaguely remember this, but now that he's about to become our Ambassador to Israel... Friedman Even Worse Than I Thought
October 20, 2016: “While the revelation of Mr. Trump’s demeaning comments caught on tape some 11 years ago brought him, as one would expect, widespread negative attention, The New York Times ran with the story with all the journalistic integrity of the worst gossip rag. If only the Times had reported on the Nazi death camps with the same fervor as its failed last-minute attempt to conjure up alleged victims of Donald Trump, imagine how many lives could have been saved.”

I did not realize you could leverage the Holocaust and the 6 million Jewish victims as a cudgel to defend a man caught on tape bragging about 'grabbing' women by their 'pussies' and coercing sex. But you can. David Friedman did. And he'll be our next Ambassador to Israel.
The worst part is that given the extent to which the Times downplayed the Holocaust, you could make the same argument about most any major story.
posted by zachlipton at 12:00 PM on December 20, 2016 [2 favorites]




ian1977: Where would be better anyway? Trumpism (or alt-rightism? know-nothingism?) seems to be a global phenomena that is spreading.

That is probably, and unfortunately, true... but not all of the different ways in which democracy is implemented are equally vulnerable to it. In many countries, it's not really possible for any one party to control the government the way the Republican party is going to do that in the US over the coming years.
posted by Too-Ticky at 12:11 PM on December 20, 2016


The Pro-Putin New World Order
This is the new world order -- anti-Muslim white-supremacist parties in Europe and now America, plus Putin and Likud. [...]

Apart from China and the ever-weakening EU, who stands in opposition to this alliance? Justin Trudeau? Jerry Brown?
posted by tonycpsu at 12:14 PM on December 20, 2016 [1 favorite]


Damn, it's hard to work and keep up with this thread. You folks need to come up for air now and then.

Regarding Ellison. I want to believe. We need a DNC chair that ties economic and civil rights together, that will fight in all fifty states (like Howard Dean did). But I have my reservations. I lived in Minnesota for years and have some roots in the legal community and the DFL. There have always been concerns about what Ellison's real motivations are. These are not based on the man's race or his religion. But I have talked with a couple folks who knew him from law school and he was thought of as less than selfless, a promoter who ultimately was only looking out for himself. Now maybe he has grown, maybe he is now the visionary we need. I want to believe. But also I will really believe it when I see it.

Oh, and whoever said that Obama's record on picking DNC chairs was less than stellar was spot on. Whoever gets picked, they have to be better than what we've had since Howard Dean.
posted by Ber at 12:16 PM on December 20, 2016 [3 favorites]


The FBI appears to have not really known anything at the time of Comey's statement.

That's what the statement itself actually said. We found some stuff, we don't know what it is, but we thought we should mention it anyway.

The point of the letter had nothing whatsoever to do with the underlying evidence or even the investigation itself, it was solely intended to kick the EMAILS "scandal" back into the mainstream news coverage at the most critical point in the election cycle. It was a deliberate act of partisan sabotage. It had nothing to do with a legitimate law enforcement purpose, and didn't really pretend to.
posted by T.D. Strange at 12:19 PM on December 20, 2016 [26 favorites]


Meanwhile in Houston, where we elected a Democrat D.A. for the first time in decades: [D.A.] Ogg accuses fired prosecutors of sabotaging cases in political retribution
Ogg said crime victims in at least five cases had contacted her to say prosecutors overseeing their cases called them to say their cases were in jeopardy, or defendants were given lenient plea deals, because of the firings.

"It appears that some of these individuals are sabotaging their own cases," Ogg told reporters at a press conference. "It's the use of victims as pawns by disgruntled employees that shows not just a profound disrespect for other people but a lack of professionalism that won't go unaddressed."

posted by DynamiteToast at 12:22 PM on December 20, 2016 [4 favorites]


“No, no, no, no, don’t take him literally, take him symbolically,” Anthony Scaramucci told MSNBC. “See, it’s different.”

Scaramucci, Scaramucci, will you do the fandango?
Thunderbolts and lightning, very very frightening me.
posted by carmicha at 12:24 PM on December 20, 2016 [5 favorites]


Will this national balanced budget amendment have an exception for defense spending?

They'll do it by defunding the EPA. They'll defund it so hard that it'll go into the negative and employees will pay money back to the government to balance the budget.
posted by C'est la D.C. at 12:28 PM on December 20, 2016 [3 favorites]




After Ogg did such a wonderful job inventing fire and the wheel and this is how we treat him.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 12:32 PM on December 20, 2016 [5 favorites]


But I have talked with a couple folks who knew him from law school and he was thought of as less than selfless, a promoter who ultimately was only looking out for himself.

So a potential candidate for the presidency, then?
posted by contraption at 12:33 PM on December 20, 2016


I think Hilary Clinton ran a good campaign. I think Trump won by violating all the norms of decent behavior. No one was prepared for that.

The only people who had to be prepared for that was the news media. And they hoarked up a gruesome hairball of a horse-race instead. Thanks NYT "Public Editor" Liz Spayd! Thanks Jeff Zucker! Thanks Les "may not be good for America but he's great for [CBS]" Moonvees!
posted by petebest at 12:34 PM on December 20, 2016 [11 favorites]


“No, no, no, no, don’t take him literally, take him symbolically,” Anthony Scaramucci told MSNBC. “See, it’s different.”

This way lies madness.
posted by petebest at 12:36 PM on December 20, 2016 [10 favorites]


Apart from China and the ever-weakening EU, who stands in opposition to this alliance? Justin Trudeau? Jerry Brown?

Is China even opposed to this? If Le Pen was to win in France, this is like the bizarro version of the postwar international order.
posted by Apocryphon at 12:38 PM on December 20, 2016


I can see why Glenn Beck went mad. There is nothing more terrifying than being right for all the wrong reasons.
posted by Apocryphon at 12:40 PM on December 20, 2016 [2 favorites]




No lie, I had a political conversation with a black co-worker before the election and he told me that even though he was a registered democrat, he was considering voting Trump because he thought it would be better for the black community. We didn't talk it through enough for me to find out if he believed that because he didn't trust Clinton after the prison sentencing and welfare reforms that devastated the black community in the 90s under Bill or if it was because he bought into the accelerationist argument that electing Trump would eventually inspire some kind of popular uprising or what, but there's my anecdotal contribution to understanding what went wrong.
posted by saulgoodman at 12:48 PM on December 20, 2016 [2 favorites]


You know, there actually is a super important economic issue that Democrats need to do better on, maybe the biggest economic policy problem for Democrats, and solving the problem would bring in WWC votes without throwing POC under the bus: when the predominant narrative is that raising wages, increasing benefits, allowing unions and complying with regulations means that jobs have to be cut and businesses will have to close, a hell of a lot of people believe it and vote based on that. It's an old problem, it's a huge problem, and it hasn't been addressed well outside of already-unionized workers, it's been dismissed as a lost cause. It's vital to the Democratic party to fix this instead of playing this "once the demographics change, and elections are more favorable to us, and congressional majorities grow on trees while the rivers swell with progressive fervor, we'll get to implement these policies and people will finally see how good they are" game. If we don't have a counter to the message, we will lose voters every time who are convinced their jobs are forfeit if they rock the boat.

The second part to this problem is that there absolutely are some businesses where complying with progressive policies would cause them to cut jobs and/or close. And while I believe that in a black-and-white world these businesses shouldn't be in business if they can't operate on a truly level playing field for workers, health, the environment, etc... we don't live in that world, there are workers' livelihoods on the line if the employers can't hack it, and furthermore, what am I, a libertarian? That line of thought might feel right here but it's disingenuous to apply it selectively. So maybe we need to find equitable solutions for those edge cases, perhaps subsidies for small businesses that honestly give compliance a try but just can't keep up when they're competing with big business that can.
posted by jason_steakums at 12:58 PM on December 20, 2016 [16 favorites]


The worst part is that given the extent to which the Times downplayed the Holocaust, you could make the same argument about most any major story.

I'd be okay with "Trump Not As Bad As The Holocaust, Advisor Claims"
posted by zarq at 12:59 PM on December 20, 2016 [14 favorites]


When I get disappeared it will probably be because whenever a new popular vote count comes up I tweet it to Trump.
posted by kirkaracha at 1:06 PM on December 20, 2016 [15 favorites]


Obama bans offshore drilling, for examples of fighting back in advance of the inauguration.
posted by corb at 1:12 PM on December 20, 2016 [11 favorites]


"When I get disappeared it will probably be because whenever a new popular vote count comes up I tweet it to Trump"

It is an indication of our times that I am thinking very hard before saying "me too" right now.
posted by litlnemo at 1:13 PM on December 20, 2016 [4 favorites]




He's not embracing any strategy. He's just a risky madman.
posted by tonycpsu at 1:16 PM on December 20, 2016 [48 favorites]


On the other hand, the more people who think twice and stay silent, the easier it will be for him to target people who do speak out and actually call him on his criticism. It's the whole reason that prey animals form herds--if predators encounter a whole mass of potential prey animals, they have an actual cognitive load that makes it much more difficult for them to attack any one single individual. It's also why his constant barrage of horrifying garbage is so paralyzing. The more of us who shout at it, the harder it will be for him to target and take down any one of us.

Just a thought.
posted by sciatrix at 1:17 PM on December 20, 2016 [27 favorites]


One more thing about my earlier note about Trump being a caudillo and not a fascist- I'm not looking to absolve him of using rhetoric that empowers bigots and true believers. But I'm saying that the distinction could be useful. If he's just a businessman at heart and not an ideologue, he'd just as soon as betray those who helped him rise to power if he sees it in his best interests. So it's important to look for such opportunities to exploit. Putin, after all, is a judo master- a martial art about using an opponent's momentum against themselves. There's no shame in learning the adversary's tactics.
posted by Apocryphon at 1:27 PM on December 20, 2016 [2 favorites]


He's not embracing any strategy.

Yeah, I disagree with all the pundits who say Trump is smarter than he appears. I believe he's exactly as stupid as he appears.
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 1:29 PM on December 20, 2016 [20 favorites]


‘Insane’: Anger in Mobile, Ala., as city robs park of beloved old cedar for Trump rally backdrop

In an initial statement, Colby Cooper, the chief of staff for the city, lauded the city’s efforts, saying “A Christmas Tree was needed and the City provided it,” AL.com reported. But on Sunday, following public criticism, the chief of staff issued an apology for his role, saying he became “overzealous” in making sure “every detail was covered and the expectations” of Trump’s team were exceeded ahead of Saturday’s televised rally.

“I now know there are citizens who are upset and offended that a tree from a City park was used as part of the decorations for the event,” Cooper wrote on Facebook.


Fuckhead.
posted by futz at 1:30 PM on December 20, 2016 [27 favorites]


“I now know there are citizens who are upset and offended that a tree from a City park was used as part of the decorations for the event,” Cooper wrote on Facebook.

The other day on my drive home from work I say a bumper sticker that said "Worship the creator, not the creation". I had trouble parsing it at the time but I think I understand it perfectly now.
posted by OverlappingElvis at 1:37 PM on December 20, 2016 [1 favorite]


I believe he's exactly as stupid as he appears.

It hardly seems possible, but that is the essence of Trump's Razor, n'est-ce pas?
posted by aspersioncast at 1:38 PM on December 20, 2016 [5 favorites]


but as long as he has Twitter it seems like social media will continue to exist.

That has lose-lose written all over it.
posted by petebest at 1:40 PM on December 20, 2016 [2 favorites]


After Ogg did such a wonderful job inventing fire and the wheel and this is how we treat him.

Her.
posted by Joe in Australia at 1:40 PM on December 20, 2016 [3 favorites]


Trump is stupid on a lot of things but dastardly clever on other things. I mean just look at the rest of the Republican field, I don't see how it's any crazier to accept the existence of Dr. Ben Carson or Gov. Rick Perry than it is to acknowledge Trump's.
posted by Apocryphon at 1:40 PM on December 20, 2016 [2 favorites]


What we are seeing today is the endgame of a century long effort to undermine the foundations of democracy using the tools of propaganda originally invented by Edward Bernays. The effects of this campaign have accumulated gradually but effectively, and include systematic undermining of public education, government funded research and information services, and the public media. Today we see the crowning achievement as Twitter storms and fake news sway people more effectively than professional news coverage and governmental information.

I think the final step happened faster than the authors of this program expected because of the effectiveness of Internet communications to undermine traditional news sources, and I don't think Trump was the intended beneficiary; rather, gifted con man that he is, he saw an opportunity and jumped at it without quite realizing how it had got there. Trump never had the forward vision or the means to set up something so wide-ranging and generational, but he does understand how to manipulate people and he saw what had become possible in time to grab it for himself.

And what happens next? As far as anyone can seems to be able to tell the one thing Trump has always wanted is to be accepted as a member of that society of elites that probably set this in motion, so he will probably be happy to function as their lackey. Where life gets interesting is where he might be unable to do so, because of his stupidity and lack of impulse control. It is easy to see the forces that waited a century for their vision to mature giving Trump a chance, but it's hard to see them giving him much of one after it becomes clear he really might start a world war in a fit of pique over a tweet.

I am convinced that Trump is a genuinely stupid person. A bit of cleverness, natural charisma, and the gravitational attraction of his father's money for more money have kept him from sliding off of third base where he was born, but he is utterly incapable of learning new things or forming a plan of any complexity and making it work. He owes what he has achieved to others who have done it for him and gone uncredited and, often, unpaid.

It is hard to estimate exactly what the powers that worked so hard to create this opportunity will do about Donald now that he has seized their banner, but it's hard for me to imagine that it will be good. Perhaps it is not against us that Donald is keeping his personal army of brownshirts close.
posted by Bringer Tom at 1:43 PM on December 20, 2016 [21 favorites]


WaPo: Donald Trump embraces the risky ‘Madman Theory’ on foreign policy

So that article, which isn't horrible, has this sentence, which is:
The Chinese government’s decision yesterday to return the naval drone that it had seized in the South China Sea, despite howls of protest about Trump’s braggadocio, might be the first vindication of this approach.
If we scroll upthread, we find this article, which tells us that Trump was just a madman shouting at nobody, because actual grown-ups already dealt with the drone issue hours before he started tweeting. It didn't vindicate his approach at all, because his approach had no role in solving the problem. He was the guy who comes bursting in with an axe spraying water everywhere to find that the fire has already been extinguished and now he's just getting everyone wet for no particular reason. He was the guy who bursts into the Rogue One screening after his and starts yelling about all the plot holes.

None of that is the madman theory; it's just being mad.
posted by zachlipton at 1:45 PM on December 20, 2016 [22 favorites]


Good lord that tree story is sordid. It feels like it belongs in Czarist Russia or something - where it's totally expected for local authorities to engage in chicanery and petty wrongdoing to create a moment's enjoyment for the ruler - just a moment's enjoyment, just a pageant, not even something significant or durable. The ruler being so all-powerful and corrupt that currying favor by literally every means available is far more important than any local concern.
posted by Frowner at 1:48 PM on December 20, 2016 [32 favorites]


zachlipton: he was just doing what most successful people in America and especially executives often do now: taking credit for other people's work.
posted by saulgoodman at 1:50 PM on December 20, 2016 [8 favorites]


The Chinese government’s decision yesterday to return the naval drone that it had seized in the South China Sea, despite howls of protest about Trump’s braggadocio, might be the first vindication of this approach. salvo of four desecratingly-long years of normalization by the manstream press.

Yeah, I misspelled "mainstream" but it kinda works?
posted by petebest at 1:52 PM on December 20, 2016 [6 favorites]


Or how about, say . . . . . . a 5-year $275 billion National Infrastructure Plan? Which I guess wasn't good enough because it wasn't aimed like a laser beam at the Rust Belt?

It wasn't good enough because Clinton was not a credible representative for it. She's a third-way Democrat who only reluctantly came around to such a plan as part of a "follow the follower" primary strategy. Just like how she was for the TTP and the DAPL before she was against them. She would have folded such a plan up and tut-tutted the moment she faced the slightest resistance on it as soon as she faced the slightest resistance.
posted by Coventry at 1:57 PM on December 20, 2016 [2 favorites]


Yeah, I disagree with all the pundits who say Trump is smarter than he appears. I believe he's exactly as stupid as he appears.

I have a sneaking suspicion that the same was true for most of history's dictators and history has come to paint them as charismatic and geniuses as a way for society to collectively avoid taking responsibility. I can imagine the same happing for Trump in 50 years.
posted by C'est la D.C. at 1:57 PM on December 20, 2016 [11 favorites]


Final: Clinton won the popular vote by 2,864,974

(Plus the missing Detroit ballots.)
posted by FelliniBlank at 2:04 PM on December 20, 2016 [8 favorites]


How Vanity Fair Protected Its Trump Grill Reviewer From Online Attacks: In a set of actions that other media outlets would be wise to study, the Vanity Fair public relations team quickly contacted Nguyen. “They kept an eye out for anyone who tried to release my address or my phone number or even tried to call me through the Condé [Nast] switchboard,” she says. “They were on top of their game, so big credit to them.”
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 2:05 PM on December 20, 2016 [36 favorites]


Grub Street has a story on How Vanity Fair Protected Its Trump Grill Reviewer From Online Attacks (which pulls from CJR's Vanity Fair reporter on Trump’s response: ‘I was kind of shocked’).

NYT restaurant critic Pete Wells points out that, "By the way, in a civil society, restaurant reviewers shouldn't need this kind of protection."
posted by zachlipton at 2:05 PM on December 20, 2016 [32 favorites]


There have always been concerns about what Ellison's real motivations are.

What should I search for to read more about these concerns?
posted by Coventry at 2:07 PM on December 20, 2016


Neat story, Bringer Tom, but who exactly are its Bad Guys, the "authors" of the 100-year program to bring down democracy?
posted by Lyme Drop at 2:09 PM on December 20, 2016 [4 favorites]


Frowner: Good lord that tree story is sordid. It feels like it belongs in Czarist Russia or something - where it's totally expected for local authorities to engage in chicanery and petty wrongdoing to create a moment's enjoyment for the ruler.

Hey, at least I laughed out loud when I came to this gem:

Colby Cooper, the chief of staff for the city ... issued an apology for his role, saying he became "overzealous" in making sure every detail was covered [...] "Going forward, I will be more sensitive to the spectrum of concerns regarding trees."
posted by RedOrGreen at 2:11 PM on December 20, 2016 [13 favorites]


She's a third-way Democrat who only reluctantly came around to such a plan as part of a "follow the follower" primary strategy.

Sorry, but she talked about significant investment in infrastructure in her announcement speech way before Bernie was a thing. Like she talked about many of Bernie's issues before Bernie was a thing.
We will restore America to the cutting edge of innovation, science, and research by increasing both public and private investments. And we will make America the clean energy superpower of the 21st century. Developing renewable power – wind, solar, advanced biofuels… Building cleaner power plants, smarter electric grids, greener buildings. Using additional fees and royalties from fossil fuel extraction to protect the environment.

And ease the transition for distressed communities to a more diverse and sustainable economic future from coal country to Indian country, from small towns in the Mississippi Delta to the Rio Grande Valley to our inner cities, we have to help our fellow Americans. Now, this will create millions of jobs and countless new businesses, and enable America to lead the global fight against climate change.

We will also connect workers to their jobs and businesses. Customers will have a better chance to actually get where they need and get what they desire with roads, railways, bridges, airports, ports, and broadband brought up to global standards for the 21st century.

We will establish an infrastructure bank and sell bonds to pay for some of these improvements.
posted by chris24 at 2:11 PM on December 20, 2016 [56 favorites]


In a small effort to try to make up for my double post after r317, here's Luxury Travel Magazine calling Trump's DC hotel the 3rd worst new luxury hotel in the world:
The building itself is undoubtedly impressive, but once inside we start to ask questions. LTI finds the décor a little garish and more quantity over quality. Service is poor on occasions and lacks confidence. The whole experience seems a little forced and therefore this place is not for the true discerning luxury traveler. But no doubt the tourist hordes will keep the place eternally busy.
I assume "this place is not for the true discerning luxury traveler" is about as bad as you get from Luxury Travel Magazine.
posted by zachlipton at 2:12 PM on December 20, 2016 [16 favorites]


I have a sneaking suspicion that the same was true for most of history's dictators and history has come to paint them as charismatic and geniuses as a way for society to collectively avoid taking responsibility. I can imagine the same happing for Trump in 50 years.

In the case of Trump specifically, there is a way to square the circle. He is generally stupid and unable to grasp complex concepts, and he has the attention span of a fly. But he does have the cunning of a salesman / grifter. He can hear in people's voices and read in their faces what they want to hear from him. He can read a crowd to figure out which lines are going over well and which aren't, and spew out more of the ones that work. You can say it reflects "charisma" or not, but it's a well-honed skill for a very specific situation. You can give the devil his due for being clever in that one narrow way, while still insisting that it doesn't at all reflect a more general intelligence.

I hope history remembers that about Trump.
posted by Joey Buttafoucault at 2:12 PM on December 20, 2016 [14 favorites]


She's a third-way Democrat who only reluctantly came around to such a plan as part of a "follow the follower" primary strategy.

Sorry, but she talked about significant investment in infrastructure in her announcement speech way before Bernie was a thing. Like she talked about many of Bernie's issues before Bernie was a thing
.

Yeah, FFS it really irritates me that almost no one fucking listened to her.
posted by zutalors! at 2:17 PM on December 20, 2016 [43 favorites]


It wasn't good enough because Clinton was not a credible representative for it.

So the Democratic infrastructure plan wasn't good enough because Clinton was selling it. Okay, but what would have made it good enough? 2-yr, $100 Billion? 50-yr, $trillion billion?

Of course, it goes without saying that we don't get that now since the better salesman won, but we do get the 1-yr, $100 drillion Trumpway To New York. Plus the home game version.
Certain fees and restrictions apply. Not valid in all fifty states. See your participating warlord for details.

posted by petebest at 2:18 PM on December 20, 2016 [3 favorites]


Neat story, Bringer Tom, but who exactly are its Bad Guys

As a wise person once said, you will know them by their works.

On my one visit to play tourist in Washington DC my wife and I emerged from the subway to find ourselves across the street from the American Enterprise Institute, whereupon I said "Look, honey, a building full of evil motherfuckers." That's a start...
posted by Bringer Tom at 2:19 PM on December 20, 2016 [5 favorites]


Sorry, but she talked about significant investment in infrastructure in her announcement speech way before Bernie was a thing.

Which Obama also talked about and didn't follow through on, hence the credibility gap for his annointed successor.

...it really irritates me that almost no one fucking listened to her.

The question is whether they believed her.
posted by Coventry at 2:23 PM on December 20, 2016 [2 favorites]


im sure if we keep bickering about this we'll eventually all come to an agreement
posted by entropicamericana at 2:24 PM on December 20, 2016 [20 favorites]


Starting with John F. Kennedy’s victory over Richard Nixon in 1960, Delia Anderson had voted in 14 straight presidential elections.

She had cast her ballot at the same polling place for years, never with a glitch. This year, however, a volunteer driving her to the polls mentioned that she would be asked to show a state-approved photo ID.

“Don’t these poll people already know who I am?” replied Anderson, who is 77, black and uses a wheelchair, as she frantically sifted through her purse for anything to prove her identity.

It was a lost cause. She had planned to vote for Hillary Clinton. Instead, for the first time in 56 years, she did not cast a ballot.

“Lord, have mercy,” she said. “What happened to voting?”

posted by roomthreeseventeen at 2:25 PM on December 20, 2016 [31 favorites]


"Didn't follow through on" is kind of disingenuous. He put them forward and Congress voted them down. He's not a dictator.

Laws won't protect us because Trump will just make new laws.

Unless and until they nuke the filibuster Trump can't do this. We'll know in a few weeks. If the Republicans nuke the filibuster it's game on. If they don't then the Democrats can prevent any non-budgetary shenanigans.
posted by Justinian at 2:26 PM on December 20, 2016 [11 favorites]



...it really irritates me that almost no one fucking listened to her.

The question is whether they believed her.


This is a typical goalpost that moves from "but she never said that" to "but she was a bad messenger for the thing she said"
posted by zutalors! at 2:29 PM on December 20, 2016 [53 favorites]


Unless and until they nuke the filibuster Trump can't do this. We'll know in a few weeks. If the Republicans nuke the filibuster it's game on. If they don't then the Democrats can prevent any non-budgetary shenanigans.

You have an astonishing faith that the weak and cowardly democrats will actually filibuster disastrous bills. I am without hope, and affirmed continually that institutions will not save us, including the Senate and its filibuster.

Anyway, I don't expect the lack of legality to ever be a hindrance to Trump's actions. Laws won't protect us because Trump will simply ignore the laws, and claim he's obeying them, and nobody will hold him accountable.
posted by dis_integration at 2:30 PM on December 20, 2016 [11 favorites]


Unless and until they nuke the filibuster Trump can't do this.

I disagree. I think Trump will, when he wants to, ignore the law. Who's going to hold him accountable? The press? His followers who voted for him? Congress? His own Justice Department?

No institution will hold him accountable. If somehow, a case gets to court, and they rule against him, he will ignore the ruling. Oh, he'll have some bullshit explanation, but no, he doesn't care about the rule of law.

When the Marshall Court ruled against the State of Georgia in the 1840, when the whites in Georgia wanted to evict all the Native Americans, Andrew Jackson famously said Now let him enforce it. And kicked the tribes out.

Trump has less respect for the rule of law than Jackson did, that I can guarantee you.
posted by suelac at 2:33 PM on December 20, 2016 [36 favorites]


You have an astonishing faith that the weak and cowardly democrats will actually filibuster disastrous bills

I'm not often accused of being too calm and panic-free on Metafilter!

I doubt they'll filibuster all disastrous bills. It wouldn't surprise me if they roll over and lick Trump's boots on a tax cut package which explodes the budget. Stuff like that. But they'll certainly filibuster any insane dictator-like weirdness. They use the filibuster all the time for much less bad reasons.

The real concern will be how much damage Trump and his cronies can do economically. Will they gut Medicare? Social Security? Because unless they nuke the filibuster the social issue stuff will be preventable. In so far as economics isn't a social issue when it is so closely tied to race.
posted by Justinian at 2:33 PM on December 20, 2016 [6 favorites]


The question is whether they believed her.

You know who they didn't believe? Trump. Even his own supporters knew to not take him literally. But they still voted for him. Maybe belief in delivering on policy wasn't the real issue. Maybe infrastructure wasn't really the issue. Maybe they were voting Trump regardless because the real issue was race.
posted by chris24 at 2:34 PM on December 20, 2016 [19 favorites]



You have an astonishing faith that the weak and cowardly democrats will actually filibuster disastrous bills

I'm not often accused of being too calm and panic-free on Metafilter!


I think you turned into a voice of relative reason on the Nov 9th.
posted by zutalors! at 2:37 PM on December 20, 2016 [5 favorites]


I DIDN'T CHANGE, REALITY CHANGED.
posted by Justinian at 2:39 PM on December 20, 2016 [34 favorites]


This is good to see. CBO Lays Down Key Ground Rules For Scoring Obamacare Replacement Plans
The Congressional Budget Office laid out some important ground rules in a blog post Tuesday for how it will judge whatever Obamacare replacement plans lawmakers eventually offer if they repeal the Affordable Care Act next year. The CBO said it would not be giving any proposals credit for covering consumers unless the plans that consumers would be receiving met certain broad standards for coverage.
...
"What CBO is saying is that they'll count people buying these skimpy insurance policies with refundable tax credits as being uninsured," Larry Levitt, vice president at the Kaiser Family Foundation, told TPM over an email. "This will make it harder for Republicans to say that their proposals are not increasing the number of people uninsured. CBO is making clear that what matters is not only how many people are buying an insurance policy, but also what those insurance policies cover."
In short, any health care plan Republicans propose will be scored as "N million people to lose health insurance" unless it actually covers people with something that sort of resembles a comprehensive policy.
posted by zachlipton at 2:40 PM on December 20, 2016 [23 favorites]


> 'Republicans obstructed Obama for years, forcing him to implement his promises in unanticipated ways, and forgoing some of them altogether; therefore Clinton has no credibility' is a nonsense argument. And, look, maybe that's an argument people buy!

Pairs well with:

> I DIDN'T CHANGE, REALITY CHANGED.
posted by RedOrGreen at 2:41 PM on December 20, 2016 [1 favorite]


> Any health care plan Republicans propose will be scored [by the CBO] as "N million people to lose health insurance" unless it actually covers people with something that sort of resembles a comprehensive policy.

"Good afternoon. We have just fired the entire staff of the CBO. Now watch this drive."
[Fake, but for how long?]
posted by RedOrGreen at 2:42 PM on December 20, 2016 [11 favorites]


city robs park of beloved old cedar for Trump rally backdrop

Isn't it a crime to appropriate public property for the benefit of a private citizen? Trump isn't president yet. And in particular, it is using government resources for political campaigning, which is also a crime in most states.
posted by JackFlash at 2:45 PM on December 20, 2016 [6 favorites]


And yes, in real terms, someone who owns a home, even with a mortgage, is better off than someone who does not. but at the same time, those clients I had to turn away were really hurting. And I had nothing to offer them.

This is a real problem that I've run into both professionally and personally. For example, to qualify for Medicaid in my state means you have to have assets under a certain amount. Which means if you own property, like a home you inherited, you have to sell it in order to qualify. I've worked with elderly people who needed to be in a nursing home but couldn't pay and had to sell everything they owned and give away the profits in order to get into a nursing home.

Rural poor people often own property that isn't worth very much, but is the only reason they aren't homeless. But to qualify for various programs they would have to rid themselves of that family property.

Personally I ran into this in the last year. We applied for food stamps at a time when we had no income but were denied because my husband had some money in a 401K. Not a lot of money, not anywhere near what he should have in there at age 40. But because there was money we could theoretically get our hands on, we couldn't get food stamps. So we did end up cashing out that retirement account to pay our bills until he got another job that could support us. Which, ok, but that means we're far less likely to be able to support ourselves come retirement age and will be entirely dependent on the government for that.

The problem here is that the safety net is so pared down to bare minimum that it can't help everyone. We should as a society recognize that everyone needs some support every once in a while and that helping people even when they aren't dirt poor is better for everyone in the long run. That helping my family with a few hundred dollars in groceries now for a couple months and letting us keep our retirement savings is cheaper in the long run.

But the right has been so obsessed with making sure no one is getting anything they don't DESERVE that they've gutted our safety net. And that hurts everyone and makes everyone anxious and pissed off. Everyone should be able to draw on help when they need it. But instead we've got Republicans convincing people the problem is someone receiving food stamps when they have a smartphone or a recent model car. Instead of just acknowledging that jobs aren't dependable in this economy and sometimes people lose their income unexpectedly and need help to get through a lean time.
posted by threeturtles at 2:49 PM on December 20, 2016 [49 favorites]


Buying of the President 2016

#DRAINTHESWAMP
posted by Talez at 2:54 PM on December 20, 2016 [1 favorite]


"Sen. Joe Manchin's solution for West Virginia's opioid epidemic: "We need to declare a war on drugs""

He goes on to claim that West Virginia's opioid epidemic is caused by people who start out with "recreational marijuana" and go from there.

Such genius insight from the Democrat who drags the entire party to the right in an effort to get him to go along with everything.
posted by zachlipton at 2:58 PM on December 20, 2016 [14 favorites]


"Sen. Joe Manchin's solution for West Virginia's opioid epidemic: "We need to declare a war on drugs""

So for the last 40 years the DEA has been what, playing poker with drugs?
posted by dis_integration at 3:03 PM on December 20, 2016 [21 favorites]


Thank god we don't have the Clinton Foundation and pay-to-play anywhere near the White House.
posted by Justinian at 3:03 PM on December 20, 2016 [20 favorites]


"Sen. Joe Manchin's solution for West Virginia's opioid epidemic: "We need to declare a war on drugs""

He goes on to claim that West Virginia's opioid epidemic is caused by people who start out with "recreational marijuana" and go from there.


Drug wholesalers shipped 9 million pain pills over two years to a single West Virginia pharmacy

I'm not sure Manchin realizes just how fucking stupid he is.
posted by Talez at 3:04 PM on December 20, 2016 [38 favorites]


When I get disappeared it will probably be because whenever a new popular vote count comes up I tweet it to Trump.

nah, i been tweeting he should go fuck himself for weeks and so far nothing has ha[24SR
;LHTL;KFMN
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 3:05 PM on December 20, 2016 [8 favorites]


I'm not sure Manchin realizes just how fucking stupid he is.

He probably does. Being fucking stupid is incredibly lucrative these days.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 3:05 PM on December 20, 2016 [11 favorites]


On the DNC chair note, Keith Ellison seems to be making a great, persuasive press for his case on the podcasts I listen to (Keepin It 1600 and Off Message.) Hopefully Tom Perez will do the same; I'd like to hear directly from him what he'd like to do to get the party back in fighting shape.
posted by tautological at 3:07 PM on December 20, 2016 [5 favorites]


The Texas chapter appears to have had the same feeling and immediately rebranded to call itself Pantsuit Republic, where it has cheerfully formed as a political action group helping people stay informed on local causes. I think the Austin chapter either renamed itself to something I can't work out entirely or self-immolated in irritation.

The Austin group is simply Pantsuit Austin. It doesn't seem to be all that active though there was some stuff about the protests on Monday. The Houston group is Pantsuit Republic: Houston and has had several large meetings and formed committees for various action topics. My local group is Pantsuits United. I'm on all of them (and the Texas one) but I've left the national group a while ago.
posted by threeturtles at 3:12 PM on December 20, 2016 [2 favorites]


Maine gas distributor asks customers who are Trump supporters to ‘find another supplier’

Turner told the newspaper he isn’t concerned about the impact on his business because he’s planning to retire soon. He said he thinks the president-elect is “despicable” and “the Antichrist,” but that his voicemail is “just a statement.”

“If you voted for Trump, don’t tell me and I wouldn’t cut anyone off that was freezing,” Turner said.

The voicemail message for the company on Tuesday explained the reasoning behind the request to callers:

Thank you for calling Turner LP Gas. I do not support Donald Trump’s vulgar behavior and comments about women. Therefore, I am asking my customers who are Trump supporters to find another supplier.
The price of gas remains at $110 a bottle. That is payment on delivery.

posted by futz at 3:29 PM on December 20, 2016 [17 favorites]


Maine gas distributor asks customers who are Trump supporters to ‘find another supplier'

I saw a thread about this on a right-leaning prepper/anarcho-capitalist message board and they were furious. Many, many direct threats of violence against this guy. One or two people tried to argue that it was his right on principle to refuse service, the Invisible Hand etc etc; the primary response was that gas is a LIFE-SUSTAINING SERVICE and that to deny it to the poor real American residents of the area is tantamount to an attempt to murder them, so he should be killed.

No discussion of self-sufficiency or economic freedom in a forum full of homesteading libertarians, just rage and threats. This is where we are.
posted by Rust Moranis at 3:38 PM on December 20, 2016 [39 favorites]


she talked about significant investment in infrastructure in her announcement speech way before Bernie was a thing.
Which Obama also talked about and didn't follow through on, hence the credibility gap for his annointed successor.


The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act had over $100 billion in Infrastructure provisions.

Politifact lists 17 Obama proposals, marks 8 of them kept, 8 compromised, and 1 not kept. Both "kept" and "compromised" qualify mean there was "follow-through" happening (compromise doesn't happen unless you're trying to follow through).

A year ago the talk was about Obama signing one of the first highway/infrastructure bills with a five year horizon in a while after years of railing against shorter-term fixes.

That's on a casual search rather than a deep dive.

This is kindof the pattern with a lot of discussion of Obama and other Democratic policy, though -- there's a lack of awareness of stuff that's actually been done... and of course, the lack of acknowledgment about opposing political forces.

This is one of the reasons that while I think the there's a lot of truth and definitely things to learn from in that Lies At The Heart of Our Dying Order piece linked earlier in the thread, it misses a key additional lie getting stronger and more widespread: both sides do it, "The System" is responsible for our problems, everyone is equally corrupt.

In the meanwhile what we actually seem to have is (a) a Democratic party that wants government to function well and address the suffering of people who aren't economic winners, even if it is friendly to the globalist neoliberal order and (b) a Republican party whose stated goal is the failure of government to act to benefit everyone, whose every policy initiative is towards benefiting and actively reinforcing the dominance and wealth concentrated in/by the global neoliberal order (while paying a lot of lip service to social conservative values).

We seem to be, as a whole, even within the Democratic party, people who don't notice or remember when a victory happens unless it's total. When the Republicans succeed at fighting a Democratic initiative to a draw or loss, everybody decides the Democrats need to be held accountable for not fulfilling the promise of benefiting everyone.

It doesn't take much to see how this works to help the Republicans keep their promise to benefit the richest of the rich and screw everyone else over. And until we become a more attentive and pragmatic country, we're at risk of ending up helping them continue.
posted by wildblueyonder at 3:49 PM on December 20, 2016 [39 favorites]


I saw a thread about this on a right-leaning prepper/anarcho-capitalist message board[...]No discussion of self-sufficiency or economic freedom in a forum full of homesteading libertarians, just rage and threats. This is where we are.

These are people that think that state-supported slavery is a "property rights" issue that the US had no business trying to regulate, let alone eliminate. Ancaps doing things like throwing temper tantrums about Confederate leaders being memorialized and lionized showed up on subreddits like BadHistory and BadSocialScience so much that they had to limit posts about them lest they dominate the discussion. I'm not surprised at all that they they're threatening violent retribution over this.

the primary response was that gas is a LIFE-SUSTAINING SERVICE and that to deny it to the poor real American residents of the area is tantamount to an attempt to murder them, so he should be killed.

And yet they'll happily argue that you deserve to literally die in a fire if you don't want to pay for a privately-run fire department.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
posted by zombieflanders at 3:58 PM on December 20, 2016 [11 favorites]




How LGBTQ People Can Fight a Trump Administration: If avenues to gain or maintain legal protections at the federal level are shut down, there will be ways forward in state legislatures and state courts. If state legislatures and courts become inhospitable, we will turn to base-building and public education strategies to move public understanding about trans people in their stead. The goal over the course of the next four years will not be to win every fight—if we're always winning, we're not taking on the right fights. Instead, we must assess where we can learn, build and grow as individuals and as movements.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 4:04 PM on December 20, 2016 [4 favorites]


Mchelly, as awful as that article is, the headline is misleading. To be fair to him, the OMB pick did not question the need for ever funding any scientific research. He was speaking specifically about whether there was a need to fund Zika research at a particular point in time.

Again, he seems terrible. But I don't see from that article that he literally doesn't think any scientific research should ever be funded by the government.
posted by prefpara at 4:10 PM on December 20, 2016 [7 favorites]


For example, to qualify for Medicaid in my state means you have to have assets under a certain amount. Which means if you own property, like a home you inherited, you have to sell it in order to qualify.

This is no longer true thanks to Obamacare. You now qualify for Medicaid based solely on low income and disregard any property, cash or other assets you might have. Obamacare eliminated all of the arbitrary and capricious state eligibility rules and changed to a uniform national rule that disregards assets.

Oops, sorry. It seems that you live in a red state where the Republicans refused the free Obamacare Medicaid expansion, so you are screwed.

Which makes a joke of the claim that Democrats aren't providing benefits for poor working class people. They are providing benefits but Republicans keep taking them away -- and then sanctimoniously blaming Democrats.
posted by JackFlash at 4:12 PM on December 20, 2016 [59 favorites]


I get the schadenfreude over the gas company thing, but isn't that genuinely unconstitutional discrimination by "creed"? Like refusing to do business with communists and communist sympathizers under McCarthyism?
posted by XMLicious at 4:13 PM on December 20, 2016 [2 favorites]


Searching tells me that legally: "The word creed imports a formal declaration of religious belief. The word has no reference to benevolent, philanthropic or fraternal organizations, secret or otherwise, even though of a moral character. [Hammer v. State, 173 Ind. 199 (Ind. 1909)]."

So no, I don't think it applies to voting for Trump.
posted by thefoxgod at 4:15 PM on December 20, 2016


This is no longer true thanks to Obamacare.

For now, sadly.

Although I think this would not qualify as something which could be changed under reconciliation. So attempts to claw back the Medicaid eligibility changes may be subject to filibuster.
posted by Justinian at 4:15 PM on December 20, 2016



...it really irritates me that almost no one fucking listened to her


As the only woman in my department, I'll just be over here laughing bitterly until I cry.
posted by soren_lorensen at 4:21 PM on December 20, 2016 [37 favorites]


I get the schadenfreude over the gas company thing, but isn't that genuinely unconstitutional discrimination by "creed"?

Probably not, but there is a certain sense of satisfaction at the near-impotent rage of the people that write screeds about how the Civil Rights Act is unconstitutional and that not being allowed to discriminate against LGBTQ couples is a violation of their civil rights. If they weren't likely to be armed and violent, it would be even better, and I wouldn't be concerned at what might happen to the company and/or employees.
posted by zombieflanders at 4:25 PM on December 20, 2016


Yeah, I understand the glee of refusing to work with Trump supporters, but I think this can easily backfire in a big way.
posted by steady-state strawberry at 4:31 PM on December 20, 2016 [3 favorites]


Yeah, I understand the glee of refusing to work with Trump supporters, but I think this can easily backfire in a big way.

Yup, I get the temptation, but it's not a path I want to head down.
posted by diogenes at 4:39 PM on December 20, 2016 [2 favorites]


Hey
*taps on glass*
First generation to not grow up in front of tv - are you here yet? Over.

When can you vote? Over.
posted by petebest at 4:42 PM on December 20, 2016 [4 favorites]


Yeah, you hit them in their pocketbooks, they'll shoot you in the face.
posted by oneswellfoop at 4:43 PM on December 20, 2016


Yeah, you hit them in their pocketbooks, they'll shoot you in the face.

So what, people are supposed to forget about their convictions because there are a bunch of armed bullies in this country? We might as well all just shut the fuck up then, because that's where that ends as far as I'm concerned.
posted by OverlappingElvis at 4:47 PM on December 20, 2016 [23 favorites]


It's a super bad idea to do this. Bad in terms of personal safety, relationships with neighbors, community stability. But something like 2/3 of that part of Maine voted for T. He's not bullying a few conservatives in his area, he's standing on principle against a big chunk of his local population and the vast majority of his clientele, since his service is apparently used more often by the rural population. That takes crazy bravery that I can't help but admire. Probably best aimed elsewhere, but until an effective and organized resistance movement can reach this guy it's going to be what he's going to do.
posted by Rust Moranis at 4:57 PM on December 20, 2016 [18 favorites]


[Hammer v. State, 173 Ind. 199 (Ind. 1909)]

A 1909 court decision would be from the point when it was still regarded as constitutional to refuse to sell a sandwich to someone based on their race.

However, I'm having trouble figuring out where I even got the idea that it's unconstitutional to discriminate against someone on the basis of their political beliefs... I have a hazy memory of reading about civil rights in high school and encountering a list in which both "religion" and "creed" appeared and determining (incorrectly, perhaps?) that "creed" could cover both aspects of religion and political affiliation.

But Googling doesn't seem to find anything like this and I'm having trouble finding a searchable copy of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, but the word "creed" doesn't appear in the Wikipedia article on it.

Forgetting that particular term, though, is it legal to refuse to do business with someone because you don't like their political party or political beliefs? I somehow arrived at the conclusion it wasn't, a long time ago. Maybe I have a misunderstanding of the concept of a "public accommodation" as I'm seeing mentioned in connection to the CRA?
posted by XMLicious at 4:59 PM on December 20, 2016 [1 favorite]


I can't imagine why it wouldn't be legal to discriminate on the basis of political party. If that was illegal than what could you still discriminate on? Regular beliefs / personality / statements are fair game. Religion gets special treatment.

It's a super bad idea to do this. Bad in terms of personal safety, relationships with neighbors, community stability.

Meh, I don't think _this guy_ is the one contributing to "poor community stability". And I can't imagine having good relations with my neighbors if I lived in an area that was 2/3 Trump voters. His behavior seems reasonable to me if he doesn't need the money (most people probably couldn't afford to alienate so many customers, but if you can great).
posted by thefoxgod at 5:04 PM on December 20, 2016 [4 favorites]


I get the schadenfreude over the gas company thing, but isn't that genuinely unconstitutional discrimination by "creed"?

Anti-discrimination laws are based on the concept of legally defined protected classes. Major protected classes are: race, color, religion, sex, age and disability. Nowhere does the law say anything about "creed", whatever that means.

If it is not a legally defined protected class, then it is not protected from discrimination. Political affiliation, for example, is not a protected class. Which means that your boss can legally fire you for having the wrong bumper sticker on your car (with the exception of a few state laws). Just as an employer can fire you for your politics, certainly that employer can also refuse to do business with certain people based on politics. Remember the gun stores that had signs saying no Clinton supporters allowed. That's legal.

Discrimination per se is not illegal. Discrimination of a protected class is illegal.
posted by JackFlash at 5:10 PM on December 20, 2016 [16 favorites]


Here's the classes protected from discrimination under federal law. Political preference isn't one of them.

Race – Civil Rights Act of 1964
Color – Civil Rights Act of 1964
Religion – Civil Rights Act of 1964
National origin – Civil Rights Act of 1964
Age (40 and over) – Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967
Sex – Equal Pay Act of 1963 and Civil Rights Act of 1964 (The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission includes discrimination based on gender presentation and sexual orientation as protected beneath the class of 'sex')
Pregnancy – Pregnancy Discrimination Act
Citizenship – Immigration Reform and Control Act
Familial status – Civil Rights Act of 1968 Title VIII: Housing cannot discriminate for having children, with an exception for senior housing
Disability status – Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990
Veteran status – Vietnam Era Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act of 1974 and Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act
Genetic information – Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act
posted by chris24 at 5:11 PM on December 20, 2016 [15 favorites]


Federal law says nothing about creed: however, some state laws do.
posted by corb at 5:12 PM on December 20, 2016 [2 favorites]


Meh, I don't think _this guy_ is the one contributing to "poor community stability". And I can't imagine having good relations with my neighbors if I lived in an area that was 2/3 Trump voters.

Knowing rural areas, there probably aren't a lot of people doing his job, which would mean some inconvenience/headaches for those trying to find a replacement service to come all the way out to their cabin. I know, boo-hoo. But in theory it could cause real problems for a few people.

Also: my extremely rural county voted over 70% for Trump. I don't ask my neighbors their opinions about politics and with only a couple exceptions they haven't mentioned them to me. I have genuinely good relationships with my neighbors (with the same couple exceptions). I mostly like them. It baffles me too! Cognitive dissonance is really something.

Trump voters contain multitudes, some are less horrible than others, and in my neck of the woods I'd guess they're only about 50% deplorables.
posted by Rust Moranis at 5:15 PM on December 20, 2016 [1 favorite]


If you're going to hit anyone in the pocketbook, make it who you're buying from, not selling to. For dog's sake, don't fill up at an Exxon/Mobil gas station or buy a burger from Carls/Hardees (and it breaks my heart to give up the Western Baconburger). If you do want to stick it to Trumpist customers, offer a "Trump Premium" tier of service that essentially gives them nothing but a promise to use their money to 'Make America Great Again' then put all of it toward contributions to the ACLU and Planned Parenthood.
posted by oneswellfoop at 5:18 PM on December 20, 2016 [12 favorites]


Huh. The original text of the Civil Rights Act appears to have a carve-out for communism, but I suppose it must just be a matter of making double extra sure they were able to stick it to the commies, rather than an exemption to any existing protection for political beliefs.
posted by XMLicious at 5:20 PM on December 20, 2016 [3 favorites]


Never assume consistency in the enforcement of laws. Just another flaw in Liberal Logic.
posted by oneswellfoop at 6:09 PM on December 20, 2016 [4 favorites]


Samantha Bee interviews Glenn Beck: Strange Bedfellows
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 6:36 PM on December 20, 2016 [3 favorites]


Who is this Glenn Beck fellow. He seems nice! Like a cuddly grampa!
posted by Joe in Australia at 6:50 PM on December 20, 2016 [3 favorites]


Uhhhh, is white supremacy officially a Bill O'Reilly talking point? I don't mean dogwhistles and policies with obvious discriminatory impacts, I mean literally white supremacy in the sense of "let's make sure white people have all the power": "The left wants power taken away from the white establishment and they want a profound change in the way America is run."

Here's the full context, including video. I'll clip the middle paragraph here:
Talking Points believes this is all about race. The left sees white privilege in America as an oppressive force that must be done away with. Therefore white working class voters must be marginalized and what better way to do that than center the voting power in the cities. Very few commentators will tell you that the heart of liberalism in America today is based on race. It permeates almost every issue. That white men have set up a system of oppression. That system must be destroyed. Bernie Sanders pedaled that to some extent Hillary Clinton did. And the liberal media tries to sell that all day long. So-called white privilege bad. Diversity good.
Yes, Bill. We do see white privilege in America as an oppressive force that must be done away with. Great job identifying the issue, top-notch effort there, but rather bad job being on the obviously wrong side of it by literally advocating for white supremacy.

And what's with "very few commentators will tell you that the heart of liberalism in America today is based on race?" Every time I turn around I see another commentator, on the left or the right, complaining that all Democrats care about is race. You're at least the third one to tell me that today.
posted by zachlipton at 6:51 PM on December 20, 2016 [28 favorites]


Washington State Will Enforce Penalties Against 4 ‘Faithless’ Clinton Electors

From inside the article, the Washington electors (twitter video 34sec) vice presidential picks were interesting Elizabeth Warren, Susan Collins, Maria Cantwell and Winona LaDuke all got a vote each.

Elizabeth Warren also got a vote in Hawaii and Carly Fiorina got a vote in Texas and Tulsi Gabbard got a disqualified vote in Minnesota.

Bit of Wikipedia trivia;
LaDuke is the first Green Party member to receive an electoral vote; she and Eagle were also the second Native Americans to receive electoral votes, after former Vice President Charles Curtis. Ron Paul, who returned to the Libertarian Party in 2015 after 19 years as a Republican, earned the Libertarians their second electoral vote (unlike the previous instance in 1972, Paul was not the party's nominee for 2016). At age 81, Paul was the oldest person ever to receive an electoral vote.
posted by phoque at 6:53 PM on December 20, 2016


LA Times: How Faith Spotted Eagle became the first Native American to win an electoral vote for president
“I thought it was fake news,” Spotted Eagle said, alluding to the hoaxes and conspiracy theories that dominated social media during the presidential campaign. “I told my daughter, ‘Is this real?’ She said, ‘I think it is.’” The man who cast the vote also didn’t see it coming. Democratic Washington state elector Robert Satiacum, 56, decided to vote for Spotted Eagle mere moments before he cast his ballot.
...
Spotted Eagle was pro-Sanders and ambivalent about Clinton, though she said as a “survivor,” she liked Clinton’s initiative on addressing sexual abuse in the military. She also said it was a “frightful time” with Trump’s victory. “The people coming in are pro-oil, so I think for the next four years we’re going to be in a battle, and I think all of America is going to be in a battle.”

Yet this is nothing new to her, she said — nothing new at all. “The battle that we’re fighting is 500 years old. It’s about dispossession, it’s about occupying our land by a foreign country, or foreign individuals,” Spotted Eagle said. “The resistance has always been in my blood and my spirit since I was born.”
posted by zachlipton at 6:57 PM on December 20, 2016 [8 favorites]


Have you guys seen this Trevor Noah piece on what Trump is admitting in his rallies? I find it truly incredible.
posted by prefpara at 7:02 PM on December 20, 2016 [18 favorites]


NYT: Trump’s Treasury Pick Moves in Secretive Hedge Fund Circles

Some interesting stuff in here on Mnuchin. Trump has invested millions with Mnuchin's hedge fund according to his last financial disclosure, and he's also invested with Paulson. Just after he was selected, Mnuchin shot his mouth off about the government handing back Fannie and Freddie to investors, causing their stock prices to skyrocket. These stocks are essentially worthless, as they're basically shells around the former existences of the now government-run entities, but hedge funds were buying them up in the hope that they could convince the government to essentially hand them these valuable assets for nothing. The question here is whether Trump is personally profiting from this play, and there's a good chance that he is.

The article also reveals one of his earlier funds dabbled in life settlements, a particularly unpleasant bit of financial engineering in which broke senior citizens sell their life insurance to investors who buy it in the hope the policyholder dies soon enough that they make a profit, often chopping up pools of policies and selling them all over the place. It's, unsurprisingly, an ugly business with a lot of unscrupulous middlemen.
posted by zachlipton at 7:18 PM on December 20, 2016 [4 favorites]


The Atlantic: Donald Trump's Conflicts of Interest; A Crib Sheet

It's quite long, of course.
posted by Joe in Australia at 7:20 PM on December 20, 2016 [7 favorites]


At age 81, Paul was the oldest person ever to receive an electoral vote.

<img src="happening.gif"/>
posted by save alive nothing that breatheth at 7:20 PM on December 20, 2016 [4 favorites]


How Ed Schultz transformed from MSNBC lefty to the American face of Moscow media

Whatever RT is paying him for his dignity, it's enough for him to buy Arnold Palmer's jet.
posted by zachlipton at 7:29 PM on December 20, 2016 [3 favorites]


Emails between Clinton and top aide, but little else, spurred FBI to resume controversial probe (copy of the warrant).

This just illustrates how bogus and politically motivated Comey's actions were. The warrant doesn't even meet the standard of probable cause that a crime was committed. Emails between Clinton and Abedin are not evidence of a crime any more than emails between me and you. Of course Clinton and Abedin emailed each other. That's not a crime.

Comey simply saw an opportunity to influence the election and he took it, against all of the warnings by his superiors. He had a choice -- stand up for the principles of democracy or cave to Republicans. He made his choice and as Nate Silver's analysis has shown, that made all the difference in the election, a four point swing in the final week.
posted by JackFlash at 7:30 PM on December 20, 2016 [22 favorites]


Who vets these people? Honest to god.

Washington's caucuses were an absolute shitshow this year. I assume that bled over into the elector selection process too. Satiacum in particular has been making noise about refusing to vote for Hillary for several months.
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 7:34 PM on December 20, 2016 [3 favorites]


It wasn't good enough because Clinton was not a credible representative for it. She's a third-way Democrat who only reluctantly came around to such a plan as part of a "follow the follower" primary strategy.

Oh, come the hell on - if even a third of the damn electorate was interested in even that minor level of policy & historical analysis the damn 2000 election would have been Paul Krugman (D) vs. Al Gore (R), and right now we'd be arguing whether we should be aiming for actual 100% employment or if we need a little slack in the employment numbers so we have wiggle room for our monetary policy. Here on actual Earth, more people pick the President based on who they'd rather have a beer with - claiming that Clinton's infrastructure plan never got traction with it's intended audience because "third-way Democrat" is asinine.
posted by soundguy99 at 7:37 PM on December 20, 2016 [21 favorites]


What? No, we wouldn't be arguing about that. It's well established that 100% inflation causes inflation and is virtually impossible to achieve. 2% at it's lowest.

My anger stems from the fact that the reality where I would actually have made that comment has been stolen from me.
posted by VTX at 7:51 PM on December 20, 2016 [3 favorites]


Access to Donald Trump on January 18th starts at $500,000. Includes a multi-day hunting or fishing trip with Eric or Donald Jr. Legal documents contradict Trumps' denials.

surely this
posted by Rumple at 7:52 PM on December 20, 2016 [10 favorites]


Can you imagine how Anthony Weiner feels right now

We are all trapped inside his own personal Curb Your Enthusiasm episode
posted by theodolite at 8:00 PM on December 20, 2016 [9 favorites]


Can you imagine how Anthony Weiner feels right now

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess horny?
posted by Candleman at 8:03 PM on December 20, 2016 [45 favorites]


Can you imagine how Anthony Weiner feels right now

prob feels like he'd like to send a dick pic. just a wild guess.
posted by futz at 8:08 PM on December 20, 2016 [23 favorites]


It must be noted that Ed Schultz started out on the radio as a Rush Limbaugh copycat (why not? he's got the same voice) who realized that act wasn't working so the flip-flopped to become the self-proclaimed "Liberal Limbaugh". By the time MSNBC hired him, that part of his CV had faded away. And when this act suffered declining returns, he changed again. Ed Schultz has no actual 'opinions', just an act.

Joe Pyne was considered the 'original right-wing radio talk show host' way back in the 1960s... he's best known for his signature response to a contentious caller "Go gargle with razor blades". In the late 1970s I knew a non-political radio talk host who had once worked screening phone calls for Pyne. According to him, the off-mic Pyne was totally different - attitude, temperament and politics. It has always been An Act. That's why the changes to Glenn Beck - which have followed a decline in his audience - are zero surprise to me.

And Donald Trump is just another TV character with An Act. The only surprising thing about the "Trevor Noah piece on what Trump is admitting in his rallies" is that he is stupid enough to openly confess to this pattern of deceit. After he told a crowd of his sycophants that "if Paul Ryan turns on me" he'd totally change his opinion of him, I'm less worried about the elected Democrats who are talking about working with him and "helping him to succeed". If they're trying to seduce him into abandoning more of his awful positions and promises, it just might work!
posted by oneswellfoop at 8:10 PM on December 20, 2016 [5 favorites]


It's just another norm destroyed and not by Trump this time.

There have been faithless electors in every election of the 21st Century, and in many before that, on both sides. This doesn't destroy any norm.
posted by Etrigan at 8:15 PM on December 20, 2016


2008 and 2012 didn't have faithless electors. 2004 had one, but it was probably a mistakenly-written ballot. There hasn't been more than one faithless elector in an election since the 19th century. Much like labor standards, standards of living, and race relations, this seems to be another 19th century practice we are resurrecting.
posted by dirigibleman at 8:27 PM on December 20, 2016 [10 favorites]


this seems to be another 19th century practice we are resurrecting
The Electoral College performing in the way it was originally designed to? Mmmkay.
posted by oneswellfoop at 8:32 PM on December 20, 2016 [1 favorite]


That's why the changes to Glenn Beck - which have followed a decline in his audience - are zero surprise to me.

The impression I got while trying to do internet research on his career a few years back was that his finding religion and converting to pious caffeine-free-Coke-drinking Mormonism occurred at a similar coincidentally-beneficial point in his career when he was repositioning himself from morning-show shock jock to ostensibly more serious political radio commentary.
posted by XMLicious at 8:35 PM on December 20, 2016 [1 favorite]


The only surprising thing about the "Trevor Noah piece on what Trump is admitting in his rallies" is that he is stupid enough to openly confess to this pattern of deceit.

It doesn't seem particularly stupid, since his audiences are perfectly cheerful and supportive when he tells them outright that all his campaign material was just random pandering bullshit and they're gullible morons. Next week he'll probably tell crowds that yes, he did in fact assault all those women, ha ha ha, and they'll all laugh and cheer together at how he got away with it. Good times. Someone please shoot me in the head.
posted by FelliniBlank at 9:12 PM on December 20, 2016 [5 favorites]


After he told a crowd of his sycophants that "if Paul Ryan turns on me" he'd totally change his opinion of him, I'm less worried about the elected Democrats who are talking about working with him and "helping him to succeed". If they're trying to seduce him into abandoning more of his awful positions and promises, it just might work!

I mean, he was able to sell the Republican base on Russia in a matter of weeks - if Trump told his supporters that it somehow pissed off liberals he could probably get a UBI passed.

Of course, the problem with getting Trump on board with progressive policies would be that his switch would just flip from Putin mode to Hugo Chavez mode and there's like zero chance that Bernie Sanders mode is even an option, we'd still be stuck with a corrupt authoritarian grifter and then he'd be the left's liability.
posted by jason_steakums at 9:14 PM on December 20, 2016 [7 favorites]


Here's a Missouri school that says that, starting in January, a new law will mean that students of any age can be charged with a felony if they are involved in a fight at school that causes any kind of injury (really, third-degree assault by anyone, which is just "knowingly caus[ing] physical injury to another person" is now a felony instead of a misdemeanor).

Because who needs a school to prison pipeline if we can disenfranchise kids before they're even old enough to vote.
posted by zachlipton at 9:17 PM on December 20, 2016 [17 favorites]


Of course, the problem with getting Trump on board with progressive policies would be that his switch would just flip from Putin mode to Hugo Chavez mode and there's like zero chance that Bernie Sanders mode is even an option, we'd still be stuck with a corrupt authoritarian grifter and then he'd be the left's liability.

Congratulations. You've succinctly identified why we don't trust Chuck Schumer and his extraordinarily dangerous game.
posted by zachlipton at 9:19 PM on December 20, 2016 [19 favorites]


She would have folded such a plan up and tut-tutted the moment she faced the slightest resistance on it as soon as she faced the slightest resistance.

Well, I hope that high horses and buckets of self-righteousness are fully convertible to company scrip in the coming years, because you'll never starve. One aspect of the American left that I've considered toxic even before I moved here is the rictus Democracy Now! grimace of perpetual fucking disappointment. Start looking for small victories in defending the compromised victories you got.
posted by holgate at 10:10 PM on December 20, 2016 [17 favorites]


It must be noted that Ed Schultz started out on the radio as a Rush Limbaugh copycat (why not? he's got the same voice) who realized that act wasn't working so the flip-flopped to become the self-proclaimed "Liberal Limbaugh". By the time MSNBC hired him, that part of his CV had faded away. And when this act suffered declining returns, he changed again. Ed Schultz has no actual 'opinions', just an act.

Back in 2004 or whatever the switch he made was incredibly blatant, it was just "Let's see if this is more profitable" basically, but there was so little oppositional content in media that I listened anyway.
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 10:14 PM on December 20, 2016 [1 favorite]


There have been faithless electors in every election of the 21st Century, and in many before that, on both sides.

The real difference here is the Washington delegation. Two of whom were signaling they wouldn't vote Clinton, even before Trump's win. That hasn't happened in the modern era. It's something entirely new for one party to be unable to trust their own ostensibly pledged electors.
posted by T.D. Strange at 10:14 PM on December 20, 2016 [5 favorites]


Ed Schultz has always been a buffoonish blowhard. People sometimes don't get why I like Chris Matthews (for all his faults) when I can't stand guys like Schultz or Alan Grayson. I, on the other hand, don't get how they can't see the difference between sincere, considered belief and hot air.
posted by Justinian at 10:19 PM on December 20, 2016 [2 favorites]


It's something entirely new for one party to be unable to trust their own ostensibly pledged electors.

Well, the choice of electors was more about extending the olive branch to Sanders supporters in states where he won delegates (though in WA you had the hinky situation with a caucus that provided delegates and a primary that didn't). That won't happen again on the Dem side, regardless of how hot the primary gets.
posted by holgate at 10:23 PM on December 20, 2016 [3 favorites]


Right, you tend to stop offering olive branches when all that happens is people turn around and hit you with them.
posted by Justinian at 10:31 PM on December 20, 2016 [25 favorites]


There was a lot of get-rid-of-the-damn-caucuses sentiment in Washington this spring. Hopefully that happens for 2020!
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 10:41 PM on December 20, 2016 [3 favorites]


Caucuses are so garbage and anti-democratic I'm surprised that Republicans haven't tried to make the Presidential election into caucuses in the states they control. That's how terrible they are. Caucuses, not Republicans. Republicans are even more terrible than that.
posted by Justinian at 10:49 PM on December 20, 2016 [14 favorites]


[satire] Putin to Sing at Trump Inauguration [satire]
After having difficulty persuading prominent entertainers to participate at the event, the Trump transition team announced on Sunday that the Russian President Vladimir Putin would sing at Donald J. Trump’s Inauguration next month. [...]
posted by Joe in Australia at 11:25 PM on December 20, 2016 [2 favorites]


trump should get creepy russian guy to sing!
posted by j_curiouser at 11:45 PM on December 20, 2016 [1 favorite]


Well, they obviously share a hair stylist.
posted by Joe in Australia at 11:51 PM on December 20, 2016 [1 favorite]


Sorry, but Eduard Khil will not be available.
posted by Too-Ticky at 11:55 PM on December 20, 2016


That O'Reilly talk zachlipton linked to above is interesting. It is, as zach says, pretty much saying much of the same thing liberals do while only changing the emphasis.

If you look at the voting patterns, it's clear that the Democrats are heavily reliant on the minority vote. Also on the woman vote. White men have largely abandoned the Democrats and the left believes it's because of racism that they want to punish minorities, keep them down. So that's what's really going on when you hear about the Electoral College and how unfair it allegedly is.Summing up, the left wants power taken away from the white establishment. They want a profound change in the way America is run. Taking voting power away from the white precincts is the quickest way to do that.

This, to me, points out one of the issues that the left often has in transmitting concepts. There is a tendency towards emphasizing uniformity of verbiage, which in cases like this, can be damaging. For minorities to speak about white privilege in those terms makes perfect sense as they are speaking about something white's have that they do not. But for whites to speak in those same terms, it can carry a somewhat different message, one that will potentially be heard as O'Reilly has it.

The difference is in the social space each speaker occupies. When a PoC identifies white privilege they are essentially asking for the same rights and treatment as whites get, but when a white liberal uses that same language to a person of lower or equal class, it can be interpreted as saying white's have something like a special power that gives them an advantage that we need to give up. In this way, you are telling the person to vote against their own self interests, to potentially harm themselves for the benefits of others.

Framing the issue like that makes it more difficult to make it understood and less likely to gain support. White privilege isn't about whites giving up their social standing, it's about allowing the rest of the country to share in it equally. The goal isn't to have society treat whites worse than it does, but to end the disadvantage minorities face, sometimes to deadly effect. The rights and treatment all citizens should have is the same as that given to the white man, not anything more, not anything less. The goal should be in explaining why this is to everyone's advantage, not just PoC. Their gain does not make for white loss, but for greater stability and prosperity for everyone. That is the basis of our society and what we need to demand to continue to function.

The point isn't to deny the premise of white privilege as experienced by minorities, but to better take on the meaning of that idea in order to transmit it in ways that are easier for those you are speaking to understand as a positive rather than wrongly worrying about it "taking" something from them other than their mistaken belief.

This should not, however, be taken as a way to argue for a "better" framing more generally. Those that are directly affected by white privilege are the ones that get to decide how they wish to address their concerns, and in that we must support them and whatever terms they choose, this is just trying to help others better understand what is being is said, not contradict it or haggle over usage. White privilege is real, but sometimes a shift in perspective is necessary to explain that reality to others. IMO
posted by gusottertrout at 1:52 AM on December 21, 2016 [16 favorites]


Joe Pyne was considered the 'original right-wing radio talk show host' way back in the 1960s.

I'd say the original was Father Coughlin.
posted by thelonius at 2:14 AM on December 21, 2016 [10 favorites]


The goal should be in explaining why this is to everyone's advantage, not just PoC. Their gain does not make for white loss, but for greater stability and prosperity for everyone.

In a hierchical society you can't improve someone's position in the without making someone else's worse. A hierarchy is a ranking. You can't move up in the rankings unless someone else moves down.

The author of Strangers in Their Own Land confirmed with the conservatives she interviewed that they do see our society this way.
Think of people waiting in a long line that stretches up a hill. And at the top of that is the American dream. And the people waiting in line felt like they’d worked extremely hard, sacrificed a lot, tried their best, and were waiting for something they deserved. And this line is increasingly not moving, or moving more slowly [i.e., as the economy stalls].

Then they see people cutting ahead of them in line. Immigrants, blacks, women, refugees, public sector workers.
...
I asked, is this the way you feel? And they said, "Yeah, you read my mind!" or, "Yeah, I live your narrative!"
So yeah, when people like this hear us talk about white privilege, they think we're saying other people need to be elevated above whites. Because in a line or a hierarchy, we can't be on the same level. Someone is in front, someone is on top. The question is who.

(I can kind of fit this into my "Type 1" vs "Type 2" society framework. Type 1 societies, based on the family structure, are more hierarchical. Kids need to defer to their parents. Even adults who are parents typically defer to their own parents, lest they lose the support of the family. And if you come from a rich/powerful family, you are entitled to the benefits that gives you over someone who does not. So in a type 1 society, like the places where these people live, it's more true that there are rankings and orderings of social power. In a type 2 society where people rely more on the government than on their families for support, though, there's no reason everyone can't have equal access to that support, and no one really has to defer to anyone (except to the extent that we all have to pay our taxes.) This is what liberals are actually talking about. But this type of society is not compatible with how these conservatives believe that the world does or should work. There's also a little "just world fallacy" going on here. Conservatives think society does and should have winners and losers, and they are okay with that, because they tend to believe that in the long run the world is fair -- the winners will be the people who deserve to win.)

I don't know what kind of language we can use instead of "white privelege" to reason with people who think society is fundamentally hierarchical, though. We're just starting from very different premises. Since they don't accept our premise that society does not have to be hierarchical, we can't convince them that giving advantages to others does not have to disadvantage them. They will always hear proposals to help others as proposals that will hurt them, ni matter how we frame those proposals.posted by OnceUponATime at 3:39 AM on December 21, 2016 [9 favorites]


Right, that's why we have to attack the frame of society needing to be hierarchical in the manner they perceive rather than accepting their terms of perception and trying to convince them through that lens. That's how guys like O'Reilly and Trump succeed, accept the delusion and elaborate on it.

As for any precise terminology, that's more difficult since it varies by audience. Challenging accepted ideas is always more difficult than embellishing those same.
posted by gusottertrout at 3:45 AM on December 21, 2016 [5 favorites]




The whole divisive anti-democratic lie the right exploits is the idea that nature is inherently hierarchical, with a great chain of authority leading to the big executive suite in the sky. It's not reality, it's not economically sound, we know in reality it only has to be a zero sum game if that's how we set up the rules, but large swaths of the public have internalized the conservative lie that it has to be a zero sum game, that that's a feature not a bug of capitalism, and it really is all built on the foundations of a crude, medieval philosophy that sees all worldly power as trickling down upon us from the great, bullying CEO in the sky.
posted by saulgoodman at 4:25 AM on December 21, 2016 [21 favorites]


It is semi-amazing how Reagan's Supply Siders came to power by claiming that "a rising tide lifts all boats" then have done everything possible to disprove it. Then again, it is a deeply flawed analogy, partly because if the tide rises enough, it will swamp the most securely anchored boats. And let's not even start to get into the effects Climate Change is making to sea levels...
posted by oneswellfoop at 4:41 AM on December 21, 2016 [3 favorites]


Washington Post: Congratulations, Trump. Welcome to hell.: The reason I knew you wouldn’t do most of what you promised is, one, my BS detector is from the same Queens DNA as yours (via my paternal grandmother, who was quite a dame, by the way). Two, you logically or legally can’t do much of it. Three, you’re Donald Trump, which is synonymous with “whatever works.”
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 4:47 AM on December 21, 2016 [11 favorites]


Update on Adam Saleh. Apparently, they brought the police into the airport to "talk" to him, and now he has to go through security again to book a new flight.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 5:25 AM on December 21, 2016


...aaaaand Mr. Trump is tweeting about the electoral college vs. the popular vote. Again.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 5:28 AM on December 21, 2016 [4 favorites]


this seems to be another 19th century practice we are resurrecting
The Electoral College performing in the way it was originally designed to? Mmmkay.


That's phrasing is a little tricky. The electoral college performed as it was allowed to, but not as it was designed for. The same is true for virtually every part of our government in recent years as we've moved from how things were designed for functioning government, to the limits of what is allowable regardless of how well things function.

The electoral college was not designed to give each elector completely free reign to "make statements" or vote on whim, were it so, then the general election would be worthless as the electors would be able to ignore it out of whimsy. The Congress wasn't designed to shut down government function to spite an opposition president or party. The Presidency wasn't designed to rule by executive order. The Supreme Court wasn't designed to create laws Congress was too cowardly to address themselves and so on.

Obviously there was a flaw in the design that allowed so much of the government function to go so far from original intent, but as game theory hadn't been developed yet I can give the founders a little bit of a pass for not predicting the asinine behavior of our current crop of politicians. It is hard to believe that they would be so willing to ignore the needs of the country for personal gain and that the rest of the country would actually root them on while doing so.
posted by gusottertrout at 6:12 AM on December 21, 2016 [17 favorites]


...aaaaand Mr. Trump is tweeting about the electoral college vs. the popular vote. Again.

It's simultaneously abstractly fascinating and soberingly worrisome to watch his insecurities on display like this. He can't let anything go. He's easily manipulated and has a shockingly thin skin.

His latest, in chronological order:
* Campaigning to win the Electoral College is much more difficult & sophisticated than the popular vote. Hillary focused on the wrong states!
* I would have done even better in the election, if that is possible, if the winner was based on popular vote - but would campaign differently
* I have not heard any of the pundits or commentators discussing the fact that I spent FAR LESS MONEY on the win than Hillary on the loss!
posted by zarq at 6:13 AM on December 21, 2016 [4 favorites]


O'Reilly vs Stewart debate from 2012. (YouTube 1hr33min).

I hadn't seen this before and just watched it about a month ago and found it very entertaining and it still touches on many issues raised this election.
posted by phoque at 6:15 AM on December 21, 2016 [2 favorites]


Basically, right now we have a Jon Bois government, run to test the limits of the game and see what kinds of laughs we can get along the way, with Donald "Beeftank" Trump the big star of the show.
posted by gusottertrout at 6:21 AM on December 21, 2016 [20 favorites]


Please don't soil a sweet sweet milkboy like Beeftank by associating him with Trump. That said, Jon Bois government is the perfect description for what is going on.
posted by drezdn at 6:24 AM on December 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


Fair enough. My heartfelt apologies to the great Beeftank.
posted by gusottertrout at 6:28 AM on December 21, 2016 [4 favorites]


So your network of activists--what are their plans? How do we catch all the people who want to do something but are intimidated by the things they see?

So, my network is mostly of old HIV activists who are "getting the band back together" -- at least those that are still alive, but being careful to be inclusive of all of the people that are suddenly inspired to activism. Specifically, on all of my calls/posts, I have written stuff like, "We need everyone. Lawyers and artists, graphic designers and academics, people who can make calls and people who can paint signs. Everyone is welcome. Bring your friends. Bring your mom." I have also included specific outreach to our community orgs that primarily work with Latinx, Asian and black communities.
posted by Sophie1 at 6:36 AM on December 21, 2016 [19 favorites]


We talked about Trump's pick to be the ambassador to Isreal a little already (and how he's a scammy bankruptcy lawyer who called liberal Jews "kapos"), but I don't think we talked yet about his plan to move the American embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem:

Trump’s choice for Israel ambassador is a danger to American lives
But the insult to the Arab world may be of more consequence. Friedman not only supports additional settlements and seems opposed to the creation of a Palestinian state on the West Bank, but also wants to move the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv, where it has been for decades, to Jerusalem. But Israel’s annexation of all of Jerusalem following the 1967 war has never won international recognition. American policy has always been that moving the embassy can only be done as part of an overall agreement. That agreement is not even close.

A traveler in the West Bank or, for that matter, anywhere in the Arab world, is bound to see posters of Jerusalem. It is where the Prophet Muhammad ascended to heaven and only Mecca and Medina exceed it in holiness. If the United States moves its embassy to Jerusalem, the Arab world would take it as a slap in the face. The Islamic State will use it as a recruiting tool. Violence is almost certain to erupt — possibly another intifada. People will die — Israelis and Arabs, certainly, and probably Americans too.
posted by OnceUponATime at 7:07 AM on December 21, 2016 [6 favorites]


Well surely the Republicans will oppose the move then since they care so much about the lives of embassy personnel.
posted by Joey Michaels at 7:14 AM on December 21, 2016 [22 favorites]


Vanity Fair: Exclusive: A Former Apprentice Producer Responds to Donald Trump Being Elected President: We are masterful storytellers and we did our job well. What’s shocking to me is how quickly and decisively the world bought it. Did we think this clown, this buffoon with the funny hair, would ever become a world leader? Not once. Ever.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:21 AM on December 21, 2016 [10 favorites]


plan to move the American embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem

It was discussed briefly in previous threads.

Moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem would have no benefit other than to outrage Palestinians and Arabs, quite possibly inviting a Benghazi-type attack on the embassy and consequent grounds for retaliation. There's just no reason to do it other than to spit in people's faces.

I know I'm basically repeating what was already quoted, I just don't know what else to say. This is a terrible idea with no upside -- I would call it an own goal but that assumes the incoming administration is also on team let's-not-blow-up-the-world and I'm not sure that's a given.

I wonder what the Netanyahu government thinks about this. Sure, they're pretty right-wing and have some elements which are quite pro-settlement, but also they are not particularly interested in having things happen which will almost inevitably lead to the loss of Jewish lives. I hope.

A third intifada, in the time of ISIS and Trump, would not be pretty at all, for anyone.
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:25 AM on December 21, 2016 [3 favorites]


100% inflation causes inflation

These threads are frying our brains people
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 7:26 AM on December 21, 2016 [14 favorites]


While we're on The Apprentice, apparently Tom Arnold says he has the rumored racist Trump tape from "The Apprentice". Which proves that our calendars all still read "2016".
posted by klarck at 7:27 AM on December 21, 2016 [10 favorites]


From the VF article:

There’s a larger issue at hand: non-fiction or “reality” television has obviously become a huge force in shaping the minds of the populace.

*slow, sarcastic clap*

*rubs eyebrows*
posted by petebest at 7:27 AM on December 21, 2016 [6 favorites]


These threads are frying our brains people

*shrugs*
Meh.
*shows new comments*
posted by petebest at 7:30 AM on December 21, 2016 [10 favorites]


But Arnold wouldn’t budge. In fact, he didn’t think it would make much of a difference in the election outcome.

“I think if the people that like him saw him saying the N-word -- he’s sitting matter-of-factly in front of there has to be 30 people there, and he’s matter-of-factly saying all of this stuff -- so I think they would have liked him more, the people. For being politically incorrect.”


Paging the circular firing squad. Please abandon circle. New target identified.

What a douchemuffin. This would quite likely have switched enough votes to change the election results -- if there's anything that quietly racist Midwestern white people hate, it's being associated with "actual racists" who use the n-word.
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:31 AM on December 21, 2016 [30 favorites]


If there's anything that quietly racist Midwestern white people hate, it's being associated with "actual racists" who use the n-word.

This x1000
posted by dinty_moore at 7:34 AM on December 21, 2016 [17 favorites]


Arnold explained that the tape had been put together by employees of the reality series as a humorous video Christmas card that was sent out to numerous recipients.

“[When] the people sent it to me, it was funny. Hundreds of people have seen these. It was sort of a Christmas video they put together. He wasn’t going to be president of the United States,” Arnold explained. “Now these people -- two editors and an associate producer -- are scared to death. They’re scared of his people, they’re scared of they’ll never work again, there’s a $5 million confidentiality agreement.”


what the shit
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 7:35 AM on December 21, 2016 [13 favorites]


I think everyone needs to get over the idea that there's one thing that he could do that would alienate 100% of the people who voted for him. There isn't. He's quite right that he could shoot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue and he'd retain a certain degree of support. But we don't need 100% of people who voted for him to abandon him. 50% will do just fine. Heck, even 25% will make a significant dent in his level of support and the amount that House and Senate Republicans will be able to count on continuing support from their local constituents.
posted by soren_lorensen at 7:37 AM on December 21, 2016 [21 favorites]


Even one percent would have helped QUITE A BIT LAST FUCKING MONTH
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:38 AM on December 21, 2016 [33 favorites]




what the shit

That Arnold stuff hurt my brain so hard somehow I favorited my own post
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 7:49 AM on December 21, 2016 [11 favorites]


Just

what
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 7:51 AM on December 21, 2016 [2 favorites]


I think everyone needs to get over the idea that there's one thing that he could do that would alienate 100% of the people who voted for him. There isn't. He's quite right that he could shoot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue and he'd retain a certain degree of support. But we don't need 100% of people who voted for him to abandon him. 50% will do just fine. Heck, even 25% will make a significant dent in his level of support and the amount that House and Senate Republicans will be able to count on continuing support from their local constituents.

Meh, I think he could make sweet love to a sheep on live national TV and his supports would be all, "Well, look at how much he cares about one of God's innocent creatures. That sheep has probably never felt such love."

what the shit

Indeed. He's probably trying to get a gig at one of the inaugural balls. Otherwise, why bring it up now?
posted by fuse theorem at 7:51 AM on December 21, 2016 [3 favorites]




In my house we call him Doctor MegaJacoby.
posted by Rust Moranis at 8:05 AM on December 21, 2016 [8 favorites]


What I'm trying to say though is that "his supporters" is not the same group as "people who voted for him." He is a cult of personality, but not everyone who voted for him is a cultist. A reason why the polls were wrong is that a lot of undecided R's and I's broke Trump in the final week or two. They decided to take a chance on a guy that they really weren't sure about. All those people who are now like, "Well, this isn't looking great, but I think we should give him a chance!" are going to run out of chances they are willing to give at some point. I'm not down with making nicey-nice with people who "aren't racists but decided racism wasn't a dealbreaker" but I am down with making those folks feel very uncomfy about what is happening to the degree that just being a loyal Trumpist is not going to be any kind of a selling point for those folks' Reps and Senators come 2018 and 2020.

Like, Pat Toomey won re-election by 1.7 points. He was a craven doucherocket throughout his campaign who only admitted he had voted Trump at 6:45 PM on election night. If 2% of Republicans in Pennsylvania decide that actually voting for Trump in the end was not a great idea, that's a big deal for Toomey. That's legitimate pressure. And he's shown that he basically has no real beliefs and will do whatever is politically expedient. I'd rather his calculus here break on the side of challenging Trumpism rather than rolling over for it.
posted by soren_lorensen at 8:06 AM on December 21, 2016 [22 favorites]


(Also from the VF artcle which is an email from the producer of The Apprentice seasons 1&2, emphasis mine):

My “Tweet Throat” moment when I suggested to the news media that someone unlock the recorded behavior found on The Apprentice tapes helped summon a bevy of stories about “what really went on” behind the scenes of that series. That story’s been told. What hasn’t been told (as much) is how complicit the media and social-media outlets have been in getting us to where we are now.

Yeah "We were totally complicit in this world-collapsing event and that's why we're shutting down" articles are surely being written right now.

It's a good letter and he's obviously getting it now - but he's amazed at how corporate media works. The producer of The Apprentice, Seasons 1&2. Is.
posted by petebest at 8:06 AM on December 21, 2016 [4 favorites]


Bornstein says he isn't sure if he'll continue as Trump's physician while Trump serves as president. As a media professional, I think I speak for all of us when I say we'd prefer that he did.

This is is such a well-crafted dig. "What, I'm not wishing ill health on anyone, he's just such a colorful character!"
posted by contraption at 8:10 AM on December 21, 2016 [8 favorites]


Listen to the live audio stream from today's HB2 special session in NC

For those that aren't up on the latest news, this is supposedly a session where they will vote on whether or not to repeal. A big part of the original reason HB2 was passed was because Charlotte put anti-discrimination laws into effect, creating a standoff between NC municipalities and the state government. Charlotte stated they wouldn't repeal them until HB2 was repealed instead, but two days ago the city government backed down and repealed their anti-discrimination laws, in effect selling out the LGBTQ community for the legislative equivalent of a bag of beans. Sensing this opportunity, a group of GOP legislators this morning claimed that the special session was itself unconstitutional, forcing the NCGA to adjourn until 11:30am. This means that there's a chance that they may not even end up holding a vote, and if they do, it will most likely be close. Also, because this is a special session, the NCGA could do anything they wanted to. Last week they basically took away the power they gave McCrory out of pure spite, and their threat to pack the NC courts still stands.

If you want to see how democracy has already ended for many marginalized Americans, what NC has done and is doing is Exhibit A.
posted by zombieflanders at 8:10 AM on December 21, 2016 [23 favorites]


what the shit

This wouldn't surprise me at all. TV production staff have a long tradition of putting together "funny" Christmas videos from outtakes, going back as least as far as the BBC VT videos from the 70s, which were only known about through rumours and clips on blooper shows until YouTube made it possible to upload them. (And the BBC hasn't apparently tried to take them down.)
posted by holgate at 8:10 AM on December 21, 2016


I can't speak for their "what the shit", but my "what the shit" isn't that someone put together such a tape so much as NONE OF THE PEOPLE WHO HAD IT WENT AND RELEASED IT.
posted by Green With You at 8:14 AM on December 21, 2016 [19 favorites]


The kickstarter to pay back that $5M NDA penalty would be funded in record time.
posted by contraption at 8:18 AM on December 21, 2016 [16 favorites]


Yes, but would the president dropping an N-bomb be an impeachable offense?
posted by pxe2000 at 8:19 AM on December 21, 2016


Yes, but would the president dropping an N-bomb be an impeachable offense?

No.
posted by Talez at 8:21 AM on December 21, 2016 [2 favorites]






If the special session is declared unconstitutional, doesn't that invalidate all laws since they started?
posted by corb at 8:25 AM on December 21, 2016


Trump Doctor:

A photograph of his psychoanalyst hangs in his office. As this reporter left his office, Bornstein pointed out what appeared to be a small, naked doll sitting on the ground — “here’s a naked doorstop.”
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 8:26 AM on December 21, 2016 [10 favorites]


Reagan co-starred in a B Hollywood movie with a chimpanzee. I - That's all. It seemed relevant, almost poignant . . .
posted by petebest at 8:27 AM on December 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


The key line from that article I just linked: "It's a novel form of party message discipline that stems from Trump but doesn't necessarily require the president-elect to speak or tweet himself. Plenty of others are willing to do it for him."

I am as worried about what Trump's administration won't do as I am about what it will do. All he has to do is not act to stop his fans from harassing and intimidating opposing voices. State-sanctioned violence and suppression does not have to be carried out by the state to be effective.
posted by prefpara at 8:27 AM on December 21, 2016 [5 favorites]


If the special session is declared unconstitutional, doesn't that invalidate all laws since they started?

As far as I can tell, it's only this particular session. Which makes them hypocrites and cowards in the service of bigotry, but that's something that's already been well-established.
posted by zombieflanders at 8:34 AM on December 21, 2016 [2 favorites]


And what happens when the worm, inevitably, turns?

Browbeating; ineffective. Tweetstorms; being openly mocked. Straight-up pork-bucket dollar threats; not working?!?

The Frothening: Drool Rising
In Theatres May 15. Not suitable for children, adults, or chimpanzees.
posted by petebest at 8:35 AM on December 21, 2016


State-sanctioned violence and suppression does not have to be carried out by the state to be effective.

Trump not saying anything is only tacit support and not affirmative legal action. Part of what we need to do is lean heavily on local politicians to push back and get the actual laws enforced to keep us safe in our respective cities. Mileage will vary, of course.
posted by C'est la D.C. at 8:35 AM on December 21, 2016 [2 favorites]


The author of Strangers in Their Own Land confirmed with the conservatives she interviewed that they do see our society this way.
One person told me, "I watch Fox News, that’s my regular source, but I scan the liberal television programs, and I hear people refer to people like me as rednecks."
That's some bullshit right there. As conservatives are so fond of complaining, liberals are too politicially correct to call people rednecks.
Think of people waiting in a long line that stretches up a hill. And at the top of that is the American dream. And the people waiting in line felt like they’d worked extremely hard, sacrificed a lot, tried their best, and were waiting for something they deserved.
If they only want what I deserve, let my blue state tax money go to something else besides subsidizing their place in line.
posted by kirkaracha at 8:36 AM on December 21, 2016 [9 favorites]


As far as I can tell, it's only this particular session.

What the hell is their stated reason?
posted by corb at 8:37 AM on December 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


Trump not saying anything is only tacit support and not affirmative legal action.

This is a feature, not a bug.
posted by prefpara at 8:38 AM on December 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


I am as worried about what Trump's administration won't do as I am about what it will do. All he has to do is not act to stop his fans from harassing and intimidating opposing voices. State-sanctioned violence and suppression does not have to be carried out by the state to be effective.

Crowd-sourced fascism.
posted by tivalasvegas at 8:39 AM on December 21, 2016 [15 favorites]


> What the hell is their stated reason?

The stated reason is to "discuss" HB2. No hurricane cover story needed for this one -- they just want to use the power of big government to make life miserable for people.
posted by tonycpsu at 8:40 AM on December 21, 2016 [2 favorites]


Troublesome priest, yaddada yaddada.
posted by Etrigan at 8:40 AM on December 21, 2016 [9 favorites]


The stated reason is to "discuss" HB2.

They haven't even filed a bill on HB2, repeal or not, which is kind of an ominous sign.
posted by zombieflanders at 8:43 AM on December 21, 2016


I meant the Passover North Carolina, "What Makes This Special Session Night More Unconstitutional Than All Other Special Session Nights?"
posted by corb at 8:47 AM on December 21, 2016 [13 favorites]






There's no way FADA doesn't get killed in the Supreme Court, even with a Scalia replacement.


...Supremes get full time bodyguards, right?
posted by corb at 8:53 AM on December 21, 2016 [2 favorites]


First Amendment Defense Act Would Be 'Devastating' for LGBTQ Americans

I have to agree with the later part of the article: devastating for about a week, until it was ruled unconstitutional. Which is probably the point; the GOPers get to pass a law that makes the fundies happy but without any actual consequences to annoy the businessy people.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 8:54 AM on December 21, 2016 [6 favorites]




…would the president dropping an N-bomb be an impeachable offense?

The definition of "high crimes and misdemeanors" is whatever Congress says it is. So, possibly.
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 8:59 AM on December 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


Drain The Swamp…And Fill It With Toxic Waste™
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 8:59 AM on December 21, 2016 [5 favorites]


Well, swamps and wetlands are usually very rich habitats that support a wide range of species in a complex ecological balance. Ignoring all that, draining it dry and throwing up some shoddily built coastal luxury housing to flip for a quick buck isn't a bad metaphor for what he's doing, and certainly suits his MO as an evil real estate developer. It's not his fault we misunderstood him and thought he was saying some crap about getting rid of corruption.
posted by contraption at 9:05 AM on December 21, 2016 [23 favorites]


Heck, even 25% will make a significant dent in his level of support and the amount that House and Senate Republicans will be able to count on continuing support from their local constituents.f

That, to me, would be one of the strongest benefits to releasing the tape. There are enough voters who seem perfectly fine with increasingly implausibly deniable racism/sexism/ableism that I've stopped giving them any benefit of the doubt that they give a damn. But if enough Congresspeople in purple states start to feel more vulnerable if they're openly supporting a non-dog whistling racist, they might actually grow whatever body part is necessary to stop rubber-stamping whatever horrible policies Trump is going to try to ram through the system.

Or maybe not. My faith in white humanity in general jumped out the Overton Window long ago.
posted by bibliowench at 9:12 AM on December 21, 2016


>First Amendment Defense Act Would Be 'Devastating' for LGBTQ Americans

I have to agree with the later part of the article: devastating for about a week, until it was ruled unconstitutional.


The Satanic Temple is going to be cracking their knuckles with glee if it passes.


A photograph of his psychoanalyst hangs in his office. As this reporter left his office, Bornstein pointed out what appeared to be a small, naked doll sitting on the ground — “here’s a naked doorstop.”

Boggles my mind that Dr. Spaceman is apparently real!
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 9:24 AM on December 21, 2016 [16 favorites]


Trump posse browbeats Hill Republicans: Lawmakers are loath to say anything remotely critical, fearful they might set off the president-elect or his horde of enforcers.

Now we just need to ratchet up constituent pressure from the other side, and they'll start to crack... If you have GOP congresspeople and haven't called them up to talk about Russia, now would be a good time to make them sweat!
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 9:28 AM on December 21, 2016 [5 favorites]


One of the weirder parts about the Dr. Bornstein interview:
The doctor initially rebuffed STAT’s requests for an interview. “Please stop this nonsense!!!” Bornstein wrote in an email in January 2016. But after STAT spoke with two of Bornstein’s sons, Melissa arranged for a sit-down in his office.

But five days after STAT’s visit to his office, in phone calls and text messages, Bornstein said he was angry and did not want the article or any photographs of him to be published.

“I happen to have known the Sulzbergers for 50 years,” Bornstein said in the second conversation, referring to the family that helms the New York Times. “I’m going to make sure you don’t ever work again if you do this.”
And the article just casually slips in "oh he threatened our careers over an interview he agreed to" somewhere in the middle.
posted by zachlipton at 9:36 AM on December 21, 2016 [22 favorites]


One thing that has been going on in PA that I'm not sure is being modeled on a national effort or not but you might want to consider locally:

Tuesdays with Toomey started in Philadelphia with a group of people showing up at Toomey's local office at 12:30 PM (lunch hour for maximum attendance) every Tuesday to talk to staff (always staff because Toomey himself is a coward) about an issue that the group decides upon hitting that week. The Pittsburgh local Pantsuit spinoff has just started coordinating a similar effort for his Pittsburgh office to start in the new year.

Our other Congressman is a Democrat, but Toomey is a shitstain who won by a very narrow margin (see above). It's been getting a lot of press in Philly. Seems like a prime tactic to go national.
posted by soren_lorensen at 9:36 AM on December 21, 2016 [29 favorites]


Hopefully I didn't miss this above, but if not: "Newt Gingrich said Wednesday that Donald Trump’s “drain the swamp” catch phrase was “cute” but that the President-elect now disclaims it."

Their behavior right now really reminds me of that feeling when you decide you've mastered something prematurely on the basis of quick success so you start messing around, trying to add flourish and go in new directions, until suddenly reality sets in and things fall apart in a flash. It happens fast.
posted by feloniousmonk at 9:40 AM on December 21, 2016 [24 favorites]


Mr. Brexit, indeed.
posted by petebest at 9:42 AM on December 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


Right, that's literally true. The Daily Show clip I linked earlier has video of Trump saying at a victory rally that he used "drain the swamp" only because it seemed to effectively motivate his supporters, and that he would "say it like he meant it" to gin up enthusiasm.

Like.
posted by prefpara at 9:44 AM on December 21, 2016 [4 favorites]


Hopefully I didn't miss this above, but if not: "Newt Gingrich said Wednesday that Donald Trump’s “drain the swamp” catch phrase was “cute” but that the President-elect now disclaims it."

Politifact is premiering a Trump-o-meter after New Year's Day to keep track of the chump's fulfilled and broken promises.

If they make a physical version the dials might spin with enough torque to power Tokyo.
posted by zarq at 9:47 AM on December 21, 2016 [2 favorites]


He's (semi-)literally taunting his supporters with "Ha ha, I lied to you! Suckers!"?!

DTMFTA
posted by petebest at 9:48 AM on December 21, 2016 [6 favorites]


He's (semi-)literally taunting his supporters with "Ha ha, I lied to you! Suckers!"?!

Humans being what they are, I would expect that they're pretending that they knew all along.
posted by everybody had matching towels at 9:51 AM on December 21, 2016 [13 favorites]


Politifact is premiering a Trump-o-meter after New Year's Day to keep track of the chump's fulfilled and broken promises. If they make a physical version the dials might spin with enough torque to power Tokyo.

"You see kids, Trump's hot air turns the turbine on the Trump-o-meter, and the turbine generates electricity! And that's how we finally got off fossil fuels and saved the planet!"
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 9:51 AM on December 21, 2016 [3 favorites]


He's (semi-)literally taunting his supporters with "Ha ha, I lied to you! Suckers!"?!

Yes, and they're eating it up like a gravy ladle full of Nutella. Yum yum. He's such an iconoclastic scamp!
posted by FelliniBlank at 9:51 AM on December 21, 2016 [6 favorites]


It's a cult of personality; his supporters don't care if he tells the truth. They don't care if he lies. They don't care what his policy positions are. They don't care what he does once he's in office. That's... the point of a cult of personality.
posted by Justinian at 9:52 AM on December 21, 2016 [38 favorites]


That's not Nutella.
posted by contraption at 9:53 AM on December 21, 2016 [18 favorites]


"Give us hell, Quimby!"
posted by Etrigan at 9:53 AM on December 21, 2016 [4 favorites]


Hmmm. Lakoff said one of the things he can't be without losing support is a liar. [framing-wise]

Why hasn't this gone viral yet? Or it has and I'm just not watching?
posted by petebest at 9:54 AM on December 21, 2016


That's not Nutella.

To the diners in question, it's whatever Dear Leader most recently said it is.
posted by FelliniBlank at 9:57 AM on December 21, 2016


Why hasn't this gone viral yet? Or it has and I'm just not watching?

I suspect that the eventual Trump Collapse will be more like an earthquake. Pressure builds up and builds up, and nothing much seems to be happening, pressure keeps building up, and then all hell breaks loose with no warning.
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 10:00 AM on December 21, 2016 [3 favorites]


Trump 2016: Say Whatever, Do Whatever
posted by mazola at 10:01 AM on December 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


I have to agree with the later part of the article: devastating for about a week, until it was ruled unconstitutional.

Wow, even after all this, at least some of us still have faith in our institutions...
posted by saulgoodman at 10:01 AM on December 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


Wow, even after all this, at least some of us still have faith in our institutions...

The judicial branch is currently kind of our only hope. It's the only check on government power that is not controlled by Republicans. Unfortunately, it is also the weakest of the three branches.
posted by prefpara at 10:04 AM on December 21, 2016 [2 favorites]


It's the only check on government power that is not yet controlled by Republicans.
FTFY.
posted by Two unicycles and some duct tape at 10:06 AM on December 21, 2016 [4 favorites]


Yes. Trump is pretty clearly going to do some stuff that is laughably illegal and/or unconstitutional (whether as an intentional middle finger to the judiciary, or just because he has no idea what the hell a 'limit' on executive power is), and at some point a judge is going to say, "Nope, you can't do that". Then it will be up to the civil servants to decide if they're going to obey the judicial ruling or the President, and then it will be up to the media to report honestly on the matter, and then we will see if the public is ready to stand by the rule of law.

It can't be said enough. Our democratic institutions are not self-defending.
posted by tivalasvegas at 10:10 AM on December 21, 2016 [33 favorites]


Lakoff said one of the things he can't be without losing support is a liar.

I don't think Lakoff is infallible on this stuff. Trump can lie, cheat, steal (and soon, kill) because he's their liar, cheater, stealer, killer. Abusive, deceitful father figures are often still worshipped by their abused spouses and children, who come to believe that it really is for their own good.
posted by dis_integration at 10:10 AM on December 21, 2016 [9 favorites]




NARAL NC's response: UNACCEPTABLE

C'mon, NC Dems, don't fall for such an obvious Lucy-and-the-football scheme.
posted by zombieflanders at 10:13 AM on December 21, 2016 [4 favorites]


Bill would repeal #HB2, ban cities from passing ordinances like Charlotte's

Over/under on when the former half would be "corrected" without reference to the latter half: February 4th.
posted by Etrigan at 10:16 AM on December 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


I love that @NARALNC's header photo is just a big sign that says POLITICIANS MAKE CRAPPY DOCTORS
posted by everybody had matching towels at 10:18 AM on December 21, 2016 [9 favorites]


...Supremes get full time bodyguards, right?

Kind of. I mean, yes they do travel with bodyguards, two per I think, but it's nothing like secret service protection for the President. I once almost bumped into Scalia without even realizing it at a cocktail party, for instance. He was shorter than you'd think.
posted by Joey Buttafoucault at 10:20 AM on December 21, 2016 [2 favorites]


Unfortunately it's preaching to the converted but nevertheless it is highly succint.
Noam Chomsky:
Trump's National Security Adviser Wants the U.S. to 'Go to War with the Whole Islamic World'
Trump's position is "vulgar imperialism masked by a fraudulent concern for the working people and the middle class."
posted by adamvasco at 10:22 AM on December 21, 2016 [4 favorites]


Lakoff said one of the things he can't be without losing support is a liar. [framing-wise]

It's a bit strange to me that Lakoff's prescriptions carry so much authority. Has there been any kind of empirical test of this claim? What reason is there to believe it, apart from Lakoff's credentials?
posted by Coventry at 10:22 AM on December 21, 2016 [2 favorites]


Yes, but would the president dropping an N-bomb be an impeachable offense? [...] No.

In practice you may be right. In theory an impeachable offense is whatever the House and Senate say is an impeachable offense.
posted by Justinian at 10:22 AM on December 21, 2016


Oh, and I meant to say: I wasn't frisked for weapons or anything. I vaguely knew some federal judges might be in attendance at said cocktail party, but security was just the same as any other event at my law school. Anyway. Not at all like the President's coverage.
posted by Joey Buttafoucault at 10:23 AM on December 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


I find that Lakoff is a problematic figure (much of her research on "feminist" sociolinguistics is oversampled from White women at the seeming inclusion of Black and Latinx women), but her nonintersectional perspective may play a role in how well her analysis of the president-elect operates. That said, I would like to see empirical testing on her claims.
posted by pxe2000 at 10:25 AM on December 21, 2016


I find that Lakoff is a problematic figure (much of her research...

Wait, which Lakoff are you talking about? I think most people here are talking about George, a Berkeley linguist who has a whole thing about (in a political setting) using your own framing and refusing to use that of the opposition.

Unless I've really misinterpreted the whole conversation about Lakoff in lo these many threads.
posted by Joey Buttafoucault at 10:31 AM on December 21, 2016 [5 favorites]


Has anyone actually asked Trump voters what would cause them to withdraw their support?
posted by prefpara at 10:31 AM on December 21, 2016 [2 favorites]


And the article just casually slips in "oh he threatened our careers over an interview he agreed to" somewhere in the middle.

They appear to have taken him neither literally nor seriously, which may be reasonable given that he's the kind of doctor who rich people see when they're not sick.
posted by holgate at 10:32 AM on December 21, 2016


Joey B: I'm talking about Robin Lakoff. I had to read In a Different Voice for a college sociology class and was a little surprised that it's still taught.
posted by pxe2000 at 10:33 AM on December 21, 2016


Has anyone actually asked Trump voters what would cause them to withdraw their support?

if liberals start feeling like he's not so bad and agree with some of the things he does as president, his supporters will turn on him so fast and so hard your head will spin.
posted by prize bull octorok at 10:34 AM on December 21, 2016 [8 favorites]


Has anyone actually asked Trump voters what would cause them to withdraw their support?

Asking people questions like this doesn't tend to produce accurate answers. I'm not being snarky; people are very bad about recognizing cognitive bias.
posted by Justinian at 10:36 AM on December 21, 2016 [13 favorites]


Pretty sure we were talking about George Lakoff. I'm not aware that he's done any kind of intersectional analysis, but I bet it would be an interesting read.
posted by Coventry at 10:36 AM on December 21, 2016


In the immortal words of our incoming Secretary of Energy:

Whoops.
posted by pxe2000 at 10:37 AM on December 21, 2016 [13 favorites]


As a breath of fresh air, here are some quotes from the book, Einstein on Race and Racism by Fred Jerome and Roger Taylor.
All quotes, Einstein (I've heard he's a smart guy).

"Race prejudice has unfortunately become an American tradition which is uncritically handed down from one generation to the next. The only remedies are enlightenment and education."

"Well, there is no magic solution [to the problem of racism]. I would only hope that where there is a will there is a way. I think probably that Americans will have to realize how stupid this attitude is and how harmful it is, also, to the standing of the United States."

"As for the immigrants, they are the ones to whom it can be accounted a merit to be Americans. For they have had to take trouble for their citizenship, whereas it has cost the majority nothing at all to be born in the land of civic freedom."

"There exists on the subject a fatal miscomprehension. Unemployment is not decreased by restricting immigration. For [unemployment] depends on faulty distribution of work among those capable of work. Immigration increases consumption as much as it does demand on labor."
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 10:39 AM on December 21, 2016 [4 favorites]


NC Dems just filed a clean HB2 repeal bill because the NC GOP is caucusing behind closed doors and refusing to convene. Or as Zack Ford from ThinkProgress so eloquently puts it: "They are surely not even debating whether to do the right thing, but simply how to get away with doing the wrong thing."
posted by zombieflanders at 10:39 AM on December 21, 2016 [37 favorites]


> In practice you may be right. In theory an impeachable offense is whatever the House and Senate say is an impeachable offense.

Firm, Principled Republican Opposition to Donald Trump, a Progress Report
posted by tonycpsu at 10:40 AM on December 21, 2016 [4 favorites]


.@GovernorBentley has interviewed suspended Chief Justice Roy Moore for Jeff Sessions' Senate seat, per the Gov. & Moore's camp.

Moore was the Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court who has been suspended for ordering officials to enforce an unconstitutional unconstitutional same-sex marriage ban after a previous incident where he was suspended for refusing to remove a Ten Commandments monument after being ordered to do so by a federal judge.
posted by zachlipton at 11:05 AM on December 21, 2016 [11 favorites]


.@GovernorBentley has interviewed suspended Chief Justice Roy Moore for Jeff Sessions' Senate seat, per the Gov. & Moore's camp.

Surely this!
posted by drezdn at 11:09 AM on December 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


Oh my god.
posted by Justinian at 11:10 AM on December 21, 2016 [4 favorites]


I'm kind of surprised Moore didn't make the lateral career move on his own, given how much he seems to prefer rewriting the law to interpreting it.
posted by tivalasvegas at 11:12 AM on December 21, 2016 [4 favorites]


Y'know, Alabama, if you want us to stop thinking of you in terms of the worst stereotypes and cliches you're gonna have to work with us here at least a little bit..
posted by Nerd of the North at 11:12 AM on December 21, 2016 [25 favorites]


Has anyone actually asked Trump voters what would cause them to withdraw their support?

Trump was the least popular presidential candidate in at least three decades and is currently the least popular incoming president since 1992. He'll be starting out with a low approval rating that will go lower as he fucks things up and/or blows off the promises he campaigns on. It will shock you how much their support never happened.
posted by kirkaracha at 11:13 AM on December 21, 2016 [15 favorites]


Team Bernie: Hillary ‘F*cking Ignored’ Us in Swing States "Hindsight is 20/20, but members of Bernie Sanders’s team in critical swing states say they knew Hillary Clinton was going to lose well before Election Day—and their warnings were ignored."

This is actually quite fascinating, and should be required reading for future campaign strategists. The Sanders' campaign says they shared their tactics with the Clinton campaign specifically in states where she had lost to him during the primary, so the Clintonites could adjust their tactics accordingly and work to gain back votes in the national. We have spoken a lot here about the antagonism between the two groups, but this is a clear example of the Sanders' campaign doing their best to get Clinton elected. It's a textbook example of what campaigns should do as they shift from the primaries to the national elections: losing campaigns should work with the one that won the nomination, for the good of everyone.
As the days and weeks flew by, the Bernie delegation kept underscoring TPP, jobs, union allies, the youth vote, and the environment, and pitched multiple rallies with Sanders in states such as Pennsylvania and Michigan (a state where Sanders unexpectedly beat Clinton in the Democratic primary, and a state that Clinton actively neglected during the general).
The Sanders campaign reps quoted are upset, and with good reason. But this is important to remember for the future.
posted by zarq at 11:14 AM on December 21, 2016 [24 favorites]


I guess it's best to get Moore into the Senate before one of the idiots in the incoming administration thinks to nominate him for the US Supreme Court. Worst harm reduction strategy ever.
posted by tivalasvegas at 11:14 AM on December 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


but this is a clear example of the Sanders' campaign doing their best to get Clinton elected

I wish Sanders himself had wanted to help. Regardless, what does it matter now?
posted by agregoli at 11:17 AM on December 21, 2016 [2 favorites]


(And, this annoyingly points the finger at Hillary again, like its all her fault she lost. Isn't there anything else we can talk about but round 1,000 of blame Hillary?)
posted by agregoli at 11:19 AM on December 21, 2016 [23 favorites]


Regardless, what does it matter now?

Why have we had seven multi-thousand-comment Election2016 posts since the election if we aren't interested in what happened
posted by beerperson at 11:21 AM on December 21, 2016 [7 favorites]


I meant to say: I wasn't frisked for weapons or anything. I vaguely knew some federal judges might be in attendance at said cocktail party, but security was just the same as any other event at my law school.

Welp, here's hoping the MAGAshirts don't figure out that they're only one, maybe two justices away from a rubber stamp.

*goes back to pouring liquor on food*
posted by corb at 11:22 AM on December 21, 2016 [6 favorites]


I wish Sanders himself had wanted to help. Regardless, what does it matter now?

Read the article.

Hell, read the part I quoted. Here, I'll repaste it and boldface the relevant bit:
As the days and weeks flew by, the Bernie delegation kept underscoring TPP, jobs, union allies, the youth vote, and the environment, and pitched multiple rallies with Sanders in states such as Pennsylvania and Michigan (a state where Sanders unexpectedly beat Clinton in the Democratic primary, and a state that Clinton actively neglected during the general).
The blame is being placed where it should be: on the campaign.
posted by zarq at 11:22 AM on December 21, 2016 [6 favorites]


Regardless, what does it matter now?

I said why I thought it mattered in the comment you are quoting.
posted by zarq at 11:23 AM on December 21, 2016


“We were saying we are offering our help—nobody wanted [President] Donald Trump,” Konst continued, noting that the “Bernie world” side was offering Clinton’s team their plans—strategy memos, lists of hardened state organizers, timelines, data, the works—to win over certain voters in areas she ultimately lost but where Sanders had won during the primary.

“We were painting them a dire picture, and I couldn’t help but think they literally looked like they had no idea what was going on here,” she continued. “I remember their faces, it was like they had never fucking heard this stuff before. It’s what we had been screaming for the past 9 months… It’s like [they] forgot the basics of Politics 101.”


Look, I've been pretty team Hillary for a while but this is pretty damning.

I guess I had hoped that she had learned something from the poor campaign she ran against Obama in the primaries in 2008, when I moved from her to Obama. I figured this time around they were doing the right things. I questioned going after Trump so much instead of touting her own virtues, but I figured they knew what they were doing.

I blame it on the people she had surrounding her, rather than her, but the buck still stops with her.

It's a serious fucking shame, because HRC could have been a brilliant President, better than Bill or Barack in my opinion. But she surrounded herself with the wrong people.
posted by zutalors! at 11:27 AM on December 21, 2016 [25 favorites]


Trump was the least popular presidential candidate in at least three decades and is currently the least popular incoming president since 1992.

The bad news is that the standard republican tactic to rally support is to start a war.
posted by peeedro at 11:27 AM on December 21, 2016 [20 favorites]


I wish Sanders himself had wanted to help. Regardless, what does it matter now?

Sanders endorsed her. He campaigned for her. He spoke at multiple rallies and campaign stops. And now we learn that his campaign tried to emphasize the reasons they won certain states and she didn't to her campaign strategists, so she could win the states and the election. There's more than enough evidence that Sanders did want to help, and certainly he's been clear that he holds Trump in contempt and didn't want him to win.

I've been on Team Clinton since 2007 if not earlier. I'm a New Yorker who voted for her for Senate against Rick Lazio. I've been a fan for a long, long time and I wanted her to win. I'm in complete agreement with zutalors! that she would have been a brilliant President.

I'm pissed and upset because she lost to a narcissistic asshole that should never have been allowed near the Oval Office and as a result we're facing four years or more of the most dire fascism this country has ever experienced. So yes, when a report comes out like this I don't think it does any of us any good to sweep it under the rug, plug our fingers in our ears, sing "LALALALALALA" and ignore it. We need to learn from what has happened to make damned sure it never happens again.
posted by zarq at 11:37 AM on December 21, 2016 [37 favorites]


Oh good, more Clinton/Sanders stuff.
posted by kirkaracha at 11:47 AM on December 21, 2016 [25 favorites]


So Trump emerged for a minute to sort of say things vaguely in response to press questions. Actual conversation:

Trump: “Who said that? When was that said?”
Reporter: “You said it in a press release.”
posted by zachlipton at 11:48 AM on December 21, 2016 [26 favorites]


Apparently the NCGOP are attempting to blame their own bigotry and deception on imagined perfidy by Charlotte:
The N.C. Republican Party issued a statement at 1 a.m. Wednesday blasting Democrats on City Council and Gov.-elect Roy Cooper, claiming “they lied directly to the people” over what was supposed to be a full repeal of the non-discrimination ordinance. “The HB2 blood is now stain soaked on their hands and theirs alone. What a dishonest, disgraceful shame by Roy Cooper and Charlotte Democrats.”

Many Republican lawmakers still support HB2, which they view as a stand for traditional values and protection of women and children from predators. Conservative groups are prodding them to stand firm.
Looks like gaslighting is a permanent addition to the conservative playbook.
posted by zombieflanders at 11:48 AM on December 21, 2016 [10 favorites]


As expected, the NCGOP filed a bill that is a de facto 6-month extension of HB2 (PDF).
posted by zombieflanders at 11:51 AM on December 21, 2016


The judicial branch is currently kind of our only hope. It's the only check on government power that is not controlled by Republicans.

Reason: The civilian bureaucracy voted overwhelmingly against Donald Trump. These people can make a lot of trouble for the next president in a lot of ways.

The writer seems to think it's a bug instead of a feature. The civil service may be our only bulwark against Trumpism.
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 11:55 AM on December 21, 2016 [11 favorites]


That there are things Clinton could and should have done better and that future campaigns can do better in the future, does not mean that Clinton is to blame. Assigning blame is a waste of time, if you want to comment on the relationship between the Sanders and Clinton campaigns, do it in terms of what it means for campaigns going forward. THAT is what matters here, what lessons can be learned that can be employed in the future? Anything else is relitigating the primaries and you should know better than to do that in these threads by now.
posted by VTX at 11:56 AM on December 21, 2016 [6 favorites]


Donald Trump’s 16 Obsessive Letters To ‘Mad Alex’ Salmond About Wind Turbine ‘Monsters’ In Scotland

Earlier this year, Alex Salmond told The Huffington Post UK that while he was Scotland’s First Minister, Trump wrote a series of “green ink” letters to him - and most went in the bin. He said:

“Most American presidents don’t send you ‘green ink’ letters, often capital letters. Usually couriered overnight with press articles attached to them, ‘READ THIS!’ Underlined, three times.

Here are 16 of the most intriguing letters - which damn ‘Mad Alex’ and hail his golf course as the “greatest in the world” - and reveal the billionaire moving from politeness to personal attacks in up to two letters in a day.


Not that we need more evidence that he his unhinged. Looks for tweets about this.
posted by futz at 11:59 AM on December 21, 2016 [11 favorites]


And, this annoyingly points the finger at Hillary again, like its all her fault she lost.

Actually, I blame Obama more than her. She was unsuited for the candidacy (though I agree she would have served her coalition competently as President), but the arrogance and ignorance started with him telling people in 2014 that she's the only qualified candidate. It's not surprising that the rest of the Democratic Party aligned with their titular leader on this, perverted the primary process in her favor, and shut down dissenting views with bogus rhetoric.

Regardless, what does it matter now?

An organization can only learn from its mistakes when there's a reasonable amount of accountability and transparency. It would be a shame if the Dems repeated the errors of 2000, 2004 and 2016 in 2018 and 2020. Yes, it's not all the Dem's fault: Republicans play dirty with voter access, many of their voters are motivated by racism, sexism, etc. But putting forward tainted establishment characters like Gore, Kerry and Clinton is an unforced error. It makes the Dems easy to attack, and it's dispiriting to activists.
posted by Coventry at 12:03 PM on December 21, 2016 [4 favorites]


That Sanders article is heavy on finger-pointing and light on details but one thing I'm taking away from it was that the approach HRC's team took seemed to vary widely from state-to-state. People here were talking about the FL team being a well-oiled machine whereas it looks like that machine broke down in MI and WI.
posted by asteria at 12:03 PM on December 21, 2016


perverted the primary process in her favor

Ohhh. Now I get it.
posted by Justinian at 12:05 PM on December 21, 2016 [20 favorites]


I think it's probably too raw, yet, for us to talk about 'lessons learned' without falling into the endless pit of recrimination and fingerpointing so beloved by leftists everywhere. (relevant case study: UK Labour post-Brexit.) I don't know if it's possible to resist the temptation to look back -- it's a pretty basic human impulse to endlessly relive big failures until One Shining Reason can be found to avoid making the same mistake in the future.

But at least we (both MeFi and Dems generally, and the anti-Trump movement even more generally) need to resist the urge to scapegoat one another. I think everyone made mistakes, huge mistakes. Bernie fucked up, his supporters fucked up, Stein fucked up, the DNC fucked up, the Clinton campaign fucked up, Obama fucked up, Hillary fucked up. (And of course there are the external factors, Russia, white nationalism, misogyny, Comey, WikiLeaks -- but we didn't have a lot of power over those things so to blame them is basically to say "welp, we couldn't have done anything better given the headwinds".)

Reconstruction of the Democratic Party as a viable governing coalition is important, but more important in this moment is a united front against fascism. The thing is that we don't really know how the hell to do that yet -- and I think that's part of why we keep falling back into this circle-jerk/firing-squad. Because at least we know how to do that....
posted by tivalasvegas at 12:06 PM on December 21, 2016 [34 favorites]


It's not surprising that the rest of the Democratic Party aligned with their titular leader on this, perverted the primary process in her favor, and shut down dissenting views with bogus rhetoric.

The rest of the Dems went with the most well-known/popular candidate instead of the dude who spent months in Iowa only to lose it and conceded the South. Bernie's primary campaign was a hot mess that it almost explains why Hillary's team would ignore them.

If Obama is to blame for anything its appointing Comey, removing Dean as DNC chair, and leaving a SCOTUS seat open so the Republicans had something to get the Evangelicals out to the polls.
posted by asteria at 12:07 PM on December 21, 2016 [7 favorites]




Mod note: Hello friends. At this point, please stop unless you have some new specific thing to say, we've been around and around on all this Clinton v Sanders, what about the primaries, stuff.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 12:09 PM on December 21, 2016 [15 favorites]


Looks like gaslighting is a permanent addition to the conservative playbook.

"I didn't want to hit you but you made me do it."

Hideous.
posted by tivalasvegas at 12:10 PM on December 21, 2016 [4 favorites]


What is going on with Newt Gingrich? He has been oozing exceptionally bad ideas lately.
posted by drezdn at 12:15 PM on December 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


"lately"?
posted by Justinian at 12:16 PM on December 21, 2016 [31 favorites]



The new piece is not about Clinton vs. Sanders in the primaries. Its is a discussion of whether HRC's campaign could have benefitted from Sanders's help, which is a piece of the discussion about whether her campaign mishandled some of the pivotal states that he did well in.


I would like to discuss that but it so quickly devolves into another opportunity for some to be all Perverted Primaries once again.
posted by zutalors! at 12:19 PM on December 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


Trump: “Who said that? When was that said?”
Reporter: “You said it in a press release.”


That exchange was in response to a question about Trump yesterday characterizing the Berlin incident as an attack on Christians. For further despair, see What Their Reactions to Monday's Attacks Reveal About Trump and Obama.
posted by peeedro at 12:20 PM on December 21, 2016 [2 favorites]


What is going on with Newt Gingrich? He has been oozing exceptionally bad ideas lately

Perhaps he caught a bad case of The Santorums?
posted by futz at 12:21 PM on December 21, 2016 [2 favorites]




"I didn't want to hit you but you made me do it."

The party of personal responsibility, everyone!

lolsob
posted by soren_lorensen at 12:22 PM on December 21, 2016 [5 favorites]


If Obama is to blame for anything its appointing Comey, removing Dean as DNC chair, and leaving a SCOTUS seat open so the Republicans had something to get the Evangelicals out to the polls.

Scalia died on February 13. Obama nominated Garland on March 16, just over a month later. The Senate refused to hold hearings or vote on Garland.
...since 1975, the average time from nomination to confirmation is 67 days. The longest time before confirmation in the past three decades was 99 days, for Justice Thomas, and the last four Justices, spanning two Administrations, were confirmed in an average of 75 days.
"If Scalia’s replacement is confirmed after January 2, 2017, the delay would be 324 days at a minimum."

Orrin Hatch said there was “no question” that Merrick Garland would be confirmed to the Supreme Court and explicitly cited Garland as an acceptable candidate when the Republicans were planning on oppose any Obama nomination of more liberal candidates.
posted by kirkaracha at 12:23 PM on December 21, 2016 [27 favorites]


The party of personal responsibility, everyone!

And local governance! Unless you're so icky to them that you don't deserve basic civil rights, of course.
posted by zombieflanders at 12:24 PM on December 21, 2016 [2 favorites]


Perhaps he caught a bad case of The Santorums?

C. deplorabilis, I think. They do present very similarly and are often mistaken for one another. You have to look at the sweater vest, or absence thereof, for a differential diagnosis.
posted by tivalasvegas at 12:24 PM on December 21, 2016 [2 favorites]


oh, now I want to do a whole taxonomy.
posted by tivalasvegas at 12:26 PM on December 21, 2016 [4 favorites]


tivalasvegas. Perfect!
posted by futz at 12:26 PM on December 21, 2016


@RaleighReporter: Berger says supporters of Charlotte ordinance want to pass similar ones in other cities once #HB2 repealed. "We don't need that."

"We" in this case being defined as "bigoted weaselfuckers."
posted by zombieflanders at 12:28 PM on December 21, 2016 [4 favorites]


tivalasvegas. Perfect!

I'm reevaluating my diagnosis to D. vulgaris gingrichii, actually, a rarer strain typically found in the South and characterized by multiple divorces and "conversion" experiences.
posted by tivalasvegas at 12:30 PM on December 21, 2016 [5 favorites]


friendly reminder that bathroom bills are about creating legal liabilities for businesses and schools that employ or serve transgender people
posted by Rainbo Vagrant at 12:31 PM on December 21, 2016 [18 favorites]


You know, I have a new idea of what is going to stop Trump: Trump. Trump and his ego team are so incredibly incompetent they won't be able to destroy the government.
I'm not saying there aren't easy things to damage and they'll do that, big league, but I don't think they are going to be able to assemble the deep sort of evil that Walker could.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 12:32 PM on December 21, 2016 [2 favorites]


The thing is that evil doesn't need to have much of a plan. It is easier to destroy than to build.
posted by tivalasvegas at 12:33 PM on December 21, 2016 [20 favorites]


I don't think Lakoff is infallible on this stuff. Trump can lie, cheat, steal (and soon, kill) because he's their liar, cheater, stealer, killer.

I think what [George] Lakoff is saying is that if Trump were perceived as a liar it would hurt his administration.

That's separate from whether he actually lies, or even if his supporters don't believe it matters. (If it does't matter, he's not a liar. That's the cognitive dissonance working). The idea is if we continue to press on with his lying in language form - headlines, radio stories, feed walls or whatever the hell it is you kids do - that it will naturally crumble his support.

"What a Strict Father Cannot Be: There are certain things that strict fathers cannot be: A Loser, Corrupt, and especially not a Betrayer of Trust."

Again, not that he isn't those things, because he is, or even that his supporters don't care, because they don't-or won't admit it. The point is we should use words to convey that he is those things specifically. And that will erode his support accordingly.

The thing is, corporate media already works this way; talking points memo, "branding", "messaging". They've been using words that specifically undermine a Democratic viewpoint, and here we are, 36 years after Michael Deaver cracked it for Reagan, 20-some-odd years after Fox News infected the airwaves and boom - President Turdfungus.

Maybe we could try it, y'know, see how it goes? Rachel Maddow? Call me, we'll talk, it'll be fun.
posted by petebest at 12:34 PM on December 21, 2016 [6 favorites]




And now the Lt Governor is whitesplaining why an African-American Senator should stop talking about the history of civil rights in NC.

To a Republican, "civil rights" is always in the past tense.
posted by Etrigan at 12:37 PM on December 21, 2016 [5 favorites]



I can't speak for their "what the shit", but my "what the shit" isn't that someone put together such a tape so much as NONE OF THE PEOPLE WHO HAD IT WENT AND RELEASED IT.


"I am on a secret racist Christmas video distribution ring and here is a humorous and relevant one I have...." is not how many people want to dance in the national spotlight.
posted by srboisvert at 12:44 PM on December 21, 2016 [4 favorites]


"I am on a secret racist Christmas video distribution ring and here is a humorous and relevant one I have...." is not how many people want to dance in the national spotlight.

Anonymous source that shit! Though I imagine if the d-list is small enough process of elimination could get ugly.
posted by soren_lorensen at 12:49 PM on December 21, 2016 [3 favorites]




I keep thinking that maybe the thing that will save lives will be that Trump humiliates himself on air in a way that repulses his most ardent fans. So now I've got this thing where I keep imagining DT flinging his feces on live TV, and this feels like not the best way of using my brain muscles.
posted by angrycat at 12:49 PM on December 21, 2016 [3 favorites]


"I am on a secret racist Christmas video distribution ring and here is a humorous and relevant one I have...."

Isn't that essentially the genesis of South Park?
posted by peeedro at 12:51 PM on December 21, 2016 [16 favorites]


I mean ideally I could use my brain muscles a la the dad in Firestarter but that would probably end with somebody putting their hand down the garbage disposal.
posted by angrycat at 12:51 PM on December 21, 2016 [4 favorites]


Anonymous source that shit! Though I imagine if the d-list is small enough process of elimination could get ugly.

Yeah, this is what wikileaks and all those newspapers' secure drops are built for.

I suppose the NDA might have made the employees jointly and severally responsible for damages on release, but no one in their right mind would sign it, right?
posted by Coventry at 12:56 PM on December 21, 2016


that would probably end with somebody putting their hand down the garbage disposal.

And a more apt metaphor for December 2016 there never was. Unless you replace "hand" with "head".
posted by Quindar Beep at 12:59 PM on December 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


Jesus, that transcript from his exchange with reporters regarding violence in Europe and Turkey. He's onset senile, right?
posted by windbox at 1:03 PM on December 21, 2016 [2 favorites]


Sufficiently advanced deplorabilism is indistinguishable from senility, so... sure.
posted by tivalasvegas at 1:05 PM on December 21, 2016 [3 favorites]


yeah no wonder he doesn't want to have press conferences.
posted by localhuman at 1:05 PM on December 21, 2016 [3 favorites]


Whether or not Trump implodes, two-thirds of state legislatures will still be run by Republicans. In 25 states, they control the legislature and also have the governorship. The GOP will still control the House and Senate. They'll still have their newly-installed Supreme Court Justice, too.

They'll make long-lasting changes, roll back civil rights for millions and steal health care away from millions more while we stare slack-jawed and horrified at their distracting buffoon in the Oval Office.
posted by zarq at 1:06 PM on December 21, 2016 [33 favorites]


A traveler in the West Bank or, for that matter, anywhere in the Arab world, is bound to see posters of Jerusalem. It is where the Prophet Muhammad ascended to heaven and only Mecca and Medina exceed it in holiness. If the United States moves its embassy to Jerusalem, the Arab world would take it as a slap in the face.

Trump has always done best when he can point to the falsity or hypocrisy of his opponents. This is a prime example.

The original US policy had nothing to do with a Palestinian state; it is a continuation of the US's position in 1947 that mostly-Jewish Jerusalem (and mostly-Arab Bethlehem and Ramallah) be part of a non-national corpus separatum "in view of [Jerusalem's] association with three world religions" . That policy is as relevant today as the US's 1947 policy on the Kuomintang ruling China. It's also kinda racist and colonialist, since it was predicated on the residents of the area never having civil rights.

The US already has a consulate in Jerusalem, and purchased a site for an embassy there in 2014. The Jerusalem Embassy Act mandates the moving of the embassy to Jerusalem, although it allows Presidents to waive its implementation for six months at a time. The Act became US law in 1995, so Presidents Clinton, Bush and Obama must have signed that waiver around forty times. It is just stupid and embarrassing and leads to ridiculous acrobatics about e.g., where US citizens have been "officially" born or gone to school.

In this case the only reason for not moving the embassy is hypothesised outrage on the part of people who don't believe that Israel should exist at all. That may be the case, or it may be that the US needs to draw a line and say "Listen, there is no possible peace deal that does not end with Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, and there is no justification for continuing to treat Israel differently to every other nation."
posted by Joe in Australia at 1:10 PM on December 21, 2016 [2 favorites]


I keep thinking that maybe the thing that will save lives will be that Trump humiliates himself on air in a way that repulses his most ardent fans.

Yeah, something like this is what fuels the tiny little sliver of optimism I do carry. God forbid, but just wait until something really bad happens, and Trump handles it by going on TV to brag about how great he is, how he saw it coming and told you so, and anyway, yeah, sorry for your loss America - and that's it. We'll always have the 27% crazification factor, but a lot of people "thought we needed a change" and should "give him a chance" are going to think "oh shit" and realize he's got nothing for them.

I don't know. It's not much, but that is the kind of thing I could see at least flipping some borderline Trump voters, even if he never really loses the core.
posted by Joey Buttafoucault at 1:13 PM on December 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


The Act became US law in 1995, so Presidents Clinton, Bush and Obama must have signed that waiver around forty times.

You think maybe those three people -- who, let us recall, agree on so little in the international-diplomacy realm that we can essentially say that they don't agree on anything of import -- had a skoonch of an idea of the actual consequences of not signing it?
posted by Etrigan at 1:16 PM on December 21, 2016 [10 favorites]


MeFites who didn't think that HRC or her campaign were doing a great job were told by many people that it was bad/uncomfortable/wrong to criticize Clinton's campaign strategy during the campaign because Trump!

To be fair, during the election season I saw very little criticism of campaign strategy and quite a lot of criticism of her character, emails, corruption, etc.

From the tone of the article, it seems like the the failure to draw on knowledge from the Sanders campaign was based in the acrimony between the two campaigns themselves. I don't think anyone would argue that Sanders drew his campaign out long past its viability, and I think the Clinton campaign can make a strong case that this hurt her--especially as his campaign focused more on her being corrupt and stealing votes towards the end. They had the right to do this, but from a strategic standpoint it really hurt the Democrats in the general. Dragging things into the convention, accusing her of stealing the nomination. and then Bernie's lackluster stumping for her afterwards were not beneficial for the overall goal of defeating Republicans.

If we want to talk strategy, I think Democrats need to ask themselves whether it's more important to feel right or to win. Because conservatives are very good at fighting in the primaries and falling in line when it comes time to defeat the other side, while liberals will administer purity tests up until and past Election Day. Which is not to say we shouldn't criticize candidates, but we should be mindful that endless criticism ultimately discourages turnout and can lose elections. Indeed, criticism-from-the-Left was one of the strategies employed by the Trump campaign.

I do not know how to fully resolve that issue, because social liberalism itself is partly responsible for this. If your ideology effectively centers around defending the rights of oppressed minorities from all groups, then it makes it really difficult to tell the voices from the left who disagree with your candidate that they need to sit down without it appearing like a betrayal of your principles. But you can't expect any candidate to be all things to all people, both because humans are imperfect and because politics requires compromise.

In this respect, one of Obama's strengths was his relative lack of experience. Compared to Clinton he didn't have the same number of years of making choices and compromises, and thus provided fewer opportunities for people to find him problematic. So being a blank slate is one way to side-step the purity issue. But if we want liberal candidates elected on a wide scale, from local to national, we can't center our strategy around finding inexperienced candidates who are great orators. There has to be a willingness to compromise somehow. But how do you inspire followers around the message "We know there's a long way to go and we wish we could move faster. But isn't one step forward better than five steps back?"
posted by Anonymous at 1:18 PM on December 21, 2016


In this case the only reason for not moving the embassy is hypothesised outrage on the part of people who don't believe that Israel should exist at all.

Huh, I wasn't aware that large numbers of Jewish Americans with ties to Israel don't believe Israel shouldn't exist.
posted by zombieflanders at 1:19 PM on December 21, 2016 [8 favorites]


I keep thinking that maybe the thing that will save lives will be that Trump humiliates himself on air in a way that repulses his most ardent fans.

I doubt this can happen. Trump's supporters have tolerated his filling his cabinet with billionaires; they've tolerated his refusal to jail Clinton; most horribly, they've tolerated his being a serial perpetrator of sexual assault and a rapist. I'm with zarq, though: Even if it did happen, Republicans would still have a stranglehold on power in this country, and their president's disgrace would do little to loosen it.
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 1:21 PM on December 21, 2016 [12 favorites]


McMullin is on MSNBC right now! HI EVAN.
posted by Justinian at 1:21 PM on December 21, 2016 [11 favorites]


I keep thinking that maybe the thing that will save lives will be that Trump humiliates himself on air in a way that repulses his most ardent fans.


I had a dream back during the election that I slipped him a combo of benzos and alcohol (I know he doesn't drink, there was some dream-logic reason why this worked), causing him to fall down a flight of red-carpet event steps and puke all over himself in front of All The Cameras.

And thus, I saved the world.
posted by soren_lorensen at 1:22 PM on December 21, 2016 [12 favorites]


Mod note: Let's not get further into Israel/Palestine issues in here.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 1:29 PM on December 21, 2016 [2 favorites]


He's literally just finished up a tour talking directly to those fans, and telling them blatantly that his promises and statements were a bunch of lies, and that they're dumbasses for believing him.

For which they love him.
posted by Pope Guilty at 1:31 PM on December 21, 2016 [3 favorites]


"He's right! I am a dumbass! Wow, he's so insightful! #winning"
posted by soren_lorensen at 1:33 PM on December 21, 2016 [5 favorites]


If we want to talk strategy, I think Democrats need to ask themselves whether it's more important to feel right or to win. Because conservatives are very good at fighting in the primaries and falling in line when it comes time to defeat the other side, while liberals will administer purity tests up until and past Election Day. Which is not to say we shouldn't criticize candidates, but we should be mindful that endless criticism ultimately discourages turnout and can lose elections. Indeed, criticism-from-the-Left was one of the strategies employed by the Trump campaign.

I think it's a losing strategy to expect people in a large, diverse coalition with many different interests to be quiet and fall in line just as the people in the Republican coalition ultimately always do.
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 1:36 PM on December 21, 2016 [5 favorites]


As long as we're sharing fantasies about how Trump will be stopped, mine is that I turn into the DC supernatural character The Spectre. I'm not sure how specifically that stops him, but I look good in green.
posted by Joey Michaels at 1:38 PM on December 21, 2016 [14 favorites]


He's literally just finished up a tour talking directly to those fans, and telling them blatantly that his promises and statements were a bunch of lies, and that they're dumbasses for believing him.

I think it's more "those other people are dumbasses, but I can tell you the truth because you're part of my team". It's actually a confidence-building measure and every time he uses it his supporters will get more and more enthusiastic. It's ... gnostic Republicanism.
posted by Joe in Australia at 1:39 PM on December 21, 2016 [17 favorites]


I think it's a losing strategy to expect people in a large, diverse coalition with many different interests to be quiet and fall in line just as the people in the Republican coalition ultimately always do.

Yeah, that was my point in the next paragraph. How do you reconcile the need for unity with an ethos that celebrates the importance of the individual?
posted by Anonymous at 1:48 PM on December 21, 2016


I think everyone should basically accept right now that no meaningful number of the people who support Trump are going to actually give a shit when he breaks campaign promises. Trying to fight him by saying "he said he'd do X and he isn't doing it!" is a losing game.

The only way these people are ever going to turn on him is when their circumstances definitively turn for the worse, and in a way that can't be blamed on the usual bogeymen of minorities and immigrants. He's their guy, and as long as things are OK for them, they do not care about honesty.
posted by tocts at 1:50 PM on December 21, 2016 [9 favorites]




I don't agree with that. Take the "lock her up" shit. The crowd starts chanting it, he quiets them down as if he's going to say something relevant, and instead goes off on "oh come on you morons, that was all fine before the election, but give it a fucking rest my god..."

Sarah Kendzior has tweeted about how authoritarians like Trump do not keep their promises and their word is good only until the second it's no longer convenient. Millions of people deluded into believing him will learn this the hard way. Will they care?
posted by Pope Guilty at 1:51 PM on December 21, 2016 [3 favorites]


I think we need to stop treating all those millions of people like they are a single person. Some will care. Some totally won't. A bunch probably won't pay any attention. There is no secret sauce that turns every single one of the millions of people who voted for him. Looking for it or expecting such a thing is a fool's errand. But that's not a reason to not hammer him every single day of the next 4 years with shit that will peel off small percentages of his voters. Peel off enough small percentages and you get to the few points needed for elections.
posted by soren_lorensen at 1:57 PM on December 21, 2016 [31 favorites]


@RepKenGoodman: Looks like there will not be a vote in the House on HB2 repeal. Can think of a lot of better ways to have spent my day.

So the NCGOP spent just 7 hours and one special session to pass HB2, And now they've spent five special sessions (costing the state hundreds of thousands of dollars before legal expenses) just to prove that keeping discrimination enshrined in law and punishing the working class is more important than their alleged principles of limited government, local governance, and efficient use of tax dollars. Good job, everyone.
posted by zombieflanders at 1:58 PM on December 21, 2016 [20 favorites]


Yeah, that was my point in the next paragraph. How do you reconcile the need for unity with an ethos that celebrates the importance of the individual?

You're right. That's a hard balance to strike. To me, that paragraph seemed to imply that expecting people in a diverse coalition to be quiet and fall in line could actually be a winning strategy, so I must have misread it.
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 1:59 PM on December 21, 2016


think we need to stop treating all those millions of people like they are a single person. Some will care. Some totally won't. A bunch probably won't pay any attention.

I'm not saying, "don't hammer him on his lies". I'm just saying, don't waste a lot of time and emotional effort trying to understand why his followers don't seem to care, or why each of his complete 180-degree turns on his promises isn't a bigger scandal. The people who can be convinced are the middle ground people, many of whom didn't even vote. Expending a lot of effort trying to argue "gotchas" with his true believers is itself a fool's errand.
posted by tocts at 2:06 PM on December 21, 2016 [6 favorites]


I think it's worth noting that a lot of his supporters - especially his self-proclaimed "smart" supporters - know that he wasn't going to be holding a lot of his promises and just trying to win the election. I was talking to a guy about it - MBA, runs his own business, does pretty well for himself - he saw it a positive that he was "saying what he needed to say" in order to win "just like democrats say what they need to say" about working families/fighting corporations/free college/healthcare for all/etc to hype up their base even though a majority of of it never comes into fruition (never mind the fact that this is almost always because of GOP obstruction, not "jk I was lying about that").

His lying is smart and cunning to them. He is being an alpha businessman who does what he needs to do to get shit done. He wanted the presidency and knew how to take it even if it meant lying his face off and playing dirty. They don't feel played, or like victims of a con - they love it.
posted by windbox at 2:09 PM on December 21, 2016 [20 favorites]


Anonymous source that shit! Though I imagine if the d-list is small enough process of elimination could get ugly.

Find out or estimate how many copies there are and send out that many. Unless the video copies were digitally watermarked in some way, it'll give everyone cover. But then I suppose the next move would be to sue them all and hope the culprit feels guilty enough to confess. Regardless, it would probably have to be someone made of better stuff than Arnold to take the risk.
posted by fuse theorem at 2:11 PM on December 21, 2016


His lying is smart and cunning to them. He is being an alpha businessman who does what he needs to do to get shit done. He wanted the presidency and knew how to take it even if it meant lying his face off and playing dirty. They love it.

And if it drives those Dems and libruls nuts, that's a bonus!

(Which underscores why it's important for any resistance to Trump to attack him on substance and practical points instead of his endless contradictions and bogus blather.)
posted by Doktor Zed at 2:17 PM on December 21, 2016 [5 favorites]


Trumpland Citizens Guide to Holiday Greetings

Someone says: "Happy holidays!"
You say: "Fuck you, it's 'Merry Christmas!'"

Someone says: "Merry Christmas!"
You say, "Heil Trump!"
posted by kirkaracha at 2:31 PM on December 21, 2016 [10 favorites]


Yeah I think people underestimate the extent to which people voted for him just to piss off liberals and the establishment. Whether rightly or wrongly there are a lot of people who have totally given up on government ever being able to do anything for them and so they just voted for the ridiculous guy cause they thought it was funny.

Honestly, those are the people I have hope of reaching. When things get BAD, and I'm afraid they will, I hope people realize that government does have power. It has the power to seriously fuck up your life, so you'd better be careful how you vote.

If Dems were smart, they'd find a way to hang all this around the Republicans' necks and never let people forget it, but I'm not confident about that.
posted by threeturtles at 2:32 PM on December 21, 2016 [18 favorites]


The only way these people are ever going to turn on him is when their circumstances definitively turn for the worse, and in a way that can't be blamed on the usual bogeymen of minorities and immigrants.

I'm picturing some cataclysm-level terrorist/nuclear attack, or maybe massive environmental or economic upheaval, that leaves half the country's population dead or starving or close to it. If Trump left the country for his own safety, and didn't look back at the devastation he'd left behind? Then I could see his followers turning on him.

But even then, he'd be out of the country, and not accountable. As long as he's here, I can't imagine anything he could do that would cause a major turn against him. He and the Republicans who depend on his followers for votes—not to mention the right-wing media—could always, always spin it away as not as bad as the liberal media says it is, or a time for unity not division, or the Democrats' fault, or something.
posted by Rykey at 2:33 PM on December 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


threeturtles you are exactly right about reaching those people. I've already seen regret expressed by at least 1 friend who voted for Trump as a fuck government move.
posted by yoga at 2:47 PM on December 21, 2016 [3 favorites]


As long as he's here, I can't imagine anything he could do that would cause a major turn against him

I can imagine a full on Senior moment where he forgets what he is doing/saying, pisses his pants, and starts calling out for Ivanka would be hard to spin. Something that reveals that he is barely keeping it together and that he is struggling with Alzheimer's. Imagine you voted for an authoritarian father figure and you ended up with a foolish old man struggling to keep it together.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 2:53 PM on December 21, 2016 [7 favorites]


Doesn't seem to have hurt Reagan any, SLoG.
posted by Justinian at 2:54 PM on December 21, 2016 [11 favorites]


Counterpoint: Ronald Reagan

On preview: shakes fist at Justinian
posted by zombieflanders at 2:54 PM on December 21, 2016 [11 favorites]


I've already seen regret expressed by at least 1 friend who voted for Trump as a fuck government move.

When you have a fairly significant portion of your electorate voting specifically to "fuck government", you have real, serious problems. Even once we get rid of Trump, we still need to address this, because an angry electorate could very well put someone nearly as bad back in. It's just dangerous when a large portion of people are checked out, but still pulling the lever in the voting booth.
posted by corb at 2:56 PM on December 21, 2016 [23 favorites]


Unfortunately I think it's probably no use to speculate on what he could do to lose some or most of his followers until he's in the Oval Office. Many of his fans either haven't really accepted that he's won yet (see all the sore winnerism and complaining about Hillary and SJWs that they're still going on with) and many others have either no idea what to expect or have a variety of specific expectations of him. I think that potentially he could lose a whole bunch of followers very fast, but must say I don't see any particularly likely scenario for this. Chaos is just gonna have to reign for a while before we can see how well his fanbase responds.
posted by Rust Moranis at 2:59 PM on December 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


Reagan was never caught on camera in an undeniable display of Alzheimer's. Nancy did a good job of shielding him. And that was at the end of 8 years of service so I think Reagan had a lot of banked goodwill.

Also Reagan didn't run as a tough guy-- although he sometimes acted tough. He ran as a genial fellow with good ideas (good if you were a Republican.) Trump specifically ran as The Boss.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 3:00 PM on December 21, 2016 [8 favorites]


An informed electorate is a fantasy in 2016. People are stupid. They don't read. They don't want to be informed about policy. And there's an entire industry stoking resentment against the very idea of intelligence or even just objective fact.

The only thing to fight that kind of anti-intellectualism which has already metastasized in the US is personal charisma, and direct appeals to consequences they feel personally.
posted by T.D. Strange at 3:02 PM on December 21, 2016 [18 favorites]


I think Trump voters are like the hosts in Westworld. They only present the appearance of rational decision making when it's actually just a cognitive loop. It takes repeated trauma and personal suffering to break out of that loop and start to really think about the world.

Yes I've been watching a lot of Westworld, why?
posted by Justinian at 3:04 PM on December 21, 2016 [13 favorites]


nothing he does will reduce his stature among the most rabid. in a post-fact world, everything is obama's fault.
posted by quonsar II: smock fishpants and the temple of foon at 3:07 PM on December 21, 2016 [5 favorites]


WaPo: After meeting with Trump, Boeing CEO relents on cost of Air Force One

"We’re all focused on the same thing here, we’re going to make sure that we give our war fighters the best capability in the world and that we do it in a way that is affordable for our taxpayers,” Muilenburg said. “And his business head set around that is excellent. It was a terrific conversation. Got a lot of respect for him. He’s a good man. And he’s doing the right thing.”

As for that $4 billion price tag, Muilenburg promised taxpayers would get a break — though by the time the contract is finished and the planes are flying, Trump is not likely to be still in office.


So Trump's successor will be the beneficiaryvictim of his "business sense." How much more Trumpian could that be? None. None more Trumpian.
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 3:10 PM on December 21, 2016 [12 favorites]


I'm sure there are other ways to go about it, but my way of addressing the "fuck government" mentality is to fight hard to defeat the political party that's organized its ideology and messaging around that very principle.
posted by tonycpsu at 3:14 PM on December 21, 2016 [14 favorites]


> WaPo: After meeting with Trump, Boeing CEO relents on cost of Air Force One

Dear Washington Post: You Know This Headline is Pro-Trump Propaganda, Right?
posted by tonycpsu at 3:27 PM on December 21, 2016 [22 favorites]


A fifth of those who approve of Obama also favour dismantling his accomplishments (WaPo)

"It's maybe a weird end-point of the idea that Everything the Government Does Is Bad.™ There's this continuous split between how people feel about Congress (boooo) and how they feel about their own congressmen (yayyy) that may be what we're seeing here: Obama's great! But he did some government, and we can't have that."
posted by Rumple at 3:30 PM on December 21, 2016 [6 favorites]


hmm, why is Anthony Bourdain trending? Anthony Bourdain vows to boycott restaurants at Trump's DC hotel. Oh.
posted by zachlipton at 3:33 PM on December 21, 2016 [8 favorites]


Bourdain is awesome.
posted by valkane at 3:44 PM on December 21, 2016


Donald Trump is holding a government casting call. He’s seeking ‘the look.’

Several of Trump’s associates said they thought that John R. Bolton’s brush-like mustache was one of the factors that handicapped the bombastic former United Nations ambassador in the sweepstakes for secretary of state.

“Donald was not going to like that mustache,” said one associate, who asked for anonymity to speak frankly. “I can’t think of anyone that’s really close to Donald that has a beard that he likes.”

posted by RobotVoodooPower at 3:54 PM on December 21, 2016 [11 favorites]


There's this continuous split between how people feel about Congress (boooo) and how they feel about their own congressmen (yayyy) that may be what we're seeing here: Obama's great! But he did some government, and we can't have that."

I think some of it's a sentiment even less resembling a logical argument: at the level of "Hmm, Obama seems like a nice guy! His wife is nice, and so are the kids. I approve! But also, government horribly corrupt and bad, I hear! Boo government!

Between the mid-50s approval rating for Obama and the high-40s popular vote that Clinton got lies around 5 percent of the electorate who basically have no idea about how Washington works or about who can fairly be held responsible (even in a theoretical sense, not even counting the massive GOP obstructionism -- I'm talking "I'm Just A Bill-level civic knowledge here) when things don't get done and they basically were throwing a dart blind.

you guessed it, I'm still mad about that one ACA enroller from Kentucky who voted for Trump.

I don't say these people shouldn't be allowed to vote, though I do question whether they're competent to hold a drivers license or anything sharper than a butter knife.
posted by tivalasvegas at 3:55 PM on December 21, 2016 [6 favorites]


Holy shit, the music lineup for Donald Trump’s inauguration ball is hot garbage
"Nashville singer-songwriter Beau Davidson, who will be performing music from his latest album, The American Gentleman; The Reagan Years, 'one of the HOTTEST ’80s cover bands' who only perform music released during Ronald Regan’s presidency; and a wedding band called The Mixx; plus DJ sets by DJ Romin, DJ Young Rye, DJ Flow, and — my personal fav — DJ Freedom. The Star Spangled Singers will also take the stage to serenade party-goers with 'uplifting, patriotic songs and instrumentals.'"
posted by monospace at 3:56 PM on December 21, 2016 [25 favorites]


It’s like [they] forgot the basics of Politics 101.”

I think the inevitable books and articles really need to explore this; they had a new data-driven campaign model and seemed to discard anything that didn't fit into it. Do we know anything more about that Ada software?
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 3:58 PM on December 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


David Burke's Prime at Foxwoods is one of my favorite restaurants. And then he went and opened a restaurant in Trump DC, so no more Angry Lobster for me now.
posted by Ruki at 3:59 PM on December 21, 2016


Holy shit, the [person, people or concept selected] for Donald Trump’s [event or plan] is hot garbage

There, I just saved headline writers a ton of work over the next four years
posted by tivalasvegas at 4:00 PM on December 21, 2016 [22 favorites]


When you have a fairly significant portion of your electorate voting specifically to "fuck government", you have real, serious problems. Even once we get rid of Trump, we still need to address this, because an angry electorate could very well put someone nearly as bad back in. It's just dangerous when a large portion of people are checked out, but still pulling the lever in the voting booth.

This is by design that they feel this way in many cases, though—the Republican Party wants them to feel as though they're the fucking enslaved Israelites forced by Pharaoh to make bricks without straw, if I have that Biblical reference correct, no matter how well off or catered to they are because it makes them politically pliable.

How can that be dealt with now that any such sentiment is so totally detached from reality, when people will readily feel utter privation and outrage, that their country has been taken away from them because gay couples can get married or because they're certain that the country is chock-full of bastions of Sharia law where police fear to tread?

That Birthright Citizenship as articulated by the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which was a principle of colonial law, British law, and Western civilization reaching back to the Antonine Constitution of the Roman Empire which made a Roman citizen of everyone born within the Empire's borders, is actually just a liberal conspiracy, despite it being what our own Constitution actually literally says? Which many of their own ancestors benefited from?

Yeah, this is a real problem which may very well unravel and permit the despoiling our nation, but when a pivotal and politically-valuable part of it is mass rejection of consensus reality and unwillingness (present company excepted) to hold their fellows or leaders accountable to even approximating the truth, what can anyone else do?

When concessions are made—like adopting a plan incorporating as its basis a Heritage Foundation proposal to use the supposed magic pixie dust of markets to reform our healthcare system—the imaginary grievance disappears in favor of a legion of others.
posted by XMLicious at 4:07 PM on December 21, 2016 [14 favorites]


Ooh, turns out that last week the USA Freedom Kids dropped that lawsuit they had against Trump for failing to pay them for a gig they did at one of his rallies.

Maybe it's not to late to book them for the Inauguration!
posted by tivalasvegas at 4:09 PM on December 21, 2016 [9 favorites]


The Reagan Years, 'one of the HOTTEST ’80s cover bands' who only perform music released during Ronald Regan’s presidency

Well that rules out Holiday in Cambodia, but We've Got a Bigger Problem Now came out in 81 and a reworked version of that would probably go down well.
posted by Pink Frost at 4:10 PM on December 21, 2016 [9 favorites]


Holy shit, the [person, people or concept selected] for Donald Trump’s [event or plan] is hot garbage

There, I just saved headline writers a ton of work over the next four years


Yes! And, like the New Yorker cartoons, every caption under a picture of him or his staff can be "Christ, what an asshole."
posted by C'est la D.C. at 4:13 PM on December 21, 2016 [7 favorites]


Holy shit, the music lineup for Donald Trump’s inauguration ball is hot garbage

The event this article is talking about, The All American Inaugural Ball, is not the official inaugural ball. There are dozens of inaugural balls, every hotel and large venue in DC hosts one. The Presidential Inaugural Committee hosts the official balls, and the details remain unannounced.
posted by peeedro at 4:15 PM on December 21, 2016 [7 favorites]


OK, I feel kind of bad about mocking those kids since I'm sure it sucked for them to get drawn into a national mini-controversy:

After engaging in the public spat with Trump campaign, USA Freedom Kids went on a hiatus, Popick said.

"The political stuff really took a toll on (the girls)," said Popick, whose daughter is part of the group.


But what kind of dad votes for the guy (sorry, "declines to say" whether he voted for the guy) who blatantly ripped off his daughter and her friends?!?! I hereby name him Popick, Head Deplorable. Ugh:

Popick declined to say whether he voted for Trump because "that's private." He said President Barack Obama pushed the country backward.

I think I've had enough crappy surrealism for one day, off to watch a few more eps of Black Mirror.
posted by tivalasvegas at 4:15 PM on December 21, 2016 [5 favorites]


I think I've had enough crappy surrealism for one day, off to watch a few more eps of Black Mirror.

We had a debate in the Strange house over whether there was anyone in the US equivalent to a princess that could induce a reaction like that in the first episode, and decided, no, it couldn't happen here. There's no one person with the necessary profile in the national consciousness of the US.

But now we have First Creepy Daughter Lady Ivanka.
posted by T.D. Strange at 4:21 PM on December 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


“Donald was not going to like that mustache,” said one associate, who asked for anonymity to speak frankly. “I can’t think of anyone that’s really close to Donald that has a beard that he likes.”

Jason Miller, communications director has a beard. I don't know if that means Mr. Anonymous doesn't know what he is talking about or if that means Miller is "not really close" to DJT.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:27 PM on December 21, 2016


Would it be legal to pay the people who staff conventions in DC to not show up for the Inaugural Ball?

Presumably these people are temps and contractors. Surely we can make a competing bid.
posted by schmod at 4:31 PM on December 21, 2016


Jason Miller, communications director has a beard. I don't know if that means Mr. Anonymous doesn't know what he is talking about or if that means Miller is "not really close" to DJT.

Sopan Deb is all over that beat, because of course he is, clarifying that Miller has a goatee. Parscale had a ridiculous beard too.

That said, I am enjoying beardgate enormously.
posted by zachlipton at 4:33 PM on December 21, 2016 [4 favorites]


It may also just mean that Donald disapproves of Jason Miller's beard. We'll just have to see what happens to it on the 20th, I suppose.
posted by contraption at 4:33 PM on December 21, 2016


NCNAACP The Senate has adjourned. Crowd begins to chant "shame" as we leave the chamber

So a complete waste of taxpayer money as nothing got done in this special assembly.

Sopan Deb is all over that beat, because of course he is, clarifying that Miller has a goatee.

I've seen his picture. He has one of those mustache-connected-to-goatee things which I refer to as a pussy beard. It probably has a real name.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:37 PM on December 21, 2016 [5 favorites]




It probably has a real name.

I believe that is a Van Dyke
posted by soren_lorensen at 4:43 PM on December 21, 2016


He has one of those mustache-connected-to-goatee things...It probably has a real name.

I believe that is a Van Dyke


In the Van Dyke style, the mustache & goatee are not necessarily connected. I believe the proper term for the connected variant is Circle Beard.
posted by zakur at 4:49 PM on December 21, 2016


No. A Van Dyke is much more classy. The Van Dyke is unconnected so that the mustache and the small beard are separate.

OK I take it back because a quick look at wikipedia says "A Van Dyke specifically consists of any growth of both a moustache and goatee with all hair on the cheeks shaven."

Funny how much I like the unconnected vs. the connected though.

Aha! The circle beard! Yes, that makes sense.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:52 PM on December 21, 2016


Somebody found another bearded Trump adviser: Brad Parscale-- the head of his digital team. He has a straight up full beard, nothing fancy. But then Parscale is behind the scenes so I guess that is would be OK by Trump standards.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 4:56 PM on December 21, 2016


You know who else distrusted facial hair? (From 2000).
posted by Devonian at 5:06 PM on December 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


you know, I'm reading the Chernow bio of Hamilton, sorry to be a metafilter cliche, but it struck me: where in Trump's world is there an idea of honor, of idealism?

The only honor is in winning. The only ideal is to win.

I guess that's one reason why I have been so full of bitter hate. I've wondered, I don't hate Trump because he is vulgar, do I? I watch only semi-ironically a number of shows where vulgarity is celebrated. I'm--comfortable with vulgarity, in everything except where vulgarity impedes idealism.

Watching thirty-something act like children on Vanderpump Rules is gloriously entertaining and perhaps the definition of vulgarity. Sometimes I have it on background when I do other shit because, yeah, maybe I'm part of the problem, but I don't mind watching people get completely drunk and be awful to each other in small portions.

But the Trump campaign had no ideals beyond MAGA. That's why Trump can get up there and be all *I thought drain the swamp was stupid until I said a few times and saw you stupid people ate it up* Maybe one out of ten people will be like *wait* and those people may be our allies in the future, but I bet nine out of ten were like *genius! he discovered a verbal formula to MAGA!*

It's like mandatory pep rallies in high school where you had to clap for the football players who stuffed you into a locker. Why am I clapping for these people? I hate them? Oh, Making High School Great Again. Right.
posted by angrycat at 5:08 PM on December 21, 2016 [7 favorites]


Normalisation:
Backing far-right Swede, Trump proxy boycotts top Israeli official

The boycott decision was reportedly made by the whole delegation, of which Trump's representative was just one member, but (a) that just pushes the question back one stage; and (b) Becky Norton Dunlop is one of the top-listed speakers, just after Israel's Justice Minister.
posted by Joe in Australia at 5:08 PM on December 21, 2016


The only honor is in winning. The only ideal is to win.

he personifies nfl football: cheat, bad calls, deflate, cheap-shot - no prob - if you win.
posted by j_curiouser at 5:22 PM on December 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


Of we follow the "like-the-NFL" model to its conclusion, this suggests his extender base will turn on him once he's won too much and then suddenly everything will matter. As long as he's losing, he can do whatever.
posted by Joey Michaels at 5:33 PM on December 21, 2016 [1 favorite]


When you have a fairly significant portion of your electorate voting specifically to "fuck government", you have real, serious problems.

I wonder ("term limits!") where ("kick the bums out!") that ("vote for me, I'm not a politician!") came from?
posted by holgate at 5:41 PM on December 21, 2016 [2 favorites]


I was just watching some "In Memory" tribute, and was astounded to learn that Scalia died THIS YEAR. Like, this is still the same year.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 5:49 PM on December 21, 2016 [24 favorites]


Like, this is still the same year.

My god. If this time-dilation effect keeps up we'll have effectively invented immortality. This is an unexpected path to the Singularity.
posted by Rust Moranis at 5:55 PM on December 21, 2016 [22 favorites]


Also I'm not sure why Peter Watts and Todd Solondz ever decided to collaborate but I would like them to stop and to let us out please
posted by Rust Moranis at 6:11 PM on December 21, 2016 [6 favorites]


what? and have von trier finish shooting?
posted by j_curiouser at 6:15 PM on December 21, 2016 [9 favorites]


When you have a fairly significant portion of your electorate voting specifically to "fuck government", you have real, serious problems.

I'm not gonna say it was aliens media, but it was aliens media.

aannnd exactly what we're about to see in X-treme form. Republicans run amok. Oh Tom Daschle, where are you when we nee- oh that's right you sucked. Who's the good Democratic leader again?

I gotta put that in my phone, I keep forgetting it.
posted by petebest at 6:20 PM on December 21, 2016 [1 favorite]




From the press pool article,
“There are sporadic chants of ‘CNN sucks’ before Trump takes the stage, although an older man standing next to the press pen assures us, ‘We don’t really mean it.’ ”


Aw it's all in good fun! Whew, that's a load off eh?
posted by petebest at 6:45 PM on December 21, 2016 [13 favorites]


Man, that Anthony Bourdain article is THE BEST.
Bourdain also turned his ire on celebrity chef David Burke, who brought his own restaurant to the hotel after another famous chef, José Andrés, pulled out of the development last year in protest of Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric.
“So Burke’s a steaming loaf of shit, as far as I’m concerned, and feel free to quote me,” Bourdain said.

Burke did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

“It’s not helpful, that sort of thing,” Bourdain added of the chefs partnering with Trump. “I’m not asking you to start putting up barricades now, but when they come and ask you, ‘Are you with us?’ You do have an option. You can say ‘No thanks, guys. I don’t look good in a brown shirt. Makes me look a little, I don’t know, not great. It’s not slimming.’"
posted by triggerfinger at 6:46 PM on December 21, 2016 [61 favorites]


Donald Trump on Proposed Muslim Ban: ‘You Know My Plans’ "All along, I’ve been proven to be right. 100% correct"

President-elect Donald Trump on Wednesday called the recent attacks in Germany and Turkey “terrible” and suggested that he does not intend to reevaluate his plans to ban Muslims from immigrating to the United States, boasting that he had been “proven to be right.”

“You know my plans. All along, I’ve been proven to be right. 100% correct. What’s happening is disgraceful,” Trump told reporters Wednesday when asked whether the recent violence has influenced his proposed Muslim ban.
posted by futz at 6:52 PM on December 21, 2016 [8 favorites]


Wait is this one of the times we re supposed to take him symbolically or literally? I can't keep it straight.
posted by gatorae at 6:55 PM on December 21, 2016 [12 favorites]


yes he is horrible. I don't even know what to say anymore. Like, of course he's not reevaluating his plan.
posted by zutalors! at 6:55 PM on December 21, 2016 [4 favorites]


Does anyone know if there's any kind of movement to start Moral Monday chapters in other states?
posted by triggerfinger at 6:55 PM on December 21, 2016 [5 favorites]


In a recent post I was lamenting the dropoff in quality we'll have when Trump takes over from Obama. I think we'll also look back at this election as one where we elected the wrong candidate, and this election will seem like the biggest missed opportunity.

Bush winning over Gore is the current front-runner. Maybe William Jennings Bryan losing to William McKinley? Tilden "losing" to Hayes?
posted by kirkaracha at 6:58 PM on December 21, 2016 [2 favorites]


The problem is that we honestly don't know his plans, because he and/or his minions will tell any audience what they want to hear, and because that provides him plausible deniability for anything. What we do know is his choice of personnel, and they surely indicate a plan to go with far-right Islamophobic unhinged Trump policies rather than The New York times is a "great American jewel" easygoing, wants everyone to love him Trump.
posted by zachlipton at 7:06 PM on December 21, 2016 [11 favorites]


Trump appoints 'Death by China' author as head of US trade council

US President-elect Donald Trump has appointed economist Peter Navarro, an outspoken critic of China, as the head of a new national trade body.

...The presidential transition team said the appointment of Mr Navarro "demonstrates the president-elect's determination to make American manufacturing great again".


Gah. And stop with the fucking sloganeering. Stop it.
posted by futz at 7:24 PM on December 21, 2016 [3 favorites]


High School Students Are Sending Vagina-Shaped Lollipops to Donald Trump

...two intrepid high school students have taken matters into their own hands by launching a protest campaign that's entitled "Send Trump P**sy!" the Daily Dot reports. Started by Jules and Gabe, an LGBT couple, this campaign is aimed at letting President Trump know that his rhetoric, policies, and treatment of women and minority groups are indefensible. How do they duo plan to send such a message? By shipping vulva-shaped lollipops directly to Trump HQ, of course...

Those who take issue with the next Commander-in-chief can let him know by ordering one of these pops for $3.99, and with 50% of the proceeds going to Planned Parenthood...


...If p**sy lollipops aren't your thing, Jules and Gabe have included a link to Send D**ks to Donald, another protest site...
posted by futz at 7:38 PM on December 21, 2016 [11 favorites]


The most remarkable thing for me is that, even after all this, I have moderate and ostensibly liberal friends in my circle who still think Hillary and Trump were more-or-less equally evil.

Also, hello Metafilter. Long-time lurker, too angry not to participate now.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 7:47 PM on December 21, 2016 [62 favorites]


Welcome!
posted by futz at 7:54 PM on December 21, 2016


You know who else distrusted facial hair? (From 2000).

Hitler?
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 7:55 PM on December 21, 2016 [2 favorites]


Welcome thedarksideofprocyon, and yes, I have lefter-than-thou friends that are STILL posting "look how bad Hillary is/Trump won because corrupt DNC rigged primaries" garbage on FB.
posted by windbox at 7:56 PM on December 21, 2016 [4 favorites]


Quartz: Coping with narcissistic personality disorder in the White House
...You can influence him by making him feel good. There are already people like Steve Bannon who appear ready to use him for their own ends. The GOP is excited to try. Watch them, not him.

...Whenever possible, do not focus on the narcissist or give him attention. Unfortunately we can’t and shouldn’t ignore the president, but don’t circulate his tweets or laugh at him—you are enabling him and getting his word out. (I’ve done this, of course, we all have… just try to be aware.) Pay attention to your own emotions: Do you sort of enjoy his clowning? Do you enjoy the outrage? Is this kind of fun and dramatic, in a sick way? You are adding to his energy. Focus on what you can change and how you can resist, where you are. We are all called to be leaders now, in the absence of leadership.
posted by triggerfinger at 7:57 PM on December 21, 2016 [21 favorites]


this election will seem like the biggest missed opportunity

Alt-history circles will have a field day with this election. Especially 20 years from now when Clinton will be seen by almost everyone as a missed opportunity and not as a corrupt caricature. Maybe stories will be told in the Vaults about how the Fire could have been avoided, and we could have lived comfortable, boring lives on the surface if only, if only...

And, in the next year or two, maybe West Wing can get a new season to give us the parallel universe government under a liberal female President. Which will be watched by millions, and be a leading cause of depression among the millions muttering "if only, if only..."
posted by honestcoyote at 8:00 PM on December 21, 2016 [17 favorites]


Welcome!

Thanks for the warm welcome. I can only wish that I'd come during a happier time.

As for my moderate friends, it's actually fairly interesting. One of them is a disaffected liberal-turned-self-described-moderate who turned on the left because she identifies it with the worst part of tumblr she encountered - she considers the left in general pro-censorship and authoritarian - and has recently started posting things more sympathetic to the right. When I point out that conservative members of minority groups she's posted sympathetically about like Milo Yiannopoulos and Peter Thiel are not representative of ordinary LGBT+ people or their experiences and don't have the interests of less privileged LGBT+ people at heart, she points to Hillary being friends with Lena Dunham and Project Insight.

I'm not surprised by how a lot of the "stick it to the SJWs" crowd sided with Trump, on the other hand.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 8:13 PM on December 21, 2016


Fascism, xenophobia and misogyny aren't winning everywhere.

Romania Set for First Female, and First Muslim, Prime Minister

"In a surprise move, Romania’s largest political party nominated a woman from the country’s Tatar minority for prime minister on Wednesday. If she wins approval from the president and Parliament, she will be both the first Muslim and the first woman to hold the post.

The Social Democratic Party scored a resounding victory in the Dec. 11 general election, winning more than 45 percent of the vote. Together with its smaller ally, the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats, it holds a majority of the seats in Parliament."
posted by chris24 at 8:41 PM on December 21, 2016 [33 favorites]


You know how, as a consequence of the development of sophisticated firefighting techniques, we reduced the frequency of large-scale forest fires in various places around the world—but as a consequence of that, the fires that do happen are more volatile, rapidly-spreading, and larger because of an abundance of dry underbrush and other forms of fuel that would be regularly depleted in a non-human-influenced environment?

Well how about this: the vitality of international terrorism in the past couple of decades as well as political phenomena like the Tea Party and Trumpism are a consequence of the success of military and political counter-insurgency techniques developed during the 20th century. Those techniques prevented revolts and disruptions below a certain scale but caused a build-up of "dry underbrush" which the initiators of the aforementioned movements figured out how to ignite and catalyze.

Maybe that's a general reason why many currents and patterns we see appear to make little sense—because it has to be understood the way a meteorologist analyzes weather, a calculation of energy and potentials and how they interact as abstractions rather than a deterministic understanding of every incremental cause and effect. (At least I think that's how meteorology worked at some point, I don't know much about it.)

I think I just re-imagined Isaac Asimov's Psychohistory. So much for original thoughts...
posted by XMLicious at 8:50 PM on December 21, 2016 [11 favorites]


As far as literature goes, I can find some parallels of my own, none of which are especially flattering.

To sum it up, Trump strikes me as someone with the ingenuity of Napoleon, the faux-populist charisma of Buzz Windrip, and the emotional maturity and entitled attitude of Veruca Salt.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 8:57 PM on December 21, 2016 [3 favorites]


Mod note: Folks, please reload the thread to make sure what you're replying to hasn't been deleted. Thanks.
posted by restless_nomad (staff) at 9:08 PM on December 21, 2016


XMLicious:

It's difficult for me to imagine that allowing the breakout of milder uprisings/revolts/terrorism on a regular basis could prevent more virulent populism and terrorism from emerging. However, one could certainly argue that the added pressure applied to anti-establishment movements and terrorist networks has applied some kind of Darwinistic effect and forced them to become far more pernicious and resilient.
posted by prosopagnosia at 9:09 PM on December 21, 2016


Some Trump Voters Will Be ‘Pissed Off As Hell’ If He Defunds Planned Parenthood
In video recordings of the focus groups, the Trump voters opposed to defunding the family planning provider appeared surprised that Trump had committed to signing such legislation Some of them were even more surprised to realize his running mate, Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, has led the fight against Planned Parenthood and reproductive rights for half a decade.

“I’m astounded,” said one Trump supporter in Phoenix, upon hearing about Pence’s anti-abortion record. “I guess I’ve been living in a bubble. He sounds like a tyrant.”
numbers, numbers.
posted by the man of twists and turns at 9:09 PM on December 21, 2016 [35 favorites]


The most remarkable thing for me is that, even after all this, I have moderate and ostensibly liberal friends in my circle who still think Hillary and Trump were more-or-less equally evil.


It doesn't get mentioned enough, but people thought Gore and Bush were the same/equally bad.

That changed. I think the change in opinion will be even quicker this time around.
posted by asteria at 9:10 PM on December 21, 2016 [4 favorites]


“I’m astounded,” said one Trump supporter in Phoenix, upon hearing about Pence’s anti-abortion record. “I guess I’ve been living in a bubble. He sounds like a tyrant.”

If only people hadn't been force to make a snap decision in the 5 minutes before casting their ballots they might have been able to learn about their candidate's positions and make a reasoned, sound judgment! If only.
posted by Justinian at 9:16 PM on December 21, 2016 [51 favorites]


On the upside, my "independent, but I've voted Repub for decades" dad just disavowed the Republican party completely. Both he and my mother voted Hillary. My sister is beginning to follow politics and get involved for the first time, with the enthusiastic support of her (cheerfully liberal) new husband. She's been asking me for links so she can be informed.

I've been having a lot of very blunt conversations with people in my family these past few weeks, with some mixed results. I've gotten a lot of upset "but both sides" and "but it's not ALL REPUBLICANS" comments, and I've been very, very direct: I am willing to allow conservatives to save face over the right's anti-democracy attacks, but I am no longer willing to allow Republicans to do so. I've been pushing hard the point that the behavior of the Republican party has been shamefully anti-democratic and directly eroding the institutions of the nation, and tying the idea that you can't simultaneously be a patriot and support the tactics of the leadership in the Republican party pretty hard. I think it is beginning to show some traction, but we'll see.

I've had a lot of people checking in and worrying about me this month. I've been telling them, "look, the more people who go out and do something about this, the safer I feel and the more I feel like I can take breaks and take care of myself. Going to a protest, talking to someone else who is scared and doing something about it, hearing that someone I know called their state reps to chew them out up and down over some of this legislation... those things let me relax, because it reminds me it isn't just me."

I'm almost wondering if a new "What are you doing?" MeTa wouldn't be helpful.
posted by sciatrix at 9:17 PM on December 21, 2016 [42 favorites]


It doesn't get mentioned enough, but people thought Gore and Bush were the same/equally bad.

Optimistically, this election won't be remembered as a missed opportunity. Instead, it'll be like Bush V Gore, something everyone was furious about until another Democratic savior comes along ... at which point, we'll do this entire farce all over again, starting with the desire for a 'pure' third party that can erase two equally bad opponents.

I'm not yet 35, and I already feel like a goddamn Cassandra.
posted by steady-state strawberry at 9:18 PM on December 21, 2016 [16 favorites]


XMLicious: I think it's more a function of how old you are. I don't remember the 70s well, but I know about the hijackings and bombings and kidnappings and assassinations. And that countries like Spain and Greece and Portugal had actual fascists and generals in charge. Perhaps if you're American, that felt like it was happening far far away.

So I don't think "international terrorism" is that much of a newish phenomenon. What I think is newish is a collapse in civic identity in large-population countries. (Though not in small-population ones.) Noah Smith had a long set of tweets that noted how the Civil War and then WW2 were significant in integrating disparate elements of the (white) American population -- the Irish and German immigrants, then the continental Europeans from the south and east -- and that more broadly, there were "integrating institutions", whether unions or large corporate structures or political machines or whatever, that no longer exist.
posted by holgate at 9:21 PM on December 21, 2016 [5 favorites]


It doesn't get mentioned enough, but people thought Gore and Bush were the same/equally bad.

I'm still disappointed but not altogether surprised that people didn't apply that lesson this time around.

Most of the Trump supporters I know in real life are still utterly unrepentant and convinced that he's for the working man, will kick out all the Washington fat cats, build the wall, drain the swamp, et cetera et cetera. I'm not sure what, if anything, could shake them. A lot of them distrust the news, distrust education, and above all distrust anything they even think is liberal.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 9:21 PM on December 21, 2016 [6 favorites]


I'm not sure what, if anything, could shake them.

Tell them they're being conned, every single day. Give them an early out.
posted by holgate at 9:24 PM on December 21, 2016 [7 favorites]


I'm still disappointed but not altogether surprised that people didn't apply that lesson this time around.

I think part of it is that we got 16 years' worth of new voters who didn't experience Bush v. Gore firsthand.
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 9:24 PM on December 21, 2016 [8 favorites]


45 years of terrorist attacks in Europe, visualized
Terrorism across Europe has killed 10,537 people in 18,803 reported attacks – excluding those considered military tactics in war zones – between January 1970 and December 2015, according to the University of Maryland’s Global Terrorism Database (GTD).
How terrorism in the West compares to terrorism everywhere else
Since the beginning of 2015, the Middle East, Africa and Asia have seen nearly 50 times more deaths from terrorism than Europe and the Americas.
posted by kirkaracha at 9:28 PM on December 21, 2016 [2 favorites]


Tell them they're being conned, every single day.

I've tried. They won't listen to me - partly because of my age, I suspect, and partly because I'm a woman and small even for how young I am. And part of it's because of the circumstances under which I interact with them, where conversation is very tightly controlled and the mediator isn't neutral.

But I'll try again, and try harder. I'm still figuring out how he got them under his spell in the first place, and If I understand that and approach them on those terms I might be more successful.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 9:34 PM on December 21, 2016 [4 favorites]


I've tried. They won't listen to me

Keep trying and be patient. You can't really start expecting them to be able to be convinced until they or their loved ones are suffering due to his policies. Even then they will able to lean on a pre-provided alternate narrative to explain why this bad thing that Trump's doing isn't really bad or isn't really his fault, so convincing will remain an uphill battle. I do think it's worth the effort though: americans hate to be conned and scammed, despite their propensity to fall for cons and scams.
posted by Rust Moranis at 9:40 PM on December 21, 2016 [8 favorites]


CNN's got a story Trump team floats tariffs
Two sources who represent business interests in Washington tell CNN that the man in line to be White House chief of staff, Reince Preibus, has told key Washington players that one idea being debated internally is a 5% tariff on imports.

These sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the conversations with the Trump team were arranged as confidential, said the reaction was one of fierce opposition. Priebus, the sources said, was warned such a move could start trade wars, anger allies, and also hurt the new administration's effort to boost the rate of economic growth right out of the gate.
A 5% across the board tarriff is nuts and will just result in retaliatory duties on everything.
posted by zachlipton at 9:44 PM on December 21, 2016 [7 favorites]


Most of the Trump supporters I know in real life are still utterly unrepentant and convinced that he's for the working man, will kick out all the Washington fat cats, build the wall, drain the swamp, et cetera et cetera. I'm not sure what, if anything, could shake them. A lot of them distrust the news, distrust education, and above all distrust anything they even think is liberal.

They hate bankers. They hate money in politics. Liberals hate those things too so I find that a good common ground starting point. Trump is appointing the richest cabinet in history. He has at least two Goldman Sachs guys. These things are the opposite of drain the swamp.

I'd love a thread somewhere on tactics people are using when talking to others (as sciatrix mentioned), because I have some approaches I've been using that have been making me hopeful, and I'd love to talk about them but typing in this thread on my phone is just killing me.
posted by triggerfinger at 9:50 PM on December 21, 2016 [9 favorites]


A 5% across the board tarriff is nuts and will just result in retaliatory duties on everything./i>

I want to say that's the dumbest thing they could possibly do but I don't want them to see it as a challenge.

posted by Justinian at 9:51 PM on December 21, 2016 [17 favorites]


one idea being debated internally is a 5% tariff on imports.

Gives one the impression they are going to start questioning, say, gravity next. The learning curve hopefully will be overcome quickly.
posted by From Bklyn at 9:53 PM on December 21, 2016 [4 favorites]


Keep trying and be patient. You can't really start expecting them to be able to be convinced until they or their loved ones are suffering due to his policies.

Exactly. What's important is that they have someone to whom they can say "yes, I've been conned" early, not late. And as much as I want people to feel bad about being conned, having someone there means they'll feel bad without any outside interference. It's not about "I told you so". It's about an early out.
posted by holgate at 9:54 PM on December 21, 2016 [5 favorites]


According to the Trump supporters I know, they want the government run "like a business". They think Trump, as a businessman, will do just that.

And from his history he isn't a very good businessman. He thinks he is, says he is, and can convince other people he is, but he isn't.

(Part of me is still half-convinced we're living in a nightmare world created when some careless time-traveler stepped off of the path and crushed a butterfly.)
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 9:57 PM on December 21, 2016 [13 favorites]


...it's causing alarm among business interests and the pro-trade Republican establishment.

Don't worry, I hear Trump's a great negotiator. I'm sure other countries will back down when he tells them that if they raise tariffs he'll cut them out of the US market altogether.
posted by Coventry at 9:58 PM on December 21, 2016


One of the sources said he viewed the idea as a trial balloon when first raised, and considered it dead on arrival given the strong reaction in the business community -- and the known opposition to such protectionist ideas among the GOP congressional leadership.

But this source voiced new alarm Tuesday after being told by allies within the Trump transition that defending new tariffs was part of the confirmation "murder board" practice of Wilbur Ross, the President-elect's choice for commerce secretary.


Murder board, in case anyone else was wondering.
posted by Coventry at 10:12 PM on December 21, 2016


And from his history he isn't a very good businessman. He thinks he is, says he is, and can convince other people he is, but he isn't.

I suspect that most supporters wouldn't know a good businessperson from their arse if their arse was on business fire. Their sense of what "good businessing" means is drawn from SRS BSNS cat memes and the shit they see in airports and in-flight mags. And, fuck us to hell, The Apprentice, where Masters of Bugger All get to business for the cameras. This is where Tom Frank's original critique of "CEO as hero" comes in. I am not anti-entrepreneur, but I think the cultism around Businessing is mostly a cancer on society.
posted by holgate at 10:14 PM on December 21, 2016 [41 favorites]


I also blame Ayn Rand, among others.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 10:15 PM on December 21, 2016 [12 favorites]


prosopagnosia: It's difficult for me to imagine that allowing the breakout of milder uprisings/revolts/terrorism on a regular basis could prevent more virulent populism and terrorism from emerging.

I wasn't proposing that anyone should stop specific counter-insurgency activities, just pitching a framework for understanding events.

My thinking was along these lines: that the Republican Party and the broader conservative propaganda-industrial complex is probably constantly playing whack-a-mole to prevent groundswell movements on particular issues from gathering momentum and growing substantial enough to force the hand of their own elected officials or interfere with the interests who are steering the ship. Decry and stoke hysteria over "out-of-control government spending" but don't let any impetus to eliminate energy industry subsidies or enormous pork-barrel defense projects get going; invoke "think of the children!" without abetting any sentiments that would require money or political capital to be spent for the benefit of children; and in general, kneecap any collaboration or factionalism among elected officials or other political leaders that refuses to play ball with the dominant powers and kowtow to their priorities.

I would think that tamping down and discouraging things like those would over time result in a pool of potential politically-active people who repeatedly get nowhere pursuing their own priorities and are hence primed to just want to feel they've achieved progress on anything even if it's a cause their heart isn't behind, and other types of generalized political impetus. It builds up like an electrical charge, then when the Tea Party or Trumpismo comes along precipitously discharges into that outlet.

In the vein of terrorism I suppose it starts at a higher level than counter-insurgency: if you take the Middle East, during the 20th century colonialism and then further interference in the internal affairs of the resulting countries protected Western interests but prevented anything like pan-Arabism or other sort of combination that could directly challenge those interests, and counter-insurgency and other aid and influence maintains governments that are tractable to Western interests.

For example, an article I think I read because it was linked to from MeFi said that in the 1990s in Egypt while we were supporting Mubarak and his domination of the country, the Muslim Brotherhood which had been in long-term opposition to various Egyptian governments for a century or so was setting up clinics and feeding people but excluded from the established power structure in the country.

So similarly, an impetus and potential that builds up and then grounds and discharges itself in things like the Egyptian participants in Al Qaeda, Egyptian fighters who traveled to Iraq during the U.S. invasion and occupation, and the Arab Spring.

And holgate: I'm not trying to say any of it's new, but trying to explain the simultaneity and escalating scale of some of these events. I'm sure that there would be a cycle of tamping down dissent and build up of a backlash in many synchronized historical phenomena like the events of the 70s you speak of, the rise of fascism, or for example the communist revolutions and other revolutions of 1917.
posted by XMLicious at 10:16 PM on December 21, 2016 [2 favorites]


In video recordings of the focus groups, the Trump voters opposed to defunding the family planning provider appeared surprised that Trump had committed to signing such legislation

Hey, I didn't know my mom was in a focus group!

My parents don't want to talk politics with me anymore, but I don't plan on shutting up any time soon. It's actually easier now that I don't have to defend Clinton to them anymore. Now it's just, "No, really, he is that awful," and while part of me hates shaming the otherwise good people that raised me to be a pinko commie liberal, the bigger part of me wants them to come to their senses, no matter how painful it may be for them. (I don't know for sure if they voted for Trump. I begged them not to. I just know that they haaaaaated Clinton. Some questions are better left unanswered.)
posted by Ruki at 10:47 PM on December 21, 2016 [9 favorites]


yes he is horrible. I don't even know what to say anymore. Like, of course he's not reevaluating his plan.

It's wonderful. We don't even know what the plan is. It's been a ban, and a registry, and extreme vetting of Syrian refugees. He could be "100% right" about all those things or something else altogether. Or not, until whatever it is is inoperable. Before it's operable again.

FML.
posted by notyou at 10:51 PM on December 21, 2016 [3 favorites]


The Wrap continues its coverage of innaguration chaos: Trump Inauguration Panic: Mark Burnett Throws ‘Hail Mary’ Staff Shake-Up (Exclusive)
Donald Trump is so displeased with his team’s inability to lock in A-list talent for his inauguration events next month that he’s ordered a “Hail Mary” shakeup of his recruiters to try to book performers, a person familiar with the situation told TheWrap.
...
Performers who are known to have rejected requests include Elton John, country singer Garth Brooks and opera star Andrea Bocelli. According to the insider, many of those approached have said they do not want to “normalize” Trump’s presidency.
Interestingly, it seems that stars are showing more fortitude in standing up to Trump than Democrats in Congress. It's pretty impressive to see such a universal refusal.

Also fun is this perspective, pointing out that Trump boosters are so eager to pretend California doesn't exist when it comes to the popular vote, but they're desperate for Hollywood's love and approval at the inauguration.
posted by zachlipton at 10:53 PM on December 21, 2016 [37 favorites]


I lived through the European 80s and 90s when terrorists blew shit up in close proximity to me. And I also lived through the astonishing collapse of the Warsaw Pact nations one by one. I mean, there's an argument that if a state's institutions have the capacity to absorb terrorism and not be broken by it, then at some point that state's capacity will break, but I'm not sure that I buy that either. I think, bluntly, that my parents' generation, born at a point where they don't really remember the rise of fascism, has sufficient numbers that they can vote to fuck over everyone younger than them because enough has changed during their lifetimes that they don't really like on a personal level, even if that means their children have significantly greater opportunities than they did.
posted by holgate at 10:54 PM on December 21, 2016 [4 favorites]


One of the other things I've realized about the really die-hard Trumpists I know is that many of them see themselves as the "real" victims of a society that discriminates against them and their beliefs, political correctness, and job loss from immigrants and minorities (even though the real reasons are far more complex).

A lot of their media directly reinforces this (Fox, Breitbart, and Infowars, among others), gives them talking points which sound good, regardless of the actual facts, and gives them something to say in response to liberals who argue with them. At the same time, they distrust conventional news sources, isolating them to media which reinforces and amplifies their point of view. Retaliation against them, even when they provoked it (i.e, when Milo got kicked off Twitter), only reinforces their belief that they're censored and victimized by a liberal media.

(On the subject of Fox, looking at their headlines on my mobile I'm not surprised to see how quickly they've converted themselves into a full-time Trump propaganda arm, complete with headlines lionizing Trump and vaguely threatening ones aimed at his critics.)
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 10:59 PM on December 21, 2016 [13 favorites]


Wtf is an LGBT couple?

Presumably one or both of them are lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender, but they don't want to go into more details or else want to show solidarity with other gender/sexual minorities. It's not laziness on the publication's part: that's verbatim how they describe themselves on their website. They also don't seem to reveal their genders or sexual orientations anywhere, which I assume is a conscious choice. The language might be a little clunky but I think it's still a reasonable thing to say.
posted by en forme de poire at 11:31 PM on December 21, 2016 [16 favorites]


Especially 20 years from now when Clinton will be seen by almost everyone as a missed opportunity and not as a corrupt caricature. Maybe stories will be told in the Vaults about how the Fire could have been avoided, and we could have lived comfortable, boring lives on the surface if only, if only...

I was playing an old DOS game from 1994 called Superhero League of Hoboken and one of the plot points is that you're wandering around in this post-apocalyptic Northeast Corridor and then stumble upon this old maglev train system that seamlessly connects a bunch of cities in the Northeast, built under President Gore. Le giant fucking sigh -- even more poignant than I think they intended it to be.
posted by en forme de poire at 11:33 PM on December 21, 2016 [18 favorites]


...one idea being debated internally is a 5% tariff on imports. These sources... said the reaction was one of fierce opposition.

And one of his most popular campaign talking points was for THIRTY-five percent tariffs. If anyone on Team Trump thinks 5% is going to be seen as anything less than betrayal by his most Protectionist supporters, they'd have to be as dumb as The Donald. But then, that may be the only campaign promise he hasn't reversed himself on during his"I Was Only Kidding Tour".
posted by oneswellfoop at 12:32 AM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


In fairness to Trump(!), I believe the 35% was to apply to US companies that moved factories to other places. That will be another entirely different suddenly junked policy.
posted by jaduncan at 12:44 AM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


thedarksideofprocyon,

And part of it's because of the circumstances under which I interact with them, where conversation is very tightly controlled and the mediator isn't neutral.

I am confused by this part of your comment. Did I miss something? What do you mean by mediator and tightly controlled?

One of the other things I've realized about the really die-hard Trumpists I know is that many of them see themselves as the "real" victims of a society that discriminates against them and their beliefs, political correctness, and job loss from immigrants and minorities (even though the real reasons are far more complex

Yup yep and yep to your whole comment. This is not new news though. All of the things that you mentioned are some of the reasons that we have been talking about this non stop for the last year or more.
posted by futz at 12:56 AM on December 22, 2016


I am confused by this part of your comment. Did I miss something? What do you mean by mediator and tightly controlled?

I'm in a therapy group led by an avid Trump supporter, with Trump supporters making up most of it, and he alternately brings up his own politics freely and shuts down mine.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 1:04 AM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


Also, I'm wondering if there's a way to break the image they have of themselves as "victims", or at least open them to the idea that there are other people who will be much more badly hurt by Trump's policies and their suffering is important, too.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 1:15 AM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


qcubed: Those with regrets so soon... I hope the shame of their fuck-up withers them.

Personally I hope that they'll have plenty of opportunity to spread the seeds of doubt. I think that will be helpful. Trumpists are likely to listen to other Trumpists.
posted by Too-Ticky at 1:16 AM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


eww. therapy n politics don't seem quite kosher.
posted by j_curiouser at 1:17 AM on December 22, 2016 [20 favorites]


Optimistically, this election won't be remembered as a missed opportunity. Instead, it'll be like Bush V Gore, something everyone was furious about until another Democratic savior comes along ... at which point, we'll do this entire farce all over again, starting with the desire for a 'pure' third party that can erase two equally bad opponents.

We could expend effort pursuing changes to our political system to eliminate or mitigate the spoiler effect itself. Maine voted on Nov. 8 to switch to ranked-choice voting for most of its elections.

Here in NH next door, Republicans lost a Senate seat due in part to Libertarian and "Republican Freedom Caucus" candidates.

We could change things if we worked together on it; we don't actually have to put up with the Republican and Democratic Parties insisting that the entirety of everyone's efforts at participating in democracy gets funneled into their own political capital coffers.

If indeed this situation does happen again and again going forward, I hope at some point people realize that it makes much more sense to blame those outcomes on the people standing there, passing the political reins back and forth with the Republicans, and when they're in power not lifting a finger to eliminate the spoiler effect they're theoretically complaining about election after election.

One other notable side effect of putting up with a system that fundamentally works against the viability of third parties is that someone like Trump who contrives to grab the Presidential nomination of one of the two entrenched parties immediately becomes the tip of the spear for approximately half of the political machinery in the country.

(Just for the record, I have never voted for a third party candidate in a Presidential election and I phonebanked and canvassed with the Democratic combined campaigns, doing my part to both win New Hampshire's EC votes for Clinton and to deliver that Senate seat into the hands of the Democrats and achieve our first all-Democratic all-female Congressional delegation.)
posted by XMLicious at 1:28 AM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


If we follow the "like-the-NFL" model to its conclusion, this suggests his extender base will turn on him once he's won too much

Is Trump the Beeftank of politics? No skill, no nuance, no nothing except a couple of overpowered attributes that make him weirdly effective at point scoring, that few players have defenses against because of how ludicrous the attacks are? Hmmmm.
posted by Jon Mitchell at 1:35 AM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


If I could make one change to US presidential politics...well, it would be the EC. But if I could make two changes, the second would be the single transferable vote system.

Vote for who you like, and then have your vote passed to one of the major parties if you wish. At some point, one of the minor candidates might become major in a way that isn't beholden to the two major parties. Outside of that, heh, good luck with that.
posted by jaduncan at 2:14 AM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


Yeah, the parties are so thoroughly entrenched it's not even likely to be a threat to them to start working on phasing in some approach (or multiple approaches!) to eliminating the spoiler effect, starting at local or state levels. They'd still have gerrymandering and a myriad of other virtually-unassailable advantages.

I would think that just the appearance of an interest in fair play would be worth it.

Plus of course there would be the benefit of actually eliminating the spoiler effect. There was a third-party candidate running for a House seat here who got into the double digits, which made everyone worry that a split vote on the left would deliver it to the Republican incumbent, but we pulled it off.
posted by XMLicious at 3:08 AM on December 22, 2016


Well, there's not much appetite among our occupying government for pushing big, genuinely status quo improving reforms, but we could fix a lot of problems with our elections if we had proper public campaign financing and made it mandatory, with no outside, private funding and no way to donate to particular candidates, while also banning formal, organized, fundraising parties from direct participation in our election process completely to disincentivize the formation of groups involved in long term political collusion outside of governance.

Cut the problem out at the root, in other words, and restore the system to its original design. Even fascists might be able to get behind that idea, if you sell it as a purification ritual.
posted by saulgoodman at 3:25 AM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


Does anyone have a pointer to a copy of Jon Stewart making fun of George Bush's justification for his belated and ideologically inconsistent response to the financial crisis? Something along the lines of "I used to believe in Jesus, but that didn't work out. So... Hail Satan."

I have a feeling that's going to be useful footage over the next 6 months.
posted by Coventry at 3:36 AM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


Actually, my zeroth change would be actually counting the fucking paper returns when using electronic voting machines, but I'm a dreamer.
posted by jaduncan at 3:44 AM on December 22, 2016 [15 favorites]


Are we going to do a new thread soon?
posted by Coventry at 4:11 AM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


@realDonaldTrump I met some really great Air Force GENERALS and Navy ADMIRALS today, talking about airplane capability and pricing. Very impressive people!

Posted about 7:40am Eastern, so if he actually met them today, that was a little early. Maybe he's still awake from last night.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 4:48 AM on December 22, 2016


Apparently, Kellyanne "Moms shouldn't work in the White House" Conway will be working in the White House.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 4:51 AM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


“I’m astounded,” said one Trump supporter in Phoenix, upon hearing about Pence’s anti-abortion record. “I guess I’ve been living in a bubble. He sounds like a tyrant.”

There isn't a bubble thick enough. I bet this person is lying to the reporter. Republicans have been trying to defend PP for at least a generation. They're just discovering the news?

Please.
posted by zarq at 5:12 AM on December 22, 2016 [9 favorites]




eww. therapy n politics don't seem quite kosher.

See: the reason I haven't been back to my Trump-minimizing psychiatrist since the election.
posted by corb at 5:23 AM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


Donald Trump is so displeased with his team’s inability to lock in A-list talent for his inauguration events next month that he’s ordered a “Hail Mary” shakeup of his recruiters to try to book performers, a person familiar with the situation told TheWrap

Kanye was double booked?
posted by Talez at 5:28 AM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


Is it too much to hope that the inauguration bookers will end up with an A-lister who'll turn around on the day and throw blistering shade on stage?

Probably. But if I were writing the script for 2017, that'd be the opener.
posted by Devonian at 5:29 AM on December 22, 2016 [10 favorites]


I've always found The Universal Declaration of Human Rights a good template for grounding arguments or discussion and while the USA seems to be drifting or even tacking away from many of the ideals (although heavily American idyllic in influence), there is still much people of all political leaning will agree to receiving for themselves; the dignity and fairness inherent in the described rights.

It isn't just a 'link to it and win' document. It is, if you believe the points laid out in it are just, a solid foundation to build arguments upon or like a good anchorage to deploy from and hold to in rough weather.
posted by phoque at 5:34 AM on December 22, 2016 [6 favorites]


Trump : The resolution being considered at the United Nations Security Council regarding Israel should be vetoed.

As the United States has long maintained, peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians will only come through direct negotiations between the parties, and not through the imposition of terms by the United Nations.

This puts Israel in a very poor negotiating position and is extremely unfair to all Israelis.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 5:52 AM on December 22, 2016


Trump's fucking delusional. His idea of peace isn't peace. It's an occupation.
posted by Talez at 6:07 AM on December 22, 2016 [6 favorites]



Also, I'm wondering if there's a way to break the image they have of themselves as "victims", or at least open them to the idea that there are other people who will be much more badly hurt by Trump's policies and their suffering is important, too.


My theory is that this a lot of people have personal mythologies that are way out of whack. Like, I know that in psychotherapy personal myths are supposed to be a good thing, but what I see around me are a lot of people who think they should be destined to be rich, famous and powerful and when they realize deep down that they're not and won't ever be, they become lost and wide open to false explanations for why they aren't an ubermensch already: conspiracy theories, victimhood, hatred of the other. Half the country is in a state of existential crisis.
posted by soren_lorensen at 6:12 AM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


Is it too much to hope that the inauguration bookers will end up with an A-lister who'll turn around on the day and throw blistering shade on stage?

Probably. But if I were writing the script for 2017, that'd be the opener.


My version has this as his inaugural selection, 'cause it just seems to fit the guy.
posted by gusottertrout at 6:13 AM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


If I were in a therapy group that argued about politics - especially if they were pro-Trump - I'd be finding another group doublequick. Taking care of oneself is critical and that stuff is toxic. Heck if I was in a biker gang that was pro-anything-Trump I'd be riding off, pronto.
posted by petebest at 6:14 AM on December 22, 2016 [16 favorites]


Oh hey btw, should we do an IRL about the Women's March on Washington on the 21st?
posted by soren_lorensen at 6:16 AM on December 22, 2016 [8 favorites]


There isn't a bubble thick enough. I bet this person is lying to the reporter. Republicans have been trying to defend defund PP for at least a generation. They're just discovering the news?

FTFMe.
posted by zarq at 6:20 AM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


“I’m astounded,” said one Trump supporter in Phoenix, upon hearing about Pence’s anti-abortion record. “I guess I’ve been living in a bubble. He sounds like a tyrant.”

There isn't a bubble thick enough. I bet this person is lying to the reporter.


There really are people who are against abortion on demand and against putting women in jail for miscarriages. It's not the most logically or morally consistent stance, but they're out there.
posted by Etrigan at 6:21 AM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


eww. therapy n politics don't seem quite kosher.

My running partner went to her therapist right after the election and wanted to talk about her election related anxieties and fears. Her therapist went into a whole "but Hillary is just as bad Bernie Bernie Bernie thing. " She shut that right down and then found another therapist (which was also traumatic as anyone who has switched long-term therapists can tell you).
posted by Joey Michaels at 6:24 AM on December 22, 2016 [15 favorites]


It's an Amazon prime add-on channel I think ?
posted by ian1977 at 6:26 AM on December 22, 2016 [10 favorites]


Abortion on demand?

Yes?
posted by soren_lorensen at 6:26 AM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


Abortion on demand?

Really? You've never heard that term? It's pretty common. If you dislike it, feel free to substitute "adequate women's health services, up to and including the termination of pregnancy for nonmedical reasons".
posted by Etrigan at 6:31 AM on December 22, 2016 [7 favorites]


Or "women's health"?
posted by petebest at 6:33 AM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


Oh hey btw, should we do an IRL about the Women's March on Washington on the 21st?

Yes please! I'll be going come hell or high water. I have lodging in Alexandria and use of a car while there worked out; I just need to work out how long I'll be in DC, whether my partner can get any time off to join me, and how I'm getting there.
posted by sciatrix at 6:38 AM on December 22, 2016 [7 favorites]


Trump : The resolution being considered at the United Nations Security Council regarding Israel should be vetoed.

As the United States has long maintained, peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians will only come through direct negotiations between the parties, and not through the imposition of terms by the United Nations.

This puts Israel in a very poor negotiating position and is extremely unfair to all Israelis.


The resolution is a almost certainly going to be a non-starter as far as the US is concerned. President Obama vetoed the last resolution regarding the settlements back in 2011.

The backstory (I'm filling this background in for anyone who is interested in knowing the details, but would like to remind everyone that the mods do not want us delving into I/P in this thread.) : Palestinians have been circulating their own draft for the last two weeks, trying to get a Security Council country to sign on. Egypt apparently altered the Palestinians' text to tone it down before circulating their version. The text of the current Egyptian draft is here. More details here. The Israelis say they were taken by surprise because Netanyahu has a decent relationship with Sissi.

The US is unlikely to allow a resolution through that agrees with the 1967 borders, not because of the Settlements, but because such a resolution would hand the Golan Heights and East Jerusalem to the Palestinians without negotiation. Two parts of the resolution also seem unlikely to pass US inspection: the part which calls upon the international community to distinguish between Israel and the Settlements, and the section which calls for the Arab Peace Initiative. Recognizing the Peace Initiative would mean would replacing UN resolutions 242 and 338, which called for bilateral negotiations.

Anyone who has been paying attention to the peace process knows this. Trump is calling for something that he knows the President is already going to do, so he can claim it was his idea afterwards.
posted by zarq at 6:38 AM on December 22, 2016 [12 favorites]


Or "women's health"?

That's not really how they think of it, but sure. Whatever ends this derail about how anyone who disagrees with us is a liar.
posted by Etrigan at 6:39 AM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


Video: Fort Worth mom arrested after calling for help: "The video was posted on Facebook Wednesday evening. It shows a woman named Jacqueline Craig explaining to an officer that she called police because a man had tried to choke her young son for littering.

“Why don’t you teach your son not to litter?” the officer replies.

“He can’t prove to me that my son littered. But it doesn’t matter if he did or didn’t. He didn’t have to put his hands on him,” Craig says.

“Why not?” the officer asks."
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 6:43 AM on December 22, 2016 [21 favorites]


Thanks zarq! I was wondering if this was a thing they were trying ro push through before Trump took office.
posted by corb at 6:46 AM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


'Or "women's health"?'

That's not really how they think of it


But they should, right?
posted by petebest at 6:55 AM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


Politico: What it takes to get a meeting with Trump: Apparently, it’s really easy. Featuring this gem:
Media widely reported Trump met with Barry Switzer, the former University of Oklahoma and Dallas Cowboys coach who has known Trump for decades. But Switzer said he was shopping with his wife and daughter on Fifth Avenue and decided to walk into the Trump Tower lobby after seeing the Naked Cowboy. He had no meeting scheduled.

"All the media people said, 'Coach what are you doing here,'" Switzer said in an interview. "I told them I was here to see the president like everyone else."

Switzer said he instead went upstairs in Trump Tower, bought a coffee at Starbucks and came back downstairs.

"I told the reporters I had a great visit, and that we were going to make the wishbone great again," he said. "I told them I was going to be Secretary of Offense and that Trump knew how to run the ball down the field."

"Then I went back to my hotel and laughed my ass off," he said, still laughing this week. "It went everywhere. Everyone believed it. I had all these calls, but I was just jerking people around."
posted by zachlipton at 6:57 AM on December 22, 2016 [19 favorites]


Thanks zarq! I was wondering if this was a thing they were trying ro push through before Trump took office.

No problem!

It might be! It's well known that President Obama does not like the settlements and sees them as a roadblock to peace. His attitude on the subject is no different than that of recent past Presidents. Plus, the US has only used the Security Council veto once in the last eight years -- back in 2011 (as I mentioned above) -- on a resolution which would have condemned Israeli settlements in the Occupied Territories. Maybe they're betting that the President is sick and tired of Israel's intransigence. But it just doesn't seem likely that he'd let this one pass.
posted by zarq at 6:58 AM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


“Why not?” the officer asks."

It's like how Stanford banned hard liquor in the wake of Brock Turner.

I mean, you think you know what the problem is and you think you’re fixing it but you're wayyyyyyyyyyyy off.
posted by Talez at 7:04 AM on December 22, 2016 [11 favorites]


Texas cops have always been assholes. This isn't a new Trumpocalypse thing.
posted by zarq at 7:07 AM on December 22, 2016


"It went everywhere. Everyone believed it. I had all these calls, but I was just jerking people around."

It just occurred to me that Trump's shunning of the press pool means that anyone and their mom will be able to float stories like this and it will be neigh impossible to fact check without substantial effort. Which will be used to reinforce the idea that the press is untrustworthy every time they get something wrong.
posted by C'est la D.C. at 7:08 AM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


'Or "women's health"?'

That's not really how they think of it

But they should, right?


I would argue that they shouldn't, because then you get into the realm of whether an abortion is necessary for the woman's health, rather than it being none of anyone's fucking business. They think that the "rape, incest, life of the mother" exceptions cover "health".
posted by Etrigan at 7:13 AM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]




Low-flying military planes and helicopters spotted over midtown Manhattan last week turned out to be part of a training exercise on safely airlifting the next president out of New York City, law enforcement sources say.

Looks like John Carpenter was only off by 20 years.
posted by zombieflanders at 7:26 AM on December 22, 2016 [8 favorites]


Yeah I think this Israel tweet is like the Boeing tweet - taking credit for something that is already happening, so he can pat himself on the back later.

I do worry that the Left's response to the Friedman appointment is coming at this from the wrong angle. Ambassadors don't have all that much power, and Netanyahu already doesn't listen to the religious crazies on his own turf (even the ones in his own government) - he's not going to do something he doesn't think is in Israel's best interests because of our ambassador. But Friedman advocating what he believes is pro-Israel on behalf of America? That's not the ambassador's role. Ambassadors are supposed to convey what our country thinks is in OUR best interests to the country they're serving in. Destabilizing the region further is not good for America, regardless of what it does to or for Israel.

We should be approaching this the way we do all the other appointments: Friedman is inexperienced and unfit for the role of being a diplomat, and the United States can't afford to put someone incompetent into a crucial role in government.
posted by Mchelly at 7:26 AM on December 22, 2016 [5 favorites]




Yeah, the parties are so thoroughly entrenched it's not even likely to be a threat to them to start working on phasing in some approach (or multiple approaches!) to eliminating the spoiler effect, starting at local or state levels. They'd still have gerrymandering and a myriad of other virtually-unassailable advantages.

Those "unassailable" advantages are small potatoes that only matter because the minor parties end up self-marginalizing by taking weirdo unpopular positions or trapped in a vicious cycle where not many people want to vote for them, so candidates who aren't numpties like Jill Stein or Ron Paul or Cynthia McKinney don't want to be part of the party even if they agree with some of their positions because they'd like to win office, so the candidates end up being numpties like Stein or Paul or McKinney that hardly anyone wants to vote for, so candidates who aren't numpties...
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 7:30 AM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


Obama's attempts to Trump-proof America bum me out. Scotch-taping the country together will not save it from a horde of marauding weasels.
posted by prefpara at 7:34 AM on December 22, 2016 [8 favorites]


Scotch-taping the country together will not save it from a horde of marauding weasels.

Ah, but when was the last time you saw a weasel stealing tape?
posted by Etrigan at 7:37 AM on December 22, 2016 [8 favorites]


Exclusive: Dept of Things PEOTUS Won’t Like
Mark Ross, a concert promoter and the son of the late Time Warner CEO Steve Ross, is in the process of putting together a large-scale concert called “We the People” to directly compete with Donald Trump’s inauguration. The organizers are looking to hold the event in Miami on Inauguration Day. “The talent is banging on our doors to do this,” according to a source familiar with the planning, although not a single act has been revealed as of yet. Ross is in the midst of lining up funding, according to a source.
posted by kirkaracha at 7:39 AM on December 22, 2016 [49 favorites]




Yessss. This is a grand idea. Stream it Live on YouTube so everyone can see how many people are watching in real time. That'll make it extra hilarious when Trump tries to claim that it was just a few losers tuning in.
posted by soren_lorensen at 7:41 AM on December 22, 2016 [11 favorites]


Obama's attempts to Trump-proof America bum me out. Scotch-taping the country together will not save it from a horde of marauding weasels.

I like it. At least he's doing something. At this point I'm actively rooting for him to outright install Garland in SCOTUS as a final fuck you.
posted by Mchelly at 7:42 AM on December 22, 2016 [17 favorites]


> Ross is in the midst of lining up funding, according to a source.

Shut up and take all of my moneys.
posted by tonycpsu at 7:46 AM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


I mean, why not? Let the current SCOTUS decide if he's allowed to or not.
posted by Mchelly at 7:46 AM on December 22, 2016 [7 favorites]


Obama's attempts to Trump-proof America bum me out. Scotch-taping the country together will not save it from a horde of marauding weasels.

This is honestly a sentiment that pisses me off about the left. Sure, scotch-taping the country together won't fix things. Obama isn't going to single-handedly save the nation from the horrible place it's wound up in. But goddammit, it might help. It will cut off one more avenue of terrible resource available to Trump as he tries to attack our Muslim neighbors, and I know this is making some of my allies feel just a hair safer than they did with that Sword of Damocles hanging over them and Trump in line to take the rope.

It's not perfect. That doesn't mean it's not still valuable or even still worth celebrating. Imperfect victories are still victories.
posted by sciatrix at 7:47 AM on December 22, 2016 [62 favorites]


and the United States can't afford to put someone incompetent into a crucial role in government.

I think that ship sailed on November 8. The question now is how to minimize the damage.
posted by zarq at 7:47 AM on December 22, 2016 [13 favorites]


I didn't mean he shouldn't do it or it's not a good thing. It just makes me aware of how little power he has to protect us from what Trump can do to tear everything down.
posted by prefpara at 7:49 AM on December 22, 2016


.@realDonaldTrump received daily intelligence briefing today, his spokesman says, making it the second day in a row he's received PDB. (cite)

Hooray?
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:50 AM on December 22, 2016 [9 favorites]


I'm glad Obama killed it. But seriously- it would be nice if someone paid attention to people with warnings in the first place when they're like "A list of Muslims! What could possibly go wrong?" and our answer is "EVERYTHING." Politicians need to stop assuming everything they create will only be used by beneficent rulers.
posted by corb at 7:51 AM on December 22, 2016 [17 favorites]


Obama installs Garland, the court is deadlocked at 4-4 on whether it should be allowed. Trump attempts to nominate someone to fill the seat Garland is already filling. Garland becomes an Anti-Justice as two Supreme Courts emerge.
posted by drezdn at 7:53 AM on December 22, 2016 [12 favorites]


Hooray?

Maybe we can use positive reinforcement on Trump to get him to do good things like pay attention to intelligence reports.
posted by drezdn at 7:59 AM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


Maybe we can use positive reinforcement on Trump to get him to do good things like pay attention to intelligence reports.

I'm skeptical. I get the impulse, but I also think that that's the impulse that has made Democrats collaborate with obstructionist Republicans, which has allowed them to overhaul and founder our democracy. I no longer believe that politics of carrots will get us anywhere--until we are at a place of safety again, there need to be sticks and consequences for poor actions. And I worry about positive reinforcement and false hope undercutting our motivation to make damn sure that he is not capable of destroying the country more.
posted by sciatrix at 8:03 AM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


Frankly I'd rather he not receive those briefings. God only knows how many CIA assets and case officers will be outed and killed by his big mouth.
posted by ocschwar at 8:04 AM on December 22, 2016 [13 favorites]


Maybe we can use positive reinforcement on Trump

Except that that's pretty much the definition of what I thought we were fighting against - praising a mediocre white man for doing a third of the work anyone else needs to do to be seen as baseline competent.
posted by Mchelly at 8:07 AM on December 22, 2016 [20 favorites]


But if he ignores the briefings, then we have the makings of another 9-11 on our hands. This is a Catch-22 in the most literal sense.
posted by C'est la D.C. at 8:07 AM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


I think that ship sailed on November 8.

What happened on November 8? I haven't been following the news
posted by beerperson at 8:08 AM on December 22, 2016 [7 favorites]


What happened on November 8? I haven't been following the news

we slipped into an alternative timeline where everything is inexplicably worse
posted by XtinaS at 8:10 AM on December 22, 2016 [16 favorites]


I'm glad Obama killed it. But seriously- it would be nice if someone paid attention to people with warnings in the first place when they're like "A list of Muslims! What could possibly go wrong?" and our answer is "EVERYTHING." Politicians need to stop assuming everything they create will only be used by beneficent rulers.

You and I were chatting about this earlier, and I was also talking to my dad about it the other night, and you know--I think I get why conservatives are worried about this. I think now would be a great time to tackle this. But I think the reason liberals have supported the power creep of the executive branch is because we've had eight years of the legislative branch doing its level best to completely erase our voices, our interests, and even our ability to participate in the democratic process. Remember, that's been a political reality for my entire adult voting life, and honestly even well before that.

So the impulse for liberals, who often feel like the President is the only office they can directly influence--and part of that is a liberal failing, I might add, a failing of only paying attention to the presidential elections--but the impulse for liberals is to think "well, the federal government is my only protection from a hostile and vengeful state, and the federal legislative branch is just as hostile and cares nothing about me."

I think that now is probably a great time for conservatives concerned about power grabs by the executive branch to do something about that, because I can see a lot of potential political will for a variety of reasons that can be harnessed right now. But. At the same time, those curbs must come alongside curbs at the levels of the legislative branch that strengthen the ability of people to feel represented by those branches. It cannot be a case of 'ugh, NOW we limit the president' when many liberals--including people like me who are directly affected by the attacks pushed by conservative legislators--feel desperately that their only protection from hostile legislation designed to allow them to be harassed out of their communities comes from Presidential executive orders during the odd liberal administration.
posted by sciatrix at 8:10 AM on December 22, 2016 [9 favorites]


But if he ignores the briefings, then we have the makings of another 9-11 on our hands. This is a Catch-22 in the most literal sense.


If he lets Mattis be the de-facto president, we'll be ok.
posted by ocschwar at 8:10 AM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


Incidentally, people wanted a space to talk about tangible action, talking points that work to change minds, and useful tactics when pushing conservatives in their lives? Welcome to Moral Metafilter.
posted by sciatrix at 8:12 AM on December 22, 2016 [6 favorites]


Trump Christmas Carols
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:14 AM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


Obama installs Garland, the court is deadlocked at 4-4 on whether it should be allowed.

That's okay, Garland will pull a Scalia/Thomas and refuse to recuse himself from the decision on his own appointment and cast the deciding vote allowing him to stay.
posted by gusottertrout at 8:21 AM on December 22, 2016 [10 favorites]


Video: Fort Worth mom arrested after calling for help:

@realDonaldTrump: Family of litterbugs, real losers, force IMPRESSIVE police officer to arrest them. LAW & ORDER not Obama's priority. Sad! [fake]
posted by Rykey at 8:22 AM on December 22, 2016


> But I think the reason liberals have supported the power creep of the executive branch

Let me stop you right there to point out that this isn't even "power creep", it's just using executive authority that has always been there. Obama was hesitant to use it much throughout his first term and even into his second because he was trying to work with Republicans. Once he became the last person in the United States to realize that wasn't going to happen, he started using his authority to get things done. If Congress doesn't like what he's doing, or thinks he's abusing his authority, they can use the courts, or they can write legislation to stop it. This tug-of-war is nothing new, so I think even granting that Obama's somehow escalated the use of executive power is conceding far too much.
posted by tonycpsu at 8:24 AM on December 22, 2016 [15 favorites]


It's worth Obama doing everything he can to close things down that might be abused, even if they can be opened up again by the fuckferrets. The chances of the new administration bogging down in internecine warfare and gross incompetence at governance are not negligable, and heaping more stuff on their plate ahead of time is a good thing. Running interference and playing for time? Yeah, I'll take that.
posted by Devonian at 8:26 AM on December 22, 2016 [23 favorites]


[LA Times] By removing a single word from legislation governing the military, Congress has laid the groundwork for both a major shift in U.S. nuclear defense doctrine and a costly effort to field space-based weaponry.
posted by rewil at 8:28 AM on December 22, 2016




Obama dismantling NSEERS is huge. This is a tool the incoming administration was counting on using (as we saw when we learned Kris Kobach doesn't know how to put documents in a fucking file folder). Sure they will undoubtedly find other ways to harass and disenfranchise American Muslims, but this is something we've been specifically asking for and we got it. I don't know. It means a lot to me.
posted by sunset in snow country at 8:30 AM on December 22, 2016 [39 favorites]


This narrative that there's some sort of "power creep" of one branch or another, or that we have "activist judges" is a Republican narrative that has been pushed since the Reagan years. Conservative politicians seemingly love to complain that they aren't being allowed to do what American voters ask them to, because other elected or appointed officials are somehow bypassing the Democratic process.

This ignores the fact that the President was elected. It's an attempt to de-ligitimize him. It also ignores the fact that many judges are elected, too, for the same reason. And it pushes a profound ignorance of how our government and the democratic process works. We have a judicial branch precisely because our founders wanted to make sure Congress doesn't put forth terrible laws.

Most Conservative tactics over the last 30 years have been aimed at either obstructing the way our government functions, fomenting distrust of government, or claiming that branches of government that are doing things they disagree with are destroying democracy.

It's all an endless stream of bullshit that needs to be called out and countered.
posted by zarq at 8:32 AM on December 22, 2016 [13 favorites]


LOL... Trump doesn't want big stars at his Inaugural Party, Anyway [TMZ] That would be "too over the top."

Sour grapes much?
posted by Mchelly at 8:34 AM on December 22, 2016 [10 favorites]


Obama must also be aware that dismantling NSEERS is an avenue the Republicans are going to use to attack him, especially if there's any action against Americans they can spin as being "due" to not having this program. That isn't to say Obama isn't completely right in getting rid of it, but they'll still try to spin it to damage his legacy and the Democrats, 'cause that's what they do.
posted by gusottertrout at 8:34 AM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


"Too over the top." Because Trump is all about understated elegance.
posted by tonycpsu at 8:37 AM on December 22, 2016 [14 favorites]


Jewish family fears for safety after school cancels 'A Christmas Carol' show: Report: Hempfield School District denies that a complaint about the line "God bless us, every one!" prompted cancellation of the fifth grade performance in Centerville Elementary School.

The district says the decision was due to the time the non-curricular event required.

But a report on Lancaster Online says a Jewish family blamed for complaining about the Charles Dickens play has left the county in fear for their safety, after reader comments on the story.

The report has reached national media outlets including Fox News and Breitbart News Network.

A Fox News opinion piece by Tom Kramer says "I'm afraid Tiny Tim's goose has been cooked by the Ghost of Christmas Intolerance. Bah, humbug indeed."

The family told LNP they didn't complain about the play, but only asked for their child to be excused from the performance, and the request was granted.

posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:40 AM on December 22, 2016 [15 favorites]


Obama must also be aware that dismantling NSEERS is an avenue the Republicans are going to use to attack him

In a month Obama will be a private citizen and how unpopular he is among political creatures won't matter.
posted by jackbishop at 8:43 AM on December 22, 2016 [13 favorites]



Question about the dismantling of NSEERS because I don't know how this works. How is it actually dismantled? Do they take out the structure? Get rid of records? How does what he's doing now stop Donald from just reversing it when he gets in by saying "NSEERS it's back on!"
posted by Jalliah at 8:49 AM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


I think that now is probably a great time for conservatives concerned about power grabs by the executive branch to do something about that, because I can see a lot of potential political will for a variety of reasons that can be harnessed right now. But. At the same time, those curbs must come alongside curbs at the levels of the legislative branch that strengthen the ability of people to feel represented by those branches.

You are entirely right, I think, in kind of why this - I don't feel like creating a spreadsheet of the many ways executive power has or has not expanded or been used, because that's honestly not the interesting/useful point of the discussion, so let's say tolerance of power grabs by the executive - has kind of been created and flourished, and I think you make a valuable point about how things that happen over someone's political life are kind of centered for good reason, which is a point I hadn't really considered - my baseline is Clinton, you know, so any expansion after that is intolerable for me, but I may not be thinking clearly on what his expansions were.

But this is I think kind of the problem with the - I want to say the bipartisan two-different-thing compromise? And it's not that that kind of thing is a bad idea, or we shouldn't be able to say "I'll give you this for that", because we absolutely should and I think it would make legislation much better. But the problem is kind of how legislation works in an era of unprecedented (and often justifiable) distrust.

So because of our system of checks and balances (at least in a rough way), Congress and the Supreme Court are supposed to be checks on the President, the Supreme Court is supposed to be a check on Congress and the President, who are both supposed to be a check on the Supreme Court. So in a normal time - if we were in a normal time, which I sadly know we're not - we wouldn't even begin to expect Congress to legislatively limit its own power. We would expect the Supreme Court to do its job and limit Congress. It hasn't been, and some of that is because the Supreme Court mechanism is broken.* The Supreme Court chooses which cases it hears, and it often chooses not to hear cases that the judges - who do all have Ways They Think The Country Should Run - aren't sure they can win in the moment. Which leaves a fucking lot of laws and practices without Constitutional review.

But so it's a hard sell, when you're saying "Hey, let's limit the power of the people you can generally reliably elect, while relying on the broken section to limit the power of the people we can reliably elect." If you wait until everything's fixed first, you will be waiting forever - but in a system without trust, you can't trust people who say they'll definitely fix their own problem next week if you fix their problem today.

What's the answer? I genuinely don't know. I think at some point we have to start working on the fixes we can win, and piece by piece start restoring the whole broken system. But I do understand that any way you turn in order to fix that broken system is going to be a focal point for "Why that first?"

*whether controlled by liberals or conservatives, for the love of God I can think of nothing less useful than arguing about who the activist judges Really Are.
posted by corb at 8:49 AM on December 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


@realDonaldTrump
Someone incorrectly stated that the phrase "DRAIN THE SWAMP" was no longer being used by me. Actually, we will always be trying to DTS.

You keep using that word, I do not think it means what you think it means...
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 8:50 AM on December 22, 2016 [6 favorites]


OK, I'm done here.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:52 AM on December 22, 2016 [12 favorites]



What's the answer?


Stop voting for people whose stated mission is to run the government so badly that we'll have no choice but to destroy it completely?
posted by soren_lorensen at 8:54 AM on December 22, 2016 [8 favorites]


Must have just had his Wheaties:

@realDonaldTrump
The United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes

posted by RobotVoodooPower at 8:55 AM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


That "someone" was Newt Gingrich, and he probably said it as cover because it's obvious to anyone with a working brain that _rump's appointments show clearly that he isn't really "draining the swamp."
posted by zakur at 8:56 AM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


Whoever said Trump thinks he's in the 1970s and wishing it were the 1950s was right.
posted by FelliniBlank at 8:58 AM on December 22, 2016 [13 favorites]


I feel like Trump is doing every possible thing to make it clear he is unfit to take the oath of office, and just nobody is taking the bait.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:59 AM on December 22, 2016 [48 favorites]


Nahh, reload from save game. The barbarians keep destroying my tanks and all the squares around my cities are tundra.
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 8:59 AM on December 22, 2016 [8 favorites]


I feel like Trump is doing every possible thing to make it clear he is unfit to take the oath of office, and just nobody is taking the bait.

Blink twice if you don't want to be President, Donald.
posted by soren_lorensen at 9:00 AM on December 22, 2016 [24 favorites]


It's like those people who go through adult life listening to only the music they liked in high school and college.
posted by FelliniBlank at 9:00 AM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


I think he is at a minimum exploring whether there is ANY limit to what he can say and do. So far, no.
posted by prefpara at 9:01 AM on December 22, 2016 [13 favorites]


I've been saving one last "can't even" for just the right time.

@realDonaldTrump
The United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes


Aaaand it's gone.
posted by diogenes at 9:03 AM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


The "Deploraball" - the one that sold tickets for Clarendon Ballroom without actually having a contract with the venue - has found a location: the National Press Club
posted by everybody had matching towels at 9:03 AM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


well, we had a pretty okay run.

[footage not found]
posted by beerperson at 9:05 AM on December 22, 2016 [6 favorites]


"Mein Führer! I can walk!"
posted by kirkaracha at 9:05 AM on December 22, 2016 [13 favorites]


Awful as it is to contemplate I think there might be some form of repercussions if a person he attacked on Twitter was actually killed. Just an injury or assault wouldn't do it though and I don't think that the repercussions of a Twitter-inspired assassination would even be enough to remove him from office. Maybe just a tepidly bipartisan coordinated chiding?
posted by Rust Moranis at 9:06 AM on December 22, 2016




Probably just a holiday thing, though. I mean, who doesn't get all wistful and nostalgic for good old-fashioned nuclear arms race brinksmanship at this most wonderful time of the year?
posted by FelliniBlank at 9:07 AM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


I think there might be some form of repercussions if a person he attacked on Twitter was actually killed.

Maybe, but it only reaches 'maybe' if they're white.
posted by mordax at 9:07 AM on December 22, 2016 [6 favorites]


well, we had a pretty okay run.

Nobody knew the Great Filter would be orange.
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 9:09 AM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


The "Deploraball" - the one that sold tickets for Clarendon Ballroom without actually having a contract with the venue - has found a location: the National Press Club

Headline title: "Sold Out Pro-Trump 'Deploraball' Party Will Happen At National Press Club" Not the only thing that's sold out.
posted by mochapickle at 9:10 AM on December 22, 2016 [6 favorites]


Newt: "I goofed. Draining the swamp is in, @realDonaldTrump is going to do it, and the alligators should be worried. #DTS bit.ly/2i5QMjZ"

There's a video too.
posted by zachlipton at 9:13 AM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


God I almost tweeted at Trump that not one tear would be shed at his death. That nuke tweet FUUUUUUUUUUUUU
posted by angrycat at 9:14 AM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]




@realDonaldTrump
The United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes


A surprise to no one that "leading by example" is not his first priority.

Or even a concept he understands.
posted by zarq at 9:18 AM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


Does he know we already have enough nukes to nuke the whole world over?
posted by corb at 9:20 AM on December 22, 2016 [12 favorites]


Does he know we already have enough nukes to nuke the whole world over?

More, bigger, gold-plated-er.
posted by FelliniBlank at 9:21 AM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


I will bet cash money that he knows less about nuclear arms controls than is contained in the dialog of the 1998 Playstation game Metal Gear Solid.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 9:21 AM on December 22, 2016 [25 favorites]


Sarah Kendzior: Compare Trump and Putin statements on nukes, both delivered within last 24 hours.

I was wondering why he decided to tweet about nukes seemingly out of the blue...
posted by diogenes at 9:24 AM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


1) This is awful and there's nothing good that can come of it

2) Then again, if he's really looking to start a trade war with China, this is the only possible card he has left to play to keep them from attacking us first when they call in their debt and he tries to make a "deal."

3) See #1.
posted by Mchelly at 9:24 AM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]



Sarah Kendzior: Compare Trump and Putin statements on nukes, both delivered within last 24 hours.


My first thought on reading his tweet was a bunch of swear words. My second thought was, "Putin must have said or done something about nuclear weapons.'
Which me, being of average intelligence, is really just an indication of that state that America is in right now, that in order to explain Trump one of the first and automatic gotos is now checking what Putin is up to.
posted by Jalliah at 9:30 AM on December 22, 2016 [7 favorites]


A few years after this strip appeared, Breathed ran a story arc in which Donald Trump's brain was transplanted into Bill the Cat.

Disturbingly prescient.
posted by zarq at 9:31 AM on December 22, 2016 [6 favorites]


One of the myriad back-of-my-mind worries is that real US anti-missile shield capabilities are much stronger than the limited capabilities reported to the public, and that once Trump finds out he'll completely fail to understand the hundreds of reasons you'd keep that secret and not go swaggering around acting invincible.
posted by jason_steakums at 9:34 AM on December 22, 2016 [6 favorites]


[one of the]...worries is that real US anti-missile shield capabilities are much stronger than the limited capabilities reported to the public

Vanishingly unlikely. MDA guys are so starved-for-success, they already boast everyday that goes by when they don't literally shit their own pants.

If you want to see a successful middle-class jobs program, pick apart the MDA. The twist being, "the job is to fritter away dollars on physically and mathematically impossible technology."
posted by j_curiouser at 9:44 AM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


Trump is clearly embracing Nixon's madman theory of foreign policy, with the exception that he is actually a full-blown madman, and he's only unconsciously adopting the theory, and what's more, it's also his theory of domestic policy. (Nixon was a madman, sure, of a sort, but at least he knowingly adopting the theory).
posted by dis_integration at 9:45 AM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


One of the myriad back-of-my-mind worries is that real US anti-missile shield capabilities are much stronger than the limited capabilities reported to the public, and that once Trump finds out he'll completely fail to understand the hundreds of reasons you'd keep that secret and not go swaggering around acting invincible.

Terry Pratchett on the utility of magic armor: "Many an ancient lord's last words had been, 'You can't kill me because I've got magic aaargh.'"
posted by zarq at 9:46 AM on December 22, 2016 [32 favorites]


I will bet cash money that he knows less about nuclear arms controls than is contained in the dialog of the 1998 Playstation game Metal Gear Solid.

@realDonaldTrump
Clumsy Solid Snake claims he is a clone of my friend and American hero, Big Boss. Wrong, I have good sources that have seen Snake's real birth certificate.

[obviously fake]
posted by FJT at 9:50 AM on December 22, 2016 [8 favorites]


Unfortunately, if there are secret weapons waiting to be revealed to Trump, they're probably more likely to be offensive in nature due to longstanding military doctrine around the conduct of war. Think of things like the stealth bombers whose primary goal has been to defeat high end air defense systems during a nuclear war.
posted by feloniousmonk at 9:55 AM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


Imagining Trump doing everyday Presidential activities gives me a headache.

Am wondering if the Democratic Party is really in a circular firing squad mode, or more of a circular paper cut squad mode.
posted by ZeusHumms at 10:06 AM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


If I were in a therapy group that argued about politics - especially if they were pro-Trump - I'd be finding another group doublequick.

Exactly why is complicated, but unfortunately I don't have any choice.

I also wonder how we can get disaffected people back on our side - there are a lot of "both sides are awful" people (which is a problem in its own right) and hopefully a few will come to their senses. I've been working on the ones I know, but they're very cynical as a group and only expected the worst from both sides, and some are still convinced Hillary was as bad as Trump as far as enriching her personal friends and harassing people she didn't like.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 10:12 AM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]




until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes

Best way to get "the world" to "come to its senses," of course, is to engage in arms-race-inducing rhetoric and policy.
posted by Rykey at 10:16 AM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


Today's "can't unsee" phrase: cattle ejaculators.
posted by zarq at 10:20 AM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


JetBlue Kicks Passengers Off Flight After Ivanka Trump Incident

Frankly, these people shouldn't be out in public without receiving the scorn they deserve. Watching Trump going out to dinner with people applauding him as he came in was sickening. To be clear, nobody should be threatening their safety, but I don't think it's unreasonable for people who advocate for Muslim bans to be subject to nonviolent public ridicule.
posted by zachlipton at 10:21 AM on December 22, 2016 [7 favorites]


The article says the whole family was flying coach. Coach! What? Why? What?
posted by Rust Moranis at 10:26 AM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


Today's "can't unsee" phrase: cattle ejaculators.

It's another example of what was once a working class job that has been replaced by automation.
posted by peeedro at 10:26 AM on December 22, 2016 [7 favorites]


The United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes

This is already happening. The Obama administration proposed "an atomic revitalization estimated to cost up to $1 trillion over three decades."
posted by kirkaracha at 10:27 AM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


Unfortunately, a lot of the powers in our country, especially business powers, will be happy to support him and close him off from things and people he doesn't want to hear.

(Many of my right-leaning friends cited riots from Hillary supporters as evidence that Democrats were being sore losers and should let Trump President without interference or protest - were those an actual thing, and if they were how bad did they get?)
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 10:27 AM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


roomthreeseventeen: .@realDonaldTrump received daily intelligence briefing today, his spokesman says, making it the second day in a row he's received PDB. (cite)

I hate that we are talking about a very-soon-to-be President of the United States receiving intelligence briefings like a toddler using the potty. "Two days in a row! Good boy."
posted by Superplin at 10:27 AM on December 22, 2016 [39 favorites]


Can we institute a chart with star stickers for Trump?
posted by drezdn at 10:30 AM on December 22, 2016 [15 favorites]


riots from Hillary supporters

There were plenty of demonstrations, which included non-white people and poors. So yeah, riots.
posted by Rykey at 10:32 AM on December 22, 2016 [9 favorites]




Frankly, these people shouldn't be out in public without receiving the scorn they deserve. Watching Trump going out to dinner with people applauding him as he came in was sickening. To be clear, nobody should be threatening their safety, but I don't think it's unreasonable for people who advocate for Muslim bans to be subject to nonviolent public ridicule.

The passenger was screaming at her and at her husband while they were sitting in coach with their three children. If someone screamed at me and my family in an enclosed space I would sure as hell consider that a threat to my and their safety. Hell, if someone was screaming at another family and I was sitting nearby with mine, I'd be afraid for our safety too. There is a right way and a wrong way to act in such situations. Screaming "Your father is ruining the country," and, "Why is she on our flight? She should be flying private" is harassment that should get someone thrown off a fucking plane.
posted by zarq at 10:34 AM on December 22, 2016 [18 favorites]


All true but damn that must have felt good. I'd buy the guy a drink, idc.
posted by asteria at 10:39 AM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


So yeah, riots.

There may have been a Dumpster set on fire or two. Probably less general damage than you see after a typical sporting event.
posted by maxsparber at 10:39 AM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


Apparently the Mormon Tabernacle Choir will be playing the inauguration.
posted by corb at 10:40 AM on December 22, 2016


Also, Ivanka Trump's children are 5 years old, 3 years old and 9 months old. Do you really think someone should scream at their mother and father in front of them?
posted by zarq at 10:40 AM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


This is already happening. The Obama administration proposed "an atomic revitalization estimated to cost up to $1 trillion over three decades."

Yeah the most likely explanation for a bunch of Trump tweets after the election is that he's swooping in to take credit for something that was already settled before he even knew about it. I can see the guy literally trying to spin his own impending impeachment as his awesome idea. "@realDonaldTrump: Corrupt Ryan and McConnell holding me back, going to #MAGA better than ever from back in the private sector where we get things done"
posted by jason_steakums at 10:41 AM on December 22, 2016


Throwing them off the plane is the right thing to do. Not gonna get my panties in a knot about the person doing the screaming though. With all that Trump is doing. Screaming at the people involved in putting him in this position is the pocket change of actions. Frankly they deserve this and more.

While keeping civil norms is a laudable goal and something to strive for, Trump et al are not going to be taken down by opponents staying only on the high road. It's a time for the mid level road with the odd low road mixed in.
posted by Jalliah at 10:41 AM on December 22, 2016 [19 favorites]


(Many of my right-leaning friends cited riots from Hillary supporters as evidence that Democrats were being sore losers and should let Trump President without interference or protest - were those an actual thing, and if they were how bad did they get?)

One of the most celebrated protests that involved US independence was when a bunch of people defied authority by putting on disguises, boarded private vessels, and destroyed a bunch of commercial goods by tossing it into Boston harbor. Protest is literally baked into the country, and anyone right-wing has no right to complain, especially since they named their entire post-2008 movement after the protest.
posted by FJT at 10:42 AM on December 22, 2016 [24 favorites]


Also, Ivanka Trump's children are 5 years old, 3 years old and 9 months old. Do you really think someone should scream at their mother and father in front of them?

I don't care. They won't remember it and Ivanka will do far worse to millions of children by helping her father. I am not shedding any tears because a rich white woman briefly had to deal with the consequences of her actions.
posted by asteria at 10:42 AM on December 22, 2016 [35 favorites]


NPR: You Say You're An American, But What If You Had To Prove It Or Be Deported?: It's illegal for U.S. immigration authorities to hold Americans in detention.

However, an NPR analysis of data obtained through a Freedom of Information Act Request shows that hundreds of American citizens each year find themselves in a situation similar to Palma's. That data show that from 2007 through July of last year, 693 U.S. citizens 1 were held in local jails on federal detainers — in other words, at the request of immigration officials. And 818 more Americans 2 were held in immigration detention centers during that same time frame, according to data obtained through a separate FOIA request by Northwestern University professor Jacqueline Stevens and analyzed by NPR.

posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:43 AM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


Sure, let's buy the guy a drink for screaming at a mother and father in front of their young children. Including their baby. Let's stand up for this clearly acceptable behavior against the children and grandchildren of the President-Elect because he's an asshole. Clearly the kids deserve to experience that.

Disgusting.
posted by zarq at 10:43 AM on December 22, 2016 [10 favorites]


Apparently, Kellyanne "Moms shouldn't work in the White House" Conway will be working in the White House.

I would be interested to know how this will work financially. Even though Conway has nominally worked for Trump, all through the campaign she has actually been on the payroll of the Mercer family, pulling in about $2 million a year. Conway doesn't seem to be the sort to give up $2 million a year to serve her country in the White House for the legal maximum of $176,000 per year.

Will she be working as a government paid employee or will she be working in the White House as a non-government employee on the payroll of the Mercer family? Will she be working for Trump or secretly for the interests of the Mercers through manipulation of Trump. Yet more crazy norm demolishing by the Trump administration.
posted by JackFlash at 10:43 AM on December 22, 2016 [7 favorites]


It's kind of weird to refer to JetBlue as coach although I guess it technically is and they do have fairly small sections of premium seats on some flights. More or less it's just a seating area on most flights, though. It's weird for her to be there because she is the daughter of someone who theoretically owns multiple aircraft and is a billionaire but maybe they're having cashflow issues as they cool their heels waiting for the inauguration?
posted by feloniousmonk at 10:44 AM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


I'm not saying they shouldn't have been thrown off the flight, and flying with anyone on board who's yelling is a problem, but a reasonable consequence of being one of the most prominent public faces of a Muslim ban is that people might speak their minds in public at you. I recognize the confines of an airplane cabin are different, but the world does not need to be made into a safe space for Trump and his senior advisors while their very presence in public signals bigotry and intolerance to a large percentage of the people around them.
posted by zachlipton at 10:44 AM on December 22, 2016 [22 favorites]


I don't care. They won't remember it and Ivanka will do far worse to millions of children by helping her father.

I definitely remember things that happened when I was five. I'm not saying that I wouldn't be tempted to say something nasty to Ivanka Trump in front of her children, but I would in no way think it appropriate to terrorize her little kids.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:44 AM on December 22, 2016 [7 favorites]


I still don't care so I'd suggest you move on instead of asking me to feel for the most blatant example of "white women's tears" ever.
posted by asteria at 10:45 AM on December 22, 2016 [17 favorites]


Sure, let's buy the guy a drink for screaming at a mother and father in front of their young children. Including their baby.

Oh, look, normalization.
posted by Etrigan at 10:46 AM on December 22, 2016 [16 favorites]


Throwing them off the plane is the right thing to do. Not gonna get my panties in a knot about the person doing the screaming though. With all that Trump is doing. Screaming at the people involved in putting him in this position is the pocket change of actions. Frankly they deserve this and more.

While keeping civil norms is a laudable goal and something to strive for, Trump et al are not going to be taken down by opponents staying only on the high road. It's a time for the mid level road with the odd low road mixed in.


Yeah, the "think of the children" bit is thoughtful but Ivanka's father is literally ruining the country. it's pretty frustrating that she constantly gets a pass for "pretty white Mom."
posted by zutalors! at 10:47 AM on December 22, 2016 [7 favorites]


FelliniBlank: Sarah Kendzior: Compare Trump and Putin statements on nukes, both delivered within last 24 hours.

How long before _rump realizes he can save time and just retweet Putin and add "Ditto USA #MAGA" on the end? It's totally his thing - rebranding some existing thing as his, and taking credit for it, with the option to say "it wasn't my thing" when it fails.
posted by filthy light thief at 10:47 AM on December 22, 2016 [8 favorites]


There were plenty of demonstrations, which included non-white people and poors.

I'm not surprised that the "rioting Hillary supporters" meme is one aimed at vilifying those people. At the very least it seemed to be another attempt at "see? Both sides do it!" when I bring up Trump supporters' violence.

Yet more crazy norm demolishing by the Trump administration.

Until Trump, I never realized how much I took for granted about basic compentency in the Presidency and cabinet. What disappoints but no longer surprises me is how things that would destroy or damage any other president or candidate - Hillary included - slide right off him like oil.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 10:48 AM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


Also, Ivanka Trump's children are 5 years old, 3 years old and 9 months old. Do you really think someone should scream at their mother and father in front of them?


Let's see... hmm.. Grandpa is literally, right today threatening the security of their future and increasing the likelihood of them dying from nuclear radiation or starving to death as the world dies. Let along the live of BILLIONS. That or watching the world suffocate and starve due to not doing shit about climate change. Both Mom and Dad are instrumental in getting this to happen.

And we're supposed to be upset that someone had the audacity to freak out at their parents in front of them? Because 'think of the children' or something? Maybe the screamer was thinking of a whole bunch of children. Like millions of other children.
posted by Jalliah at 10:48 AM on December 22, 2016 [34 favorites]


Nobody is giving Ivanka Trump a pass. People are saying that on an airplane (already a scary situation for many people) with little kids sitting next to her, screaming at her and creating a situation that the flight attendants cannot control is wrong.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:48 AM on December 22, 2016 [7 favorites]


It's not good to scream in front of small children. It should never be praised.

But soon, when really, really bad stuff starts happening, the things that are still seemingly inconceivable, and Ivanka keeps supporting him, you're not gonna be thinking about how awful the passengers' behavior was. You're going to be wondering why the fuck more people weren't standing up to the regime when they had a chance.
posted by Rust Moranis at 10:49 AM on December 22, 2016 [33 favorites]


I think "they're blood related to a terrorist thus fair game for harassing" is not really a door we want to open.
posted by corb at 10:49 AM on December 22, 2016 [17 favorites]


it's eleven in the morning and I am nowhere near enough bourbon to make me feel bad for Donald motherfucking Trump's grandchildren

Be better than what you done came from, kids. That's all I got for you.
posted by prize bull octorok at 10:49 AM on December 22, 2016 [14 favorites]


So they removed him from the plane.

Listen, I won't ask y'all to chip in on the drink it's fine. Grandpa hasn't ruined the economy yet so I still have a job and can afford one drink at an airport bar.
posted by asteria at 10:51 AM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


From the flight crew's perspective, they have no idea if the people screaming are going to try to assault the family, or what. It's a dangerous situation that had to be diffused somehow. This isn't about white tears.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:52 AM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


I also think that three-year old should not have worked so hard to put Trump into office
posted by beerperson at 10:52 AM on December 22, 2016 [16 favorites]


From the flight crew's perspective, they have no idea if the people screaming are going to try to assault the family, or what.

They acted accordingly.

I also think that three-year old should not have worked so hard to put Trump into office

Pretty sure he and the 5-year old worked on a couple of Grandpa's tweets.
posted by asteria at 10:54 AM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


I think "they're blood related to a terrorist thus fair game for harassing" is not really a door we want to open.

qft. we're in a different door: "they're blood related to a terrorist (or standing nearby) thus fair game for drone murder". that's the murcan pov, amirite?
posted by j_curiouser at 10:55 AM on December 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


My personal take is that Ivanka is taking an active role in this administration. Last I heard she plans to live in the White House. She is now a political figure and a very divisive one at that, so taking a public flight like that was irresponsible on her part. I'm not condoning the screaming, but things like that are going to keep happening in public spaces, especially as this administration ramps up.
posted by C'est la D.C. at 10:56 AM on December 22, 2016 [30 favorites]


Pretty sure they were a gay couple as well, per the report.
posted by zutalors! at 10:56 AM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


> I think "they're blood related to a terrorist thus fair game for harassing" is not really a door we want to open.

Kushner is not even blood-related, but he's a major decision-maker in Trump's regime. Ivanka is blood-related, and Trump has been including her in his high-level meetings and shows every signs of giving her a major role in how he governs. We're not talking about Chelsea Clinton or the Bush 43 daughters here -- these people are not just related to the people responsible for Trump's policies -- they are, at least in part, themselves responsible for his policies. Confronting them on a plane in front of their kids would not be my first choice of venue, but when her dad is talking about upping our nuclear arsenal, I'm not sure I want people waiting around for the perfect moment to register their complaints, either.
posted by tonycpsu at 10:57 AM on December 22, 2016 [33 favorites]


It's actually fucking weird she was out and about on a commercial airline and apparently without Secret Service. Between this and all the property he refuses to divest from, something bad is going to happen because of the Trump Administration's lax security standards and we're all going to pay for it.
posted by asteria at 10:58 AM on December 22, 2016 [14 favorites]



I don't think Trump can duck as fast as George "whack-a-mole" Bush


I swear, the one time I was proud of him.
posted by zutalors! at 11:02 AM on December 22, 2016 [20 favorites]


He ducked two shoes! Everyone forgets the second one. It was the most impressive thing he's ever done.
posted by asteria at 11:03 AM on December 22, 2016 [44 favorites]


Things are going to get a lot worse than plane rudeness, I fear
posted by angrycat at 11:04 AM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


when the sea levels rise and Ivanka's kids are living on floating barges made of radioactive garbage it would be nice for them to at least have comforting memories of peaceful, yelling-free plane rides from the Before Time
posted by prize bull octorok at 11:04 AM on December 22, 2016 [45 favorites]


It made him My President for that one little moment.
posted by zutalors! at 11:04 AM on December 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


The Orange One is going to froth-tweet about this.
posted by futz at 11:06 AM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


Mod note: Several comments removed. This needs to come down several notches basically immediately; the plane story's kind of a perfect storm of unresolvable conflict between hot button stuff and hollering at each other or opting for heat-raising sarcasm isn't going to improve anything.
posted by cortex (staff) at 11:07 AM on December 22, 2016 [11 favorites]


I don't think Trump can duck as fast as George "whack-a-mole" Bush

You forget that you are talking about the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency
posted by beerperson at 11:07 AM on December 22, 2016 [9 favorites]


What I remember from the shoe-throwing incident was the man who threw them was then taken next door and his screams could be heard through the wall.
posted by agregoli at 11:07 AM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


who doesn't get all wistful and nostalgic for good old-fashioned nuclear arms race brinksmanship at this most wonderful time of the year?

Weird Al has you covered!
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 11:07 AM on December 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


Democrats aim to launch comeback with Cabinet showdown
Senate Democrats are approaching the January confirmation battle over Donald Trump’s Cabinet as a chance to launch their political comeback and expose the president-elect as a fraud.

Lawmakers know they’re unlikely, at best, to stop any of Trump’s Cabinet picks from being installed. But they still see major opportunity in the confirmation hearings. The goal, according to lawmakers and aides: to depict Trump’s chosen inner circle of billionaires and conservative hard-liners as directly at odds with the working-class Americans he vowed to help.
Filed under: I'll Believe It When I See It
posted by kirkaracha at 11:07 AM on December 22, 2016 [36 favorites]


What I'm also afraid of is that because Trump's tactics have been so effective, we haven't seen the last of them in the Republican handbook even when he's gone. Playing dirty has paid off big-time for them.

The goal, according to lawmakers and aides: to depict Trump’s chosen inner circle of billionaires and conservative hard-liners as directly at odds with the working-class Americans he vowed to help.

Unfortunately, I don't think a lot of his supporters will care. However, we should take advantage of any defections or wavering from Trumpists we do get.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 11:13 AM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


Also , Ivanka Trump's children are 5 years old, 3 years old and 9 months old. Do you really think someone should scream at their mother and father in front of them?

Arrest video sparks outrage : A 7yr old boy is choked by a white neighbor, and then his mother and sister are arrested after they become outraged when the officer involved suggested that their parenting, not neighbor's violence is the problem.

Both incidents were posted today, and while neither shoud have happened, there's a question of scale.
posted by bindr at 11:14 AM on December 22, 2016 [29 favorites]


There is never a correct place, time, or manner to register dissent. There will always be complaints about the venue, the intensity, and whether the protest is counterproductive, even from people sympathetic to the cause. I think we can all imagine situations involving our own personal oxen being gored where we'd probably bend the rules of civility and decorum to have our voices heard. Who knows what you'd do until you're put in that situation, facing your oppressors (and let us dispel with the fiction that Ivanka and Kushner are just passengers on the HMS Shitgibbon -- they are directly involved and have prominent platforms they can use if they disagree with dear ol' Dad.)
posted by tonycpsu at 11:14 AM on December 22, 2016 [27 favorites]


I wonder how much they will care once he is President. They like him because he's "not a politician" What about when he is one?


I mean, I don't know the answer but it might be different.
posted by zutalors! at 11:15 AM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


Sorry. I'm cranky this morning and my initial framing on the JetBlue story was inflammatory and severely lacking in nuance.
posted by zachlipton at 11:16 AM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


roomthreeseventeen 's link to this Washington Post article is extremely alarming & need to be put under an intense and hot spotlight.
posted by yoga at 11:18 AM on December 22, 2016 [9 favorites]


You forget that you are talking about the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency

I love how his doctor is already peacing out - he won't commit to continuing to see Trump after the inauguration, he says "if something happens to him, it happens" and this is the reason we have a pre-established chain of succession. (!) You can tell the doctor's like "I'm too old for this shit, the deal was that I would give this rich fucker standing prescriptions for speed and painkillers; no way in hell am I being responsible for the health of the President of the United States."
posted by Joey Buttafoucault at 11:21 AM on December 22, 2016 [19 favorites]


Democrats aim to launch comeback with Cabinet showdown

Even if Democrats mount a proper defense and manage to stymie Trump on his official cabinet picks, there's nothing that can be done to stop Trump's fully stocked kitchen cabinet: Conway, Bannon, Icahn, Kushner, Flynn, and Ivanka.

I'm pretty sure that the newly formed National Trade Council headed by Peter Navarro doesn't require congressional approval, so he can be probably added to the list too.

Maybe I'm totally out of my mind, but I think the administration might be expecting a fight as well. They let the official picks be bogged down, make a big stink about "typical Washington swamp gridlock". They then have cover while their kitchen cabinet does the actual governing.
posted by FJT at 11:22 AM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


The Trump transition team instructed the State Department to turn over all information Wednesday about “gender-related staffing, programming, and funding,” setting off alarm bells among those who fear that the new administration is going to purge programs that promote women’s equality along with the people who work on them.

God. When I see this, I think of all the women who voted for him and part of me wants to ask the ones I know if this was what they wanted and expected. Then again, there are a disturbing number of openly anti-feminist women for reasons I never completely understood.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 11:22 AM on December 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


What I'm also afraid of is that because Trump's tactics have been so effective, we haven't seen the last of them in the Republican handbook even when he's gone. Playing dirty has paid off big-time for them.

They've paid off big-time in the short term, but he remains unpopular and continues to play so dirty and so recklessly that pretty much everyone who is paying attention and not in his immediate thrall is aghast. The endgame is either the complete collapse of our system of government (in which case it's kinda moot what political strategies future "Republicans" employ) or for his whole house of cards to collapse spectacularly and take much of the party with it, in which case maybe they'll think twice before trying that again.
posted by contraption at 11:23 AM on December 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


What I remember from the shoe-throwing incident was the man who threw them was then taken next door and his screams could be heard through the wall.

Yes. He was beaten by guards. He also spent nine months in jail, where he says he was routinely tortured and lost one of his teeth.

I don't know if throwing a shoe qualifies as free speech, but it is certainly not the sort of thing one should spend nine months being tortured for.
posted by maxsparber at 11:23 AM on December 22, 2016 [30 favorites]


I wish someone had thrown a shoe at HRC so she could whip a kitten heel back at them.
posted by zutalors! at 11:24 AM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


When I see this, I think of all the women who voted for him and part of me wants to ask the ones I know if this was what they wanted and expected

They don't care: these are State Department programs for women in other countries. Those women don't count (to them).

And yes, lots of them think we don't need laws or programs in the US to provide women equal opportunities.
posted by suelac at 11:26 AM on December 22, 2016 [7 favorites]


In re Ivanka: leaving all other questions aside, she is going to be one of the most powerful women in the world as of next month. No one voted for her. Her credentials are being rich, being white, being pretty and running a vanity clothing company. She's going to be a world leader.

"Your father is ruining the country" isn't the half of it. "You are are an usurper who is ruining the country" is more accurate.
posted by Frowner at 11:31 AM on December 22, 2016 [34 favorites]


From the Trump-team-demands-info-on-gender-equality-programs-without-giving-any-reason link:
I obtained a copy of the State Department request, which said each office should include information on all existing programs and activities that “promote gender equality, such as ending gender-based violence, promoting women’s participation in economic and political spheres, entrepreneurship, etc.”

The request did not ask directly for the names of the officials who work on these programs but stated that, in their reports, each office “should note positions whose primary functions are to promote such issues.”
This. Is. Not. Normal.
posted by byanyothername at 11:32 AM on December 22, 2016 [33 favorites]


If someone screamed "Lock them up!" every time the family showed their faces, I still wouldn't have any sympathy. That's the way it is now.

Because if there's gonna be a race to the bottom, it's important that we not slip too far behind.
posted by rocket88 at 11:32 AM on December 22, 2016 [6 favorites]


That's the way it is now.

The only thing keeping some of us from going full Schopenhauer is the idea we can fight the imposition of that world on our own. I am not ready to give up just yet.
posted by corb at 11:32 AM on December 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


Her credentials are being rich, being white, being pretty and running a vanity clothing company. She's going to be a world leader.

Right. People can say "no one is giving her a pass" all day long but they are. It's implicit, not explicit. No one sits there and says "it's okay, because she's blond, white and polite" but it's something we are implicitly trained to respect and give our attention to.
posted by zutalors! at 11:34 AM on December 22, 2016 [19 favorites]


According to the people themselves, nobody screamed and there was no scene:

Laser tweeted at the time: “My husband expressed his displeasure in a calm tone, JetBlue staff overheard, and they kicked us off the plane.”

I can't find a single witness. The "scream at" story seems to come from a single source, TMZ, which does not identify where that came from.

This is already being used as evidence that lefties are out of control harassers, and plays into a narrative that turns even the most reasonable protests into something menacing. I wonder if we could wait until we have a better source than TMZ before we tsk tsk at a gay Jewish couple who wanted to express their opinion to the presumptive First Lady?
posted by maxsparber at 11:36 AM on December 22, 2016 [58 favorites]


Yeah, I was wondering about that maxsparber. I instinctively didn't trust the "screaming" narrative.
posted by zutalors! at 11:37 AM on December 22, 2016 [6 favorites]


roomthreeseventeen: The Trump transition team instructed the State Department to turn over all information Wednesday about “gender-related staffing, programming, and funding,”

I wonder how many Department swill have the opportunity to tell the transition team "we're not giving you fodder for your purge" (you know, in more polite terms).

Seriously, how much do you want to make people hate where they work? THEY WILL BE WORKING FOR YOU IN A MONTH, STOP TRYING TO TURN THEM AGAINST YOU.
posted by filthy light thief at 11:38 AM on December 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


I mean, it's a given that a lot of high-level people leave between administrations because they were installed under different direction and are likely to be canned under new leadership, but staff level positions are generally fairly stable ... unless you pull shit like this.
posted by filthy light thief at 11:40 AM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


nobody screamed and there was no scene

As Harry Truman said "I never give them hell. I just tell the truth and they think it's hell."
posted by JackFlash at 11:40 AM on December 22, 2016 [22 favorites]


I wonder how many Department swill have the opportunity to tell the transition team "we're not giving you fodder for your purge" (you know, in more polite terms).

All of them.

If you told me under oath that a similar request hasn't gone to DoD for a list of people who are working on the integration of trans servicemembers, I would place you under citizen's arrest for perjury.
posted by Etrigan at 11:42 AM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


According to the people themselves, nobody screamed and there was no scene:

What the fuck is the Forward doing reporting on where they live in that article? Yes, it doesn't give an exact address but gives enough info - specific neighborhood in Brooklyn and area within that neighborhood, price, closing date, pictures of the unit, etc. - that anyone with an inclination can find it easily.

Hey, let's just basically dox someone who will be a target of Trumpsters. And name their child as well.
posted by chris24 at 11:42 AM on December 22, 2016 [18 favorites]


So if each person on the plane who disagrees with the incoming administration's policies had quietly walked by them and said "I think what you and your father are planning is despicable" (no shouting, etc) but otherwise left them alone, would that have been acceptable?

But practically speaking, people are upset and stuff like this is going to happen sometimes. It's best that we don't make of it more than it is which is someone who is upset and picks a less than great way of dealing with being upset. I'd also like to echo someone up thread pointing out that there is a huge disparity in how "uncivil" moments are portrayed in the media. For instance, when a black mother screams at the cops for shooting her kid or otherwise doesn't react how people think they should (calmly, etc), then people tend to support the cops for doing things like arresting said mom. But some folks get yelled at on a plane and it's like "OMG end of civil discourse!" (this i assuming there was yelling in which case I understand JetBlue's position).

tl;dr: I think cops arresting folks for completely normal and understandable emotional reactions to police brutality to be a far greater threat to civility than this kind of thing (which most people won't even do or even have the opportunity to do)
posted by R343L at 11:42 AM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


The couple also has a son, who would basically lose his family and end up in legal wrangling if gay marriage is overturned.
posted by zutalors! at 11:45 AM on December 22, 2016 [12 favorites]


I instinctively didn't trust the "screaming" narrative.

I was a bit wary for this reason. They seem to be putting forward every effort to cast protesters as the bad guys and getting in Trump's way, no matter how calmly they express themselves.

And yet it's okay for Trump and his cronies to bully, swagger, and threaten anyone they want, and somehow that's different. Freedom of speech is all well and good until it's used against the regime.

The hypocrisy of it all makes my head spin.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 11:45 AM on December 22, 2016 [12 favorites]


According to the people themselves, nobody screamed and there was no scene

I don't know forward.com, but that article's digression into the specifics of the couple's home (including a photo that makes finding their address trivial) and the name of their young child strikes me as more than a little odd.
posted by contraption at 11:46 AM on December 22, 2016 [6 favorites]


Maybe I'm totally out of my mind, but I think the administration might be expecting a fight as well. They let the official picks be bogged down, make a big stink about "typical Washington swamp gridlock". They then have cover while their kitchen cabinet does the actual governing.

I'm sure others can speak to this with more knowledge than I, but my understanding's that a lot of things can only be legally signed off on by the duly nominated and confirmed officeholder. Otherwise, there's not really anything to prevent the President from re-delegating the job duties of, say, the Attorney General to whomever unconfirmable person while tossing in some moderate figurehead for official Senate confirmation.

Of course, this all goes to the great caveat: if everyone agrees to ignore the rule (or is afraid to stand up for it), the rule is worthless.
posted by tivalasvegas at 11:46 AM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


"Your father is ruining the country" isn't the half of it. "You are are an usurper who is ruining the country" is more accurate.

Interestingly, there is precedent for her being first lady. There is no requirement that first lady be the President's wife, and the 3 times the role has been filled by someone other than the President's wife, it's always been someone of the next generation who's close family - i.e., daughter (Jefferson), daughter-in-law (Van Buren) and niece (Buchanan).
posted by Joey Buttafoucault at 11:48 AM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


Interestingly, there is precedent for her being first lady. There is no requirement that first lady be the President's wife, and the 3 times the role has been filled by someone other than the President's wife, it's always been someone of the next generation who's close family - i.e., daughter (Jefferson), daughter-in-law (Van Buren) and niece (Buchanan).

So when Trump said Make America Great Again people always thought he meant take us back to the 1950s but the truth is he really meant pre-Civil War America.
posted by dis_integration at 11:51 AM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


There's no reason that someone's daughter, or niece, or nephew, or homosexual lover, can't step into the "First Lady" role. Not everyone has to be married to someone who wants to do that.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 11:53 AM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


the 3 times the role has been filled by someone other than the President's wife

On those three occasions, however, the president was unmarried (Jefferson and Van Buren were widowers; Buchanan never married).
posted by Etrigan at 11:54 AM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


You can write to the author of the Forward article to request he remove identifying info. His email is kestenbaum@forward.com. Here's what I wrote if it makes it simpler:

Mr. Kestenbaum,

I’m assuming this wasn’t intentional, but you just basically doxxed the Goldstein’s and their child. With the information you provided about their home purchase, anyone with google can find their exact address. Anyone using reverse image search on the picture you used of their home can get an address. Please consider removing the identifying info - especially since you also released the name of their young child - as they will no doubt be targets of Trump supporters.

Best,
posted by chris24 at 11:54 AM on December 22, 2016 [19 favorites]


Apparently the Mormon Tabernacle Choir will be playing the inauguration.

please please please let this be the set-up for an epic bait-and-switch where they sing Edelweiss instead of the national anthem

I've had it stuck in my head since Sound of Music aired on TV the other day and I anticipate this earworm continuing until 1/20 anyhow.
posted by tivalasvegas at 11:55 AM on December 22, 2016 [8 favorites]


I don't know forward.com, but that article's digression into the specifics of the couple's home (including a photo that makes finding their address trivial) and the name of their young child strikes me as more than a little odd.

It is odd. Forward is a Jewish publication -- a modern offshoot of a very old, very Socialist Yiddish publication. The author is a former NY Times writer who is now the staff writer for the publication, and he may have just gotten caught up in a sort of style thing, where you identify the people in the story and discuss what you know from past news events about the subject.

But in this case, that seems crazy to me. It just reminds me that there are journalists who have not adjusted to the way the world works now, that there has been a shift, and writing about Jews who have protested Trump can put a target on their heads.
posted by maxsparber at 11:56 AM on December 22, 2016 [10 favorites]


I don't think Ivanka's a usurper for stepping into the first lady role as a daughter. I honestly don't give a fuck about that.

I think she's a usurper because she's still running the business and sitting in on meetings that go beyond what the first lady would do and this will continue to happen and we should point it out every time it happens and we should never back down from making her and her family's lives as uncomfortable as possible given the chance.

And even if she wasn't going to be first lady or an active participant in the administration, if your mom's supporting an authoritarian kleptocracy and you're benefiting from it, with the exception of actual physical harm, you are fair game at any age. It sucks, but on the list of things that suck in 2016, it isn't even in the top 10 things on that flight, let alone my concern.
posted by MCMikeNamara at 12:01 PM on December 22, 2016 [15 favorites]


I have sent this email to Forward:

As a fellow journalist and someone who also works for the Jewish press, I would strongly urge that you pare back the descriptions of Dan Goldstein, his husband, and their child, along with information about where they live, in your article about the Jetblu incident. I know this information is publicly available, but we should not make it trivially easy to track down a gay Jewish couple who have protested Ivanka Trump, especially when the public narrative is that they harassed her to point of having to be ejected from an airplane.

I say this with all seriousness: These are new times in America, and the press must be cognizant of that. These are not merely people who engaged in an unpopular expression of speech. They are likely targets of antisemitic and homophobic harassment and abuse.

posted by maxsparber at 12:01 PM on December 22, 2016 [53 favorites]


Considering Trump's constant television watching, I wonder if the best way to reach him (or rattle him) is through ads on Fox News.
posted by drezdn at 12:01 PM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


Gingrich earlier this week claimed that Trump was backing away from his "drain the swamp" campaign pledge to end corruption and the role of wealthy special interests in politics.

"Newt is learning the public prostration required of authoritarian loyalists," McMullin tweeted Wednesday. "The dear leader often changes his mind but he's always correct.

Gingrich earlier this week claimed that Trump was backing away from his "drain the swamp" campaign pledge to end corruption and the role of wealthy special interests in politics.

...Trump fired back Wednesday, tweeting: “Someone incorrectly stated that the phrase ‘DRAIN THE SWAMP’ was no longer being used by me. Actually, we will always be trying to DTS.”

Gingrich quickly responded, claiming he had "made a big boo-boo" in a video posted to Twitter.

"I talked this morning with President-elect Trump, and he reminded me he likes draining the swamp" Gingrich continued.

“I mischaracterized it the other day,” the former House Speaker and 2012 Republican presidential candidate added. "He intends to drain the swamp.

“When I make a mistake, I’m going to be straightforward and tell you. I blew that one. Draining the swamp is in. President-elect Trump wants to do it. And you’re going to get to be a part of it."


Good lord. I can't believe that this is where we are at politically. A year ago the above words would have made no sense at all.
posted by futz at 12:04 PM on December 22, 2016 [31 favorites]


Yes, but the point about Ivanka is not that she's going to be First Lady, about which I do not care, but that she is going to be a First Lady who has an active role in the administration which will dwarf any other First Lady's (including Hillary Clinton, who was so widely hated for doing some political stuff). She's going to be sitting in meetings beside the President all the time, giving advice, having the yes and the no. She's going to be a powerful, unelected politician. Even an activist First Lady like Hillary wasn't Bill's second-in-command; she had her own stuff and didn't, like, attend all the meetings with him. Which is as it should be - it's one thing to say that the First Lady will, of course, be able to share her views with the President; it's another to have her sitting beside him as he negotiates with world leaders, sets policy, etc.

Being First Lady doesn't make you "powerful" per se - Michelle Obama, for example, is a fantastic First Lady and she has a great deal of influence, but she has chosen to take more of a cultural/health-oriented/media role. It's very clear that Ivanka will be right there in meetings with Trump.

My objection to Ivanka isn't that she'll serve as First Lady. It's that she'll serve as Second President.
posted by Frowner at 12:05 PM on December 22, 2016 [36 favorites]


So that's the full "we are/have never been/have always been at war with Eastasia" triple axel in the space of 48 hours. And they're not even in office yet.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 12:06 PM on December 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


Comrade Donald is always right.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 12:07 PM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


Guardian: Registry used to track Arabs and Muslims dismantled by Obama administration

I’m really enjoying Don’t-Give-A-Fuck Obama.
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 12:10 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


It makes sense that an amphibian isn't too happy to hear about a swamp being drained.
posted by Too-Ticky at 12:10 PM on December 22, 2016 [13 favorites]


I’m really enjoying Don’t-Give-A-Fuck Obama.

DGAF Obama would have appointed Merrick Garland. This guy is "not an effing idiot" Obama.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:12 PM on December 22, 2016 [15 favorites]


Newt is going to make a great Stalinist.
posted by octobersurprise at 12:12 PM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


it's another to have her sitting beside him as he negotiates with world leaders, sets policy, etc.

Yeah, in this scenario Ivanka would be in this picture.
posted by zutalors! at 12:13 PM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


Chris Cioffi: Barber to call for NAACP to back economic boycott of North Carolina
Barber and several protesters who were arrested last week at the General Assembly spoke at Davie Street Presbyterian Church, criticizing the legislature’s failure to repeal House Bill 2 and last week’s special sessions that sapped power from incoming Gov. Roy Cooper. The NAACP leader also vowed his group would file a lawsuit alleging the legislature’s actions violated the U.S. Constitution and announced its 11th annual Moral March on Raleigh.

Barber said the state NAACP chapter would draft a letter to the group’s national board after Christmas asking it to consider an economic boycott of the state.

“We did it in South Carolina when they raised the Confederate flag,” he said. “We must do it, we believe, as this new legislature is trying to raise a new Confederacy, in policy, right here in North Carolina.”

In addition to repealing HB2 – a bill that overrides local ordinances setting rules on minimum wages and employment and orders transgender people to use the public bathroom corresponding to the gender on their birth certificate – Barber said his group will request the boycott stand until fair election districts are drawn and actions from last week’s second special session are rolled back.
posted by zombieflanders at 12:13 PM on December 22, 2016 [15 favorites]


you are fair game at any age

These are incredibly chilling words.

This summer, I took part in fighting Trump, as did many others. While my family escaped unscathed, people physically travelled to the school Kendal Unruh's children attended so they could scream at the children, the teachers who dared teach them, and Kendal herself if she dared show her face. They threatened to picket outside our homes with the specific intent of scaring our families into staying inside, this keeping them hostage to our vote.

One of the only things that I think prevented them from actually doing this is that the idea was unusual. It would have been unprecedented and abnormal. Not abnormal "against people we like", abnormal over all.

So no, it's not okay to support harassment of families or any other attacks on families, no matter who they are. Every time you do, you are chipping away at the norms that keep most of our families safe when we go out and protest and fight. If you won't do it for decency, do it for us.
posted by corb at 12:15 PM on December 22, 2016 [24 favorites]


Gingrich is never going to figure out that Trump just keeps him around to give him atomic wedgies every once in a while
posted by theodolite at 12:15 PM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


Good lord. I can't believe that this is where we are at politically. A year ago the above words would have made no sense at all.

the most fucked up thing about this is I'm not even enjoying seeing Newt Gingrich debase and humiliate himself
posted by prize bull octorok at 12:15 PM on December 22, 2016 [40 favorites]


The Trump administration and their lapdog media are already making efforts to criminalize dissent by painting any criticism whatsoever as riots, chaos, violence, threats, treason, etc. So maybe we on the left could do our best not to make their job even easier by siding up with them to castigate critics of fascism for acting too mean about it.
posted by the turtle's teeth at 12:18 PM on December 22, 2016 [21 favorites]



So no, it's not okay to support harassment of families or any other attacks on families, no matter who they are. Every time you do, you are chipping away at the norms that keep most of our families safe when we go out and protest and fight. If you won't do it for decency, do it for us


We're talking about incredibly wealthy children of the future first lady who were in the presence of some dissent, which most likely was not even yelling.

Like, context please.
posted by zutalors! at 12:18 PM on December 22, 2016 [25 favorites]


It's very clear that Ivanka will be right there in meetings with Trump.

My objection to Ivanka isn't that she'll serve as First Lady. It's that she'll serve as Second President.


That's not my objection -- I mean, both Hillary Clinton and Eleanor Roosevelt took on political work as First Ladies. It's firstly that she's cut from the same deplorable cloth, and secondly that she's supposed to be overseeing the Trump business, so there's a huge conflict of interest.
posted by tivalasvegas at 12:20 PM on December 22, 2016 [8 favorites]


We're talking about incredibly wealthy children of the future first lady who were in the presence of some dissent, which most likely was not even yelling.

Like, context please.


Quick diagnostic test for privilege: "Is it socially allowed for me to express anger, frustration or pain in public, or will I be immediately harangued by the national media, have my outburst exaggerated until I am considered to be a threat and/or have my concerns be immediately dismissed because I didn't express them in a way that was comfortable to the person with whom I was angry?"
posted by tivalasvegas at 12:24 PM on December 22, 2016 [17 favorites]


people physically travelled to the school Kendal Unruh's children attended so they could scream at the children, the teachers who dared teach them, and Kendal herself if she dared show her face.

Was this reported on? I don't find a single news story, or even a blog, that references this, but maybe I am looking in the wrong place.
posted by maxsparber at 12:33 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


That's not my objection -- I mean, both Hillary Clinton and Eleanor Roosevelt took on political work as First Ladies. It's firstly that she's cut from the same deplorable cloth, and secondly that she's supposed to be overseeing the Trump business, so there's a huge conflict of interest.

Yes, but if FDR was meeting with the SoS about the war, Eleanor Roosevelt wasn't there. If someone came to have a meeting with FDR about policy, Eleanor Roosevelt wasn't there. It's true that the First Lady has a lot of influence on the president, yes, but there's a big difference between "we talk about stuff" and "I am in meeting with you, raising objections, forming policy, interacting with politicians and administrators as if I were president". Eleanor Roosevelt did many admirable things as First Lady and afterward, and was in many respects a better person (IMO) than FDR. But she wasn't elected.

If we're going to say "the First Lady will have a role that is like being a Shadow President, she is entitled to sit in all meetings at the President's discretion and to be treated as the President's adjutant by other politicians" then the First Lady must be on the ticket with the President, give speeches, advance her own policy position and show she has policy chops. It's not normal for the President's family to act more like high-ranking cabinet members than mere family members.
posted by Frowner at 12:34 PM on December 22, 2016 [33 favorites]


I mean, it's very obvious that Ivanka is not going to be a First Lady like Hillary Clinton or Eleanor Roosevelt. She's going to have a great deal of direct power in her own right and participate as if she were a career politician, based on nothing except the fact that she's the President's daughter.

Both Hillary and ER actually had quite a lot of political experience, too - they didn't just get to do stuff because they were rich women who were married to the President. Many First Ladies who didn't have a lot of policy chops were relatively reticent - Nancy Reagan and Barbara Bush were unpleasant pieces of work, but they were pretty behind the scenes. [ETA - they did cultural stuff, as did Laura Bush, of course]

"The President's family should rule alongside him" is not a principle I ever want to espouse.
posted by Frowner at 12:38 PM on December 22, 2016 [15 favorites]


I don't know enough about Eleanor's role to say anything more to that, but at least in Hillary's case, she was given a pretty important political portfolio (health care reform). Maybe Ivanka's role will stretch the bounds of normal, but compared to the other ways that norms are being trampled underfoot and fed to the alligators, I'm not super-worked up about her sitting in on meetings.
posted by tivalasvegas at 12:38 PM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


I mean, it's very obvious that Ivanka is not going to be a First Lady like Hillary Clinton or Eleanor Roosevelt. She's going to have a great deal of direct power in her own right and participate as if she were a career politician, based on nothing except the fact that she's the President's daughter.

Part of it might be based on the fact that she and Jared are both smarter than Donald Trump.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:40 PM on December 22, 2016 [7 favorites]


She's not just "sitting in on meetings," she's shadow Presidenting.
posted by zutalors! at 12:41 PM on December 22, 2016 [12 favorites]


shadow Presidenting
posted by theodolite at 12:43 PM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


but compared to the other ways that norms are being trampled underfoot and fed to the alligators, I'm not super-worked up about her sitting in on meetings.

If she's wandering around on JetBlue without Secret Service protection, I most certainly am. Count me in the camp of 'how is this not the story?' If they keep doing dumb shit like that, something bad is definitely actually going to happen, and it will not be some cutesy argument about 'can we let people yell at dictators on planes?'

(Also, my first thought is what maxsparber brought up: I don't believe the Trump/JetBlue account of what happened. At all. Why should I start believing Trumps *now*? If Donald told me the sky was blue, I would open a window to see how he managed to fuck that up too. I mean, has it really been that long since he claimed a guy had a gun at a rally, but it was actually a sign? Lying's all that whole group does.)
posted by mordax at 12:44 PM on December 22, 2016 [15 favorites]


Also sitting in on meetings is kind of a big deal. You're in a meeting with the President. Everyone there normally has a formal position as staff, appointee or official advisor. That's intentional because that's how we have accountability. What formal position does Ivanka have? How do we hold her accountable? First Ladies have always had some wiggle room on that because practically speaking presidents have come as a package with their spouse often being a part of their political success. There's a reason there are only a handful of non-spouse First Ladies and so far as I know none of them had responsibilities or influence like Eleanor Roosevelt or Hillary Clinton, being largely social hostesses. Ivanka's apparent role is a huge norm violation. Even Eleanor Roosevelt and Hillary Clinton didn't routinely sit in on meetings with their husbands.
posted by R343L at 12:46 PM on December 22, 2016 [7 favorites]


I mean, it's unclear why the Secret Service wasn't there, right? They can't just go if Ivanka dismisses them.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 12:46 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


She's not just "sitting in on meetings," she's shadow Presidenting. posted by zutalors! at 12:41 PM on December 22 [+] [!]

And in 4 or 8 years she might be real Presidenting. We were dreading the idea of 8 years of having to say the words "President Trump" - now imagine 16 years. Ugh.
posted by bluecore at 12:48 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


The Trump transition team instructed the State Department

Can the transition team instruct anyone to do anything at this point? Does the president-elect have legal authority before the inauguration?
posted by kirkaracha at 12:48 PM on December 22, 2016


Imagine a Trump presidenting on your face forever.
posted by Joey Michaels at 12:49 PM on December 22, 2016 [6 favorites]


On a different note, with the news that Trump and Friends are going after librarians I'm now very proud to say that I'm currently in the process of aiming for a master's degree in library science.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 12:52 PM on December 22, 2016 [25 favorites]


A drunk friend of mine with that degree once called it Library Spyance, which now seems relevant.
posted by prefpara at 12:53 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


Pointing out that Trump is bringing in Billionaires and Goldman Sachs execs won't make Trump supporters think Trump is draining the swamp, as the so-called alligators they wanted to get rid of was really the Democrats/liberals.
posted by drezdn at 12:55 PM on December 22, 2016 [7 favorites]


What's happening in North Carolina is really important. What are the options available to the Democrats? Can they threaten to do the same thing in states they control?
posted by cell divide at 12:55 PM on December 22, 2016


whoa

some dude getting getting testy with Ivanka does not equal the breakdown of civil discourse, I don't care how many fragile psyches were around. Ivanka should have flown her kids elsewhere if she didn't want them to hear about how she's part of IDK the end of the world or whatever the dude said.

And the dude was doxxed as a result. I am on Team Buying A Drink for Dude Who Probably Didn't Yell on the Plane.

I repeat, if Ivanka doesn't want the young ones to hear that they are part of an Evil Empire, she has fucking options.

I don't know to whom I'm responding here, generally, just that I'm annoyed that this is a Thing
posted by angrycat at 12:56 PM on December 22, 2016 [33 favorites]


She's going to have a great deal of direct power in her own right and participate as if she were a career politician, based on nothing except the fact that she's the President's daughter.

In the Trump White House, every day is Take Your Daughter to Work Day! #MAGA!

The Dos and Don'ts of Take Your Kids to Work Day:
While you want to make it interesting, keep it realistic, Taylor says. "It's Take Our Daughters and Sons to Work Day, not a trip to Disney World. Allow them to see you problem-solve and let them partake in that process; a valuable and empowering exercise."

Don't just have your child shadow you; make sure they're engaged, Taylor adds.

But be careful that you don't let them become too hands-on at work, Teach says. For instance, don't allow them to make business decisions, take important calls, or send work-related e-emails.
posted by kirkaracha at 12:58 PM on December 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


I'm angry it's getting compared to that woman who was arrested because her child was choked by an adult and the cop thought it would be a great time to shame her for trying to stand up for herself.
posted by asteria at 12:58 PM on December 22, 2016 [11 favorites]


What's happening in North Carolina is really important. What are the options available to the Democrats? Can they threaten to do the same thing in states they control?

The last thing Democrats should be doing is joining the Republicans in shredding our democratic norms and putting personal power above all other considerations.
posted by prefpara at 12:59 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


What's happening in North Carolina is really important. What are the options available to the Democrats? Can they threaten to do the same thing in states they control?

I'm not sure what they'd be "threatening" to do here. Granting basic civil rights? Paying livable minimum wage? Allowing people to use the bathroom they want? Those aren't threats.
posted by zombieflanders at 1:00 PM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]




I obtained a copy of the State Department request, which said each office should include information on all existing programs and activities that “promote gender equality, such as ending gender-based violence, promoting women’s participation in economic and political spheres, entrepreneurship, etc.”


I yelled at the radio yesterday, when some mid-level Christian religious leader was talking about conservative Hispanics who voted for a man of family values. Between incoherently swearing, I asked "how again is it that the pussy-grabbing, twice divorced and thrice married misogynist is the one who stands for family values? Oh right, the lives you care about until they're born! You don't care about the would-be mothers, or the potential fathers, or really the existing children."

Gender equality, which it seems you're trying to de-fund at every level, should be part of family values, right? Oh, but it's not, because "family values" is all about supporting the patriarchy, where everyone in the family knows their subordinate role under the father. I'm glad we're clear on who voted for what again.
posted by filthy light thief at 1:01 PM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


Helen Mirren's inspirational Christmas message:
Hello. At this time of celebration and togetherness, we have the chance to reflect on the year gone by. And I think we can all agree that 2016 has been a big pile of shit.
posted by kirkaracha at 1:03 PM on December 22, 2016 [29 favorites]


Pointing out that Trump is bringing in Billionaires and Goldman Sachs execs won't make Trump supporters think Trump is draining the swamp, as the so-called alligators they wanted to get rid of was really the Democrats/liberals.

That's what I've found out - the ones in my therapy group, for example, don't really seem to care that the one-percenters in the cabinet don't have their best interests at heart. All they wanted was to see the "Washington elites" driven out and they don't really care who takes their place.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 1:03 PM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


news that Trump and Friends are going after librarians I'm now very proud to say that I'm currently in the process of aiming for a master's degree in library science.

As a current librarian, I'm really interested in what you're referring to here. Context/link?
posted by Rykey at 1:05 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


I just went back and checked the comments on the Forward article and holy fucking shit. Uniformly pro-Trump, full of homophobic and anti-Semitic slurs and specific threats.
posted by contraption at 1:07 PM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


I mean, it's unclear why the Secret Service wasn't there, right? They can't just go if Ivanka dismisses them.

Secret service does not normally provide protection for adult family members of the president.
posted by JackFlash at 1:08 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


Was this reported on? I don't find a single news story, or even a blog, that references this, but maybe I am looking in the wrong place.

I'm not sure. My source for that was Kendal, I suppose it's possible she's made it up, but most of the harassment she's talked about is stuff I experienced or watched someone else experience, so I give her the benefit of the doubt. Trumpkins seem to fucking love going after people's families and claiming every citizen activist has made themselves a public figure, though, and it's been pretty scary.
posted by corb at 1:09 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


The request did not ask directly for the names of the officials who work on these programs but stated that, in their reports, each office “should note positions whose primary functions are to promote such issues.”

This. Is. Not. Normal.


More thoughts on this - normal, at least at what I've seen at the state level, and to a lesser degree at the city and county level, is that political appointees and people who they have hired, AKA the people with the most unstable power, start planning their exit strategies when it looks like the tides will shift and a new administration will come in, and those in peak management positions take jobs with private companies, non profits, or something within their field but more stable in administration shifts. The VAST majority of staff stay put, and roll with the changes as they come.

Digging into who followed which of upper management's directions that conflict with the new administration is not done - out with the old plans, in with the new. Staff adapt, with some griping about how much work was tossed out, and look for ways they can change together. There is no identification of positions that supported the prior administration, because that's micro-management of staff from way too high a level to really care about how the work gets done.

Unless those policies are so contrary to your entire plan forward that you want to turn the ship around as sharply as possible as quickly as possible.

Fuck us all.
posted by filthy light thief at 1:09 PM on December 22, 2016 [11 favorites]


As a current librarian, I'm really interested in what you're referring to here. Context/link?

I'm currently working on applying to graduate school for library science and aiming for a master's degree.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 1:10 PM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


Secret service does not normally provide protection for adult family members of the president.

Other than spouse, of course.
posted by JackFlash at 1:13 PM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


If anybody is scarring the Trump-Kushner children for life by angrily browbeating their parents in front of them, I'm betting it's Grandpa rather than some drive-by grumbler on a plane.
posted by FelliniBlank at 1:13 PM on December 22, 2016 [13 favorites]


While I believe there's a real difference between Hillary's role in Bill's administration and what Ivanka's role in Donald's administration will be, that difference is going to be hard to articulate to some people enough to get them to care, if you can even get them to listen. My best effort:

First, Bill made Hillary having a role in his administration part of his campaign for president so voters had an idea of what they were getting even if it were new. He touted her involvement as "two for the price of one" according to Wikipedia. I'm fairly certain Trump never claimed this (if anything, the opposite). Second, Hillary didn't actually have as big a role as it seems Donald wants Ivanka to have. Third, she didn't also have a major role in running Bill's business while Bill was president (and couldn't really, because they understood the importance of blind trusts and they didn't HAVE a business to run).

So it's not just being different that make it bad, it's bad because voters didn't know they were getting first lady Ivanka, they didn't know they were getting the most powerful first lady in history, and they didn't know they were getting a first lady with major conflicts of interest that are even worse than they would be if she weren't so involved with his administration (and those were already pretty big).
posted by Green With You at 1:14 PM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


I just went back and checked the comments on the Forward article and holy fucking shit. Uniformly pro-Trump, full of homophobic and anti-Semitic slurs and specific threats.

Yeah. I tried to contact Forward about six months ago about what a cesspool their comments section was and was ignored, and they complained about it in the comments section for a while, and then just unfollowed them. It's like the idea that a moderated comments section and social media might NOT become an alienating mass of hyperpartisan shit-flinging is an entirely alien concept to them.
posted by maxsparber at 1:15 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


I'm currently working on applying to graduate school for library science and aiming for a master's degree.

Ha, yeah, I got that part. It's this:

news that Trump and Friends are going after librarians

that I'm worried about, and I hadn't heard anything specific about it (though I'm not a bit surprised). What's going on?
posted by Rykey at 1:20 PM on December 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


shadow Presidenting

Worst Andy Gibb single.
posted by Superplin at 1:22 PM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


Oh, for fuck's sake, now Robert Reich is getting credit for the Freedom Concert idea and not disabusing anyone of that notion.
posted by Etrigan at 1:23 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


Wordshore put a link to a librarian article at in the body of this FPP.

Did you all not read all the links??!!!
posted by paper chromatographologist at 1:25 PM on December 22, 2016 [11 favorites]


What's going on?

I was referring to the Teleread link in the opening post.

I'm still trying to figure out what's given him so much armor as far as his supporters and America in general are concerned. "Surely this..." jokes aside, for all his incoming unpopularity he's shaken off things that should have been incredibly damning, and if we're going to defeat or restrain him we're going to have to find a way to beat that.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 1:26 PM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


it's bad because voters didn't know they were getting first lady Ivanka

They still don't really know. AFAIK there has been no announcement just rumors denied by the transition team.
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 1:29 PM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


Just idly, I wonder how things are going to work when Trump decides he needs to replace Melania. Surely that marriage won't last eight years except maybe as a total sham - but in this leakers' culture, will he really be able to keep his affairs and/or impending divorce quiet? Actually, you have to wonder - will Melania just stay in NYC permanently to give him a freer hand?
posted by Frowner at 1:33 PM on December 22, 2016 [6 favorites]


Mustache update, because staying on top of this story is obviously the best use of my life:
I appreciate the grooming advice from the totally unbiased mainstream media, but I will not be shaving my #mustache.
--@AmbJohnBolton
posted by zachlipton at 1:33 PM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


That brings up jonmc's comment from the dirty john bolton thread:

"That mustache of his must be filthy."
posted by JackFlash at 1:39 PM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


Did you all not read all the links??!!!

Aha! I had CTRL-Fd up through yesterday's posts, thinking there was something recent darkside was commenting on.

I hadn't noticed that in the FPP, though—it's all I can do to keep up with the comments these past months. Guess that little gaffe means I'll be turning in my Librarian card...
posted by Rykey at 1:39 PM on December 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


I'm still trying to figure out what's given him so much armor as far as his supporters and America in general are concerned

A quarter of America opposes him and will always oppose him; a quarter of America is devoted to him and will always be devoted to him; and half of America just doesn't care and will continue not to care until he completely wrecks their shit.
posted by octobersurprise at 1:42 PM on December 22, 2016 [18 favorites]


Dan Scavino, of "sheriff's star" fame and prolific retweeter of Alex Jones and other nonsense, will be the White House social media director.
posted by zachlipton at 1:45 PM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


John Cassidy: Ayn Rand and Corporate Tax Cuts Won't Mend the Economy [no shit]
In a recent research note to clients, Goldman predicted that three-quarters of the money that big corporations bring back to the United States next year under the Trump tax plan will end up being spent on stock buybacks. “We estimate that $150 billion out of $780 billion of S&P 500 buybacks in 2017 will be driven by repatriated overseas cash,” the Goldman research note said. “We forecast that S&P 500 companies will repatriate close to $200 billion of their $1 trillion of total overseas cash in 2017, which will be directed primarily toward share repurchases.”

It seems unlikely, therefore, that giving big tax breaks to major corporations will do much to raise capital spending and growth, although it could give another boost to the stock market, in the short term, anyway. Indeed, this may help explain why the Dow Jones Industrial Average has risen by more than sixteen hundred points since the election and is now flirting with the twenty-thousand level. For big investors like Dalio, the Trump honeymoon is continuing. For everyone else, a large dose of skepticism is in order.
i.e., when the Dow hits 20,000 next week don't let anyone tell you it's because investors are optimistic about the actual economy.
posted by theodolite at 1:46 PM on December 22, 2016 [7 favorites]


Dan Scavino, of "sheriff's star" fame and prolific retweeter of Alex Jones and other nonsense, will be the White House social media director.

Surely this.
posted by Joe in Australia at 1:47 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


half of America just doesn't care and will continue not to care until he completely wrecks their shit

That's probably the most depressing part to me - that a lot of people are willing to look the other way to whatever he does because they aren't personally affected. I guess our job is to try and get people to care, however difficult it is, and peel away enough support from him and disaffected voters to take back what we lost in future elections.

Dan Scavino, of "sheriff's star" fame and prolific retweeter of Alex Jones

With each of these appointments, I'm not sure in what universe any of these people aren't anything but a horror show. I swear each one is worse than the last.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 1:51 PM on December 22, 2016 [8 favorites]


half of America just doesn't care and will continue not to care until he completely wrecks their shit.

You forgot the quarter of America that will believe him when he blames their wrecked shit on someone else
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 1:51 PM on December 22, 2016 [8 favorites]




If this Freedom Concert happens, I hope Celine is there.
posted by asteria at 2:01 PM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


John Bolton is one of those figures of the Bush years whom I thought of as some sort of historical aberration who would briefly enjoy his time making the world a worse place and then go die somewhere unloved.

I mean fuck your fucking mustache, you monster, why aren't you gone.

Sigh.
posted by angrycat at 2:02 PM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


Rockettes to perform at Trump inauguration
[...]
Apparently the Mormon Tabernacle Choir will be playing the inauguration.

Shameless pandering for the youth vote.
posted by Joe in Australia at 2:03 PM on December 22, 2016 [14 favorites]


Rockettes to perform at Trump inauguration

I think that Trump and Don DiMello would be great friends.
posted by Rust Moranis at 2:04 PM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


Rockettes to perform at Trump inauguration

Nothing like a line of ladies high-kicking up their skirts for a Trump inauguration. I'm surprised he doesn't just make it into a Miss Universe contest, the contestants can sing as their talent portion.
posted by dis_integration at 2:05 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


Did you all not read all the links??!!!

Aha! I had CTRL-Fd up through yesterday's posts, thinking there was something recent darkside was commenting on.

I hadn't noticed that in the FPP, though—it's all I can do to keep up with the comments these past months. Guess that little gaffe means I'll be turning in my Librarian card...


does anyone read the posts down here links up there?
posted by Billy Rubin at 2:06 PM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


wait, there's going to be a line of kicking ladies doing kicking tricks at the inauguration? I mean I guess that Trumpian.
posted by angrycat at 2:07 PM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


I guess the best thing I can think of to combat apathy is to get people to care - either by convincing them that people they care about will be hurt by his policies or they will indirectly (his economic plans are the equivalent of a child scribbling on a chalkboard, and with even less grounds in reality - they won't benefit anyone but the very rich).

For me, I'm working on moderates and conservatives I know. Several of the younger Trump voters I've met think he's not a good or honest man and recognize at least some of his harmful actions, but genuinely think Hillary was incompetent/corrupt/worse. I'll also be trying my best to attend protests and support local Democrats.

I wore a safety pin for a while as a sign of passive resistance, especially since my options are limited, but I was intimidated for it at work and people I respect have brought up reasons to focus on more direct activism (largely commercialization and co-opting of the pin by right-wingers).
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 2:11 PM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


@realDonaldTrump received daily intelligence briefing today, his spokesman says, making it the second day in a row he's received PDB.

I heard he's been eating his vegetable likes a good boy, too, even though they're yucky
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 2:16 PM on December 22, 2016 [7 favorites]


Secret service does not normally provide protection for adult family members of the president.

There have been a few exceptions (Bush daughters and Chelsea).
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 2:17 PM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


Rockettes to perform at Trump inauguration
[...]
Apparently the Mormon Tabernacle Choir will be playing the inauguration.


And finally Topo Gigio!
posted by Mchelly at 2:18 PM on December 22, 2016 [11 favorites]


Several of the younger Trump voters I've met think he's not a good or honest man and recognize at least some of his harmful actions, but genuinely think Hillary was incompetent/corrupt/worse.

We can thank our magnificent fourth estate for this, among other things.
posted by asteria at 2:21 PM on December 22, 2016 [7 favorites]


It's darkly ironic that a lot of the people who made their money peddling conspiracy theories and fear of the government are lining up so eagerly behind one that's genuinely horrific and out to get people.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 2:22 PM on December 22, 2016 [13 favorites]


I'm still trying to figure out what's given him so much armor as far as his supporters and America in general are concerned. "Surely this..." jokes aside, for all his incoming unpopularity he's shaken off things that should have been incredibly damning, and if we're going to defeat or restrain him we're going to have to find a way to beat that.

Every other President-Elect has had a reasonably long career of public service either in direct elected office or in the military, and has been inculcated by the norms of the political class. Trump has not.

Everyone (who had a voice in the national discourse) had many, many assumptions about what "could not" be done. You couldn't openly criticize an entire ethnic group and be a viable presidential candidate. You couldn't refuse to release your taxes or divest yourself of personal interests. You couldn't speak off the cuff, you have to be circumspect, you have to weigh your words. Even Bush Jr. understood these norms -- for all his cowboy swagger, his blood runs quite blue.

The kernel of -- oh god, am I saying this? -- the kernel of truth in Trumpism is that the political class really had built a cloud-castle of norms, a fantasy of parliamentary dignity and collegiality, of carefully orchestrated Correspondents' Dinner roasts and white-tie dinners and kabuki legislative dances and quiet kicking-of-cans-down-the-road. They were horrified, not by Trump's racism and misogyny, but by his aesthetics; and he and his band of white nationalists, cronies and theocrats rode into Washington on the waves of their sneering, along a path strewn with their disdain.

It was a perfectly-timed leap that he took, through the closing door of demographic change and the wild vagaries of electoral mathematics and the politics of whitelash, and it was a close thing -- we mustn't forget that. But ultimately he stumbled into the precise moment to jump, and did, and landed with a force that we do not know how to defend ourselves against.

We need to rebuild the idea of political truth, and for that we need to rebuild trust. We need local leadership -- people who can get around the smear campaigns that will destroy any national politician less talented than Barack Obama with a direct appeal to their communities. We need shrewdness, the wisdom to know when to fight, and how. We need to confront injustice in ways that expose the hatred at the core of Trumpism, ways that get people not to double down but instead to reimagine their assumptions.

Nationally, we have to defend the most vulnerable -- immigrants, people of color, low-income people, LGBTQ people, the land itself -- and the federal institutions that protect them. We have to attack the GOP coalition by bringing to bear all the pressure we can onto moderates and Trump skeptics in the House and Senate. And we have to demand Democratic Party leadership that understands all this, that won't bend to the intense temptation to normalize and retreat.
posted by tivalasvegas at 2:24 PM on December 22, 2016 [40 favorites]


Inauguration is going to be a blast for septuagenarian fans of many white people dressed exactly the same
posted by theodolite at 2:25 PM on December 22, 2016 [6 favorites]


And while we're still digesting that (completely expected) statement of nuclear arms proliferation, let's take our air supremacy back to the 80s:

@realDonaldTrump
Based on the tremendous cost and cost overruns of the Lockheed Martin F-35, I have asked Boeing to price-out a comparable F-18 Super Hornet!

posted by RobotVoodooPower at 2:34 PM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


Multimillionaires traveling coach? I am seeing a very elaborate ploy to garner sympathy.
posted by kadmilos at 2:35 PM on December 22, 2016 [12 favorites]


I've been listening to a lot of protest songs lately, some from the 60s and some anti-Bush ones. The saddest realization is that a lot of the problems they talked about are very much still with us.

Then I wonder what Phil Ochs would say about Trump.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 2:37 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


The Rockettes?? Why don't they just have a mud wrestling pit (women only of course) and pole dancers? So. FUcking. Sexist it is disgusting.
posted by yoga at 2:41 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


Ehhh, I've known and worked with the Rockettes and don't know that we need to denigrate them. They're decent people, great dancers, and have little control over what they're trotted out to do.
posted by zutalors! at 2:46 PM on December 22, 2016 [19 favorites]


Based on the tremendous cost and cost overruns of the Lockheed Martin F-35, I have asked Boeing to price-out a comparable F-18 Super Hornet!

Yeah, that sounds cost-efficient, thanks Don
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 2:52 PM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


Based on the tremendous cost and cost overruns of the Lockheed Martin F-35, I have asked Boeing to price-out a comparable F-18 Super Hornet!

What does this even mean? I mean, they're entire different aircraft for different purposes, but the specs needed to define what a "comparable" model would be according to whatever definition of comparable we're using are thousands of pages. You can't just eyeball the price; you actually have to know what you're bidding on first.
posted by zachlipton at 3:02 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


The Rockettes! Oh boy! Maybe after the party we can take the train and grab a steak at Jack Dempsey's joint! This inauguration is gonna be reet, neat and complete!
posted by valkane at 3:11 PM on December 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


zachlipton: Are those specs public? The need for the F-35 has always been a bit of a mystery to me, and I have defaulted to assuming it's nothing but a brazen boondoggle.
posted by Coventry at 3:15 PM on December 22, 2016


What does this even mean? I mean, they're entire different aircraft for different purposes, but the specs needed to define what a "comparable" model would be according to whatever definition of comparable we're using are thousands of pages.

I recommend people adopt a stance of acknowledging that Trump's tweets have real-world diplomatic and financial impact, but not spending a single second attempting to divine the true meaning or authorial intent of them. That way lies madness.
posted by C'est la D.C. at 3:19 PM on December 22, 2016 [10 favorites]


I saw the Rockettes when I was about seven. My grandparents took me and my best friend at the time to $NearestLargeTown (they must have been on tour). We thought they were incredibly glamorous and spent weeks attempting to master their arm-in-arm high kicks.

What I'm trying to say is, Trump is retroactively ruining my childhood and I want him to stop.
posted by Leslie Knope at 3:20 PM on December 22, 2016 [13 favorites]


It's also like no one has briefed him on how smart contracting lawyers can challenge decisions on grounds of political interference.--@DavidLauter
posted by zachlipton at 3:26 PM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


Really, the Rockettes might be the only act in America with enough accumulated collective goodwill to be forgiven for this.

I'm calling this one in their favor for taking this for the team.
posted by mochapickle at 3:26 PM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


Also I don't think the President can unilaterally ask a defense contractor for a price quote on a procurement contract.

Also I don't think the President-elect can either
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 3:26 PM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


Based on the tremendous cost and cost overruns of the Lockheed Martin F-35, I have asked Boeing to price-out a comparable F-18 Super Hornet!
What does this even mean?
My first guess is that it means Trump is either planning to shake down Lockheed Martin or is preemptively threatening a senator in whose district key parts of the F-35 are being built.
posted by Nerd of the North at 3:28 PM on December 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


What does this even mean?

Do not attempt to seek a coherent interpretation if it's not already obvious. Treat it as an incomprehensible howl from the Blind Idiot God of the Chaotic Void and move on.
posted by Rust Moranis at 3:31 PM on December 22, 2016 [9 favorites]


Treat it as an incomprehensible howl from the Blind Idiot God of the Chaotic Void and move on.

If we're talking about Great Old Ones, I think Trump is more like an avatar of Nyarlathotep.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 3:35 PM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


re: F-35s were an expensive and unnecessary (aside from shoveling more money than God into the military/industrial complex) boondoggle; F/A-18s actually make a lot of sense from a military perspective (training, parts, performance).

Purely a case of stopped clock though (or apolitical air force general actually giving halfway decent advice and Donald just repeating the last thing he heard).
posted by porpoise at 3:44 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


If Trump gets into a fight with the military industrial complex, I... I don't know.
posted by wildblueyonder at 3:46 PM on December 22, 2016 [7 favorites]


It's also like no one has briefed him on how smart contracting lawyers can challenge decisions on grounds of political interference.--@DavidLauter

Will it matter once Trump gets through with the judiciary? Keep in mind that not only is a Supreme Court seat up for grabs but over 10% of the federal judiciary has open seats. That's the most a new president has ever been handed.
posted by Talez at 3:46 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


Ed Rogers at WaPo: Democrats are intimidated by Trump’s Cabinet of successful superstars

President-elect Donald Trump is getting his share of criticism for appointing effective, wealthy business executives and leaders from the private sector to his Cabinet. Democrats would have you believe that people who have been magnificently financially profitable in America are somehow disqualified from helping shape American policy. But here’s a different way of looking at the Cabinet Trump has assembled: This may be the most successful group of people brought together to serve a common purpose in Washington in at least the last 50 years.
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 3:47 PM on December 22, 2016


Canada is going to pass on the F-35 and use F-18s to fill in the gaps in the meantime.

No fan of the F-35 myself, but also not a fan of "save money on fighters to spend more on nukes".
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 3:52 PM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


But they aren't qualified for seriously doing their jobs. Most of them are businessmen, not political officials. Many of them have no relevant experience.

Then again, most of those picks were chosen specifically to take an hacksaw to the agencies they're nominally in charge of. So there's that.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 3:53 PM on December 22, 2016 [6 favorites]


> So no, it's not okay to support harassment of families or any other attacks on families, no matter who they are.

If someone's screaming over the wall at Barron Trump's school during recess, that's a problem, because as far as we know the kid's got no influence over his father's decision-making process, and isn't going to have important aspects of government delegated to him. Regardless of how privileged he is, I don't think any policy goals are advanced by harassing him.

None of this is true for Jared Kushner or Ivanka Trump. Their importance to us is not "people who Donald Trump loves" but "people who can directly affect policy outcomes." They happen to be family members, but that's only because Trump chose to staff his inner circle of advisors with family members, every one of whom knew (or should have known) what they were getting into. When they agreed to work on the transition team and be present at these high-level meetings, they accepted some level of responsibility for how our country is governed, and forfeited some of their right to privacy and a peaceful JetBlue flight. They don't get to have policy influence and also remain off limits just because they're family.
posted by tonycpsu at 3:56 PM on December 22, 2016 [19 favorites]


Ed Rogers at WaPo: Democrats are intimidated by Trump’s Cabinet of successful superstars

Gee, I wonder why this Ed Rogers guy is so enamored of the Trump Cabinet. Oh, wait:
The Washington Post has allowed opinion writer Ed Rogers to advocate for the positions and interests of his lobbying firm's clients in numerous anti-environmental pieces. The Post and Rogers have not disclosed his major conflicts of interest even though his firm received over $1.6 million in fees in 2014 alone from energy and transportation clients like Chevron, Caterpillar, and the National Mining Association.

Rogers is a Republican strategist who chairs and co-founded the BGR Group with former Gov. Haley Barbour (R-MS) in 1991. As the Post itself has reported, the firm is one of the top Washington D.C. lobbying firms, having banked more than $15 million in 2014. The newspaper's reporters have described Rogers as a "Republican mega-lobbyist," "lobbyist extraordinaire," and "a go-to guy for Republicans."

One of BGR's practice areas is energy and transportation, where it professes to having "the industry expertise, Capitol Hill experience and knowledge of government to successfully advocate our clients' public policy goals." Rogers is listed as a group leader for the issue area.

On his Post "Insiders" blog, Rogers frequently advocates for positions favored by his energy and transportation clients. While the Post notes that Rogers is "a political consultant" and "chairman of the lobbying and communications firm BGR Group," the publication fails to disclose Rogers' firm's clients and conflicts of interest in his anti-environmental posts.
posted by zombieflanders at 3:58 PM on December 22, 2016 [23 favorites]


Rockettes ... the Mormon Tabernacle Choir

Man, I really hope he gets Up With People.
posted by octobersurprise at 4:00 PM on December 22, 2016 [15 favorites]


No fan of the F-35 myself, but also not a fan of "save money on fighters to spend more on nukes".

Aerospace and projects like the F-35 are what keep engineers in the upper middle class. If the aerospace industry were to collapse we'd probably see engineering and its ancillary professions knocked down a peg or two as demand and wages fall through the floor.
posted by Talez at 4:02 PM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


Poll: 62 percent of Democrats and independents don't want Clinton to run again

The two people they would most like to see are two of the most prominent Democratic-aligned politicians unlikely to seek the White House in 2020: Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and Vice President Joe Biden. Forty-four percent and 43 percent of those voters, respectively, said they would be excited to see Sanders and Biden run.

Trump has appeared to shift some of his campaign policy pledges since winning the election, but 39 percent of likely voters said he should follow the policies and promises he made. Fifty percent, however, believe the president-elect should do whatever needs to be done, even if it means reneging on his promises.


A couple of other interesting tidbits in there too.
posted by futz at 4:06 PM on December 22, 2016


President-elect Donald Trump is getting his share of criticism for appointing effective, wealthy business executives and leaders from the private sector to his Cabinet.

yeah, that's what's happening, sure
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 4:20 PM on December 22, 2016 [9 favorites]


Gee, I wonder why this Ed Rogers guy is so enamored of the Trump Cabinet. Oh, wait:

I figured most people in this thread know who Rogers is. I was going for point-and-laugh.
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 4:21 PM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


Aerospace and projects like the F-35 are what keep engineers in the upper middle class. If the aerospace industry were to collapse we'd probably see engineering and its ancillary professions knocked down a peg or two as demand and wages fall through the floor.

I'm not against the idea of aerospace products but the F-35 is a particularly spectacular example of a failed project that sucks up huge amounts of time and money.
posted by Apocryphon at 4:22 PM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]




Sen. Bernie Sanders: 'We Need To Organize And Mobilize'

“We need to organize in a way that we have never organized before,” Sanders told On Point host Tom Ashbrook in an interview Thursday, December 22. “We need to bring working people all across this country — black, white, Latino, Asian American, Native American — together to tell Mr. Trump that will not tolerate the formation of an oligarchy in this country.”

“There are issues that of course we’re gonna work with him,” Sanders said. “Our infrastructure is crumbling. If Trump comes up with a reasonable proposal, of course that’s something we should work together on…. I voted against all of these disastrous trade agreements, I wanna see new trade agreements. Should we work together on new trade policies, to encourage corporations to invest in America, not just in China? Yeah, we should.”

Beyond the above, however, Sanders made it clear that he and his political allies would be opposed to the President-elect.

“On virtually every issue, we’ve gotta be in vigorous opposition,” Sanders said. “We have got to mobilize people and use the resources that we have in the Congress to stop those ugly attacks against immigrants, Muslims. We cannot compromise one inch in terms of bigotry.”

posted by futz at 4:22 PM on December 22, 2016 [6 favorites]


Fifty percent, however, believe the president-elect should do whatever needs to be done, even if it means reneging on his promises.

As a general rule, I'm very wary of politicians, let alone faux-politicians, who command this kind of unthinking, blind loyalty, the kind where the person could spit at their followers and they'd drink it up.

The closest precedent for this kind of unanimous unthinking support for a relative political nobody was Huey Long back in the 30s. And for all his many flaws, I don't think Long would appreciate the comparison.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 4:23 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


Aerospace and projects like the F-35 are what keep engineers in the upper middle class.

Believe me, I know, and I really hoped the F-35 would get unfucked, since 40% of its sales are exports. If we don't eat our own dog food I don't know who will. Also, if Congressfuckers won't even speak out against loss of defense gravy I guess we're truly fucked.
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 4:24 PM on December 22, 2016


> A 5% across the board tarriff is nuts and will just result in retaliatory duties on everything.

You're right. How about 10%, then?
posted by tonycpsu at 4:27 PM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


Based on the tremendous cost and cost overruns of the Lockheed Martin F-35, I have asked Boeing to price-out a comparable F-18 Super Hornet!

One of the biggest things the F-35 does - and actually does well unlike many other issues - is stealth. Which can't be added to the F-18.

Oh, and Lockheed Martin stock dropped 2.3% after the tweet. Or about 1.7b in market value. I sure hope someone is watching trading activity on these tweeted stocks.
posted by chris24 at 4:44 PM on December 22, 2016 [14 favorites]


Based on the tremendous cost and cost overruns of the Lockheed Martin F-35, I have asked Boeing to price-out a comparable F-18 Super Hornet!
What does this even mean?
My first guess is that it means Trump is either planning to shake down Lockheed Martin or is preemptively threatening a senator in whose district key parts of the F-35 are being built.


First off, I don't believe Trump had or has any idea about the capabilities of the different aircraft or likely knows much about any of the things he "negotiating" on directly. I think people around Trump will use this to get notice for things they want or want changed, and in due time, companies will adapt to this behavior and figure it in as a bump in the initial pricing, allowing Trump to "negotiate" the price down via Tweets while still getting the same money they would have or more by letting Trump look good.

In this case, I wouldn't be surprised if this was something Boeing just happened to mention when talking with Trump about the expense of Airforce One and deciding they might be able to lower that price tag after all. I'm sure there were people behind the scenes not all that keen on the F-35 too, so it may just be a double win for team Trump with good press to come from multiple angles making him look smart.


Regarding the billionaires in the cabinet, this is going to make a number of Democrats blink I suspect as money is valued above almost all else in many circles, so it would be major cognitive dissonance for many to see these people as anything but "successes", smart and qualified as that's how centrally they view the accumulation of wealth in its importance and the genius involved in the ability to do so. It's the lifeblood of Washington, so politicians have a deep respect for those who have it.
posted by gusottertrout at 4:50 PM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


Do I hear 15%? 15?
posted by asteria at 4:54 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


I feel like if Trump was given the power, he'd be like the sadistic little boy from that one Twilight Zone episode who rewrites reality as he sees fit, sees people as playthings whose only purpose is to serve his will or to be broken and thrown away if they don't, and the very lives of the people around him depend on keeping him happy enough not to kill them all in a fit of temper.

We'd all be sent to the cornfield, where he wouldn't have to see or listen to us and little things like reality and common sense don't get in his way.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 4:55 PM on December 22, 2016 [13 favorites]


Alexandra Petri: Trump Cabinet casting notice

• Secretary of state: Must have lush, luxuriant white hair, Y chromosome. During the interview, you will be asked to sit in a large leather chair, spin around slowly, and say, “Well, well, Mr. Bond.” Ideal candidate would look like a cross between a Viagra Commercial Man, John O’Hurley as J. Peterman and the Wizard of Oz. No women, no fatties, NO MUSTACHES.
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 5:05 PM on December 22, 2016 [8 favorites]


Most likely the F-35 remark is a reaction to the reaction against Gingrich's trial balloon, intended to prove that he really is serious about draining the swamp.
posted by Coventry at 5:06 PM on December 22, 2016


Considering the Twilight Zone boy was played by Bill(y) Mumy, who went on to star on Lost in Space (the TV original), I'd describe The Donald as more like Dr. Smith. (And Mumy grew up to portray an alien diplomat in Babylon 5, AND was half of the Dr.-Demento-favorite group Barnes & Barnes, so it's highly unlikely he'd have as good a future career arc)
posted by oneswellfoop at 5:06 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


Aerospace and projects like the F-35 are what keep engineers in the upper middle class.

It's hard to imagine a profession which better prepares people for retooling if their current skill set loses value.

If the aerospace industry were to collapse we'd probably see engineering and its ancillary professions knocked down a peg or two as demand and wages fall through the floor.

What fraction of the F-35 budget is going to wages, and what fraction is that of total wages in the Aerospace Industry?
posted by Coventry at 5:13 PM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


gusottertrout: I'm sure there were people behind the scenes not all that keen on the F-35 too, so it may just be a double win for team Trump with good press to come from multiple angles making him look smart.

The F35 was designed to have parts built in almost every state - forty-five plus Puerto Rico. I'd imagine aerospace lobbyists are screaming in Congressional ears right now. If this pushes them closer to impeachment, I'll gladly be on team F35.
posted by bluecore at 5:13 PM on December 22, 2016 [10 favorites]


I think another part of beating Trump and peeling away his support will mean fighting against cynicism and "Both sides do it"-ism. I know people who have turned to the right or stopped caring about politics at all less because they like Trump and more because they've succumbed to the pox-on-both-your-houses style of thinking. They genuinely think they're screwed whichever side they choose and many of them haven't changed their minds.

Our side suffers from the spread of voter apathy more than theirs does, and in 2018 and 2020 we're going to have to get more of our voters to the booths if we're going to fight back.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 5:23 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


I'd describe The Donald as more like Dr. Smith.

I'd describe him as more like a fishhead. A tiny, tiny fishead.
posted by octobersurprise at 5:26 PM on December 22, 2016 [8 favorites]


The attorney general could have ordered FBI Director James Comey not to send his bombshell letter on Clinton emails.

Not really. I mean she could have ordered him but she had no way to enforce that order since the FBI director is a presidential appointee. Comey had already determined he would release the letter no matter what his superiors said. Only Obama could fire him and if he had done that in the final week of the campaign it would have generated a nuclear shit storm.

So no, there really was nothing Lynch could have done to stop the release of Comey's letter. The blame is entirely Comey's. Nobody could stop him and he knew it.
posted by JackFlash at 5:27 PM on December 22, 2016 [14 favorites]


(As a few people have asked, there's a new post under construction - though about to do the sleep thing, followed by the tea and walk and more tea and eating thing. It'll go live tomorrow [Friday] if you're stateside, or I guess later today if you are in Europe.)
posted by Wordshore at 5:33 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


there's a new post under construction

Can you optimize this one for Netscape Navigator? Thanks.
posted by thelonius at 5:34 PM on December 22, 2016 [6 favorites]


What does this even mean?

Just take an f-18 and re-engine it so it can supercruise. And replace the radar with an lpi radar. And totally remove all the avionics and add in a shitload of new sensors and comm capabilities and integrate them together into a seamless presentation of situationally relevant information. And finally totally redesign the airframe to make it more or less stealthy.

Totally cheap.

Or just upgrade rhinos and watch them get swatted out of the sky by t50s, j31s, and next generation sams.
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 5:36 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


It'll go live tomorrow [Friday] if you're stateside, or I guess later today if you are in Europe.

Or Miss Jackson if you're nasty.
posted by kirkaracha at 5:37 PM on December 22, 2016


This may be the most successful group of people brought together to serve a common purpose in Washington in at least the last 50 years.

That common purpose being, of course, the relentless commitment to and safeguarding of every citizen's access to opportunity, prosperity, and self-actualization. Right?
posted by Rykey at 5:39 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


White Nationalist Groups Raise Millions With Tax-Exempt Charities

With benevolent-sounding names such as the National Policy Institute and New Century Foundation, the tax-exempt groups present themselves as educational organizations and use donors' money to pay for websites, books and conferences to further their ideology. The money also has personally compensated leaders of the four groups.

-- New Century Foundation head Jared Taylor said his group raises money for the benefit of the "white race," a mission taxpayers are indirectly supporting with the group's status as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit.

-- The Georgia-based Charles Martel Society was founded by wealthy publisher William H. Regnery II, who also founded the National Policy Institute.

The group raised $568,526 between 2007 and 2014 and publishes The Occidental Quarterly. In an article last December, the journal's editor applauded Trump's campaign as a "game changer" for white people who oppose immigration and multiculturalism but said they "have a long way to go to really change the public discussion of race, Western culture, and Jewish influence."

...Some tax experts said the IRS is still feeling the sting from conservative critics over its 2013 concession that it unfairly gave extra scrutiny to tea party groups seeking tax exemptions.

"I don't think they're feeling very brave right now," said Ellen Aprill, a tax law professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles

posted by futz at 5:40 PM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


Based on the tremendous cost and cost overruns of the Lockheed Martin F-35, I have asked Boeing to price-out a comparable F-18 Super Hornet!


There's no prize for 2nd place in a dog fight.

The "comparison" to be made is against the latest Migs, not the F-18. And I hear the only model that's ahead of Russia's latest is the Saab Grippen. Cheaper than the F-35..
posted by ocschwar at 5:44 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


Just take an f-18 and re-engine it so it can supercruise. And replace the radar with an lpi radar. And totally remove all the avionics and add in a shitload of new sensors and comm capabilities and integrate them together into a seamless presentation of situationally relevant information. And finally totally redesign the airframe to make it more or less stealthy.

I imagine Trump's next tweet is going to be something along the lines of "Huntington Ingalls charges us $20B to build USS John Kennedy while STX was able to build the world's largest cruise ship over TWICE AS BIGLY as a carrier for only $1.4B #DRAINTHESWAP".
posted by Talez at 5:44 PM on December 22, 2016


Vladimir Putin Will Sing at Donald Trump’s Inauguration, Sources Say
Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin will reportedly sing Fats Domino’s 1956 hit “Blueberry Hill” at Donald Trump’s inaugural ceremony via live video hookup. A Russian liaison working closely with transition leaders said Putin will reprise his 2012 charity event performance of the song.
posted by kirkaracha at 5:45 PM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


[fake] tags, people. In this year even the crazy stuff could be true!
posted by corb at 5:48 PM on December 22, 2016 [23 favorites]


Even in the unlikely event that there's some sort of F-18-based alternate to the F-35, it would be a bad idea. We're basically stuck with the plane. If we bail on it now, it would set the overall development of fighter technology back substantially and we could easily find ourselves in the future with a large but outdated fleet of planes. The way the F-35 has turned out sucks but let's not pretend the plane has no unique capabilities. There's nothing else like it in our inventory, even the F-22 can't handle all of the computing it can do.
posted by feloniousmonk at 5:49 PM on December 22, 2016


Still waiting on the FAKE tag kirkaracha.

Obviously FAKE will be fine too.

*crickets*
*crickets*

Grabs a bottle of Tequila. I'll check in later.
posted by futz at 5:50 PM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


When the Chinese start to on-shore manufacturing back to the US I wonder if they'll bring the dorm style living arrangements with them.
posted by Talez at 5:56 PM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


National Report's a satire site, right in their disclaimer.

So yes. Fake.
posted by Archelaus at 5:57 PM on December 22, 2016


@realDonaldTrump [real, sad]
The so-called "A" list celebrities are all wanting tixs to the inauguration, but look what they did for Hillary, NOTHING. I want the PEOPLE!
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 6:15 PM on December 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


The truly sad thing is how many people fall for his "Despite my billions of dollars, Russia-sized ego, and massive entitlement complex, I'm really for the little guy! Honest!" schtick.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 6:18 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


He's so desperate for approval by those he sees as rich, famous or successful. If he wasn't such an asshole I'd pity him. But here we are.
posted by downtohisturtles at 6:18 PM on December 22, 2016 [15 favorites]


Of course, his idea of "the people" excluding women, LGBTQ+ folks, people of color, Mexicans, liberals, people who don't agree with him...
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 6:20 PM on December 22, 2016 [8 favorites]


I always found it a little surprising that Eric Trump's charity seemed legit unlike his father's. Turns out Eric, too, likes to bend the rules.

AP: Eric Trump Foundation flouts charity standards
The AP found that Eric Trump has exaggerated the size of his foundation and the donations it receives. At the same time, the charity's payments for services or donations to other groups repeatedly went to one of Donald Trump's private golf clubs and to charities linked to the Trumps by corporate, family or philanthropic relationships.[...]

—Based on its revenue and giving, the Eric Trump Foundation is a small-to-medium-sized charity. Eric Trump has repeatedly overstated its size. In 2015, for example, he said his group was "one of the largest foundations anywhere in the country, anywhere in the world." Told of the claim, Associate Dean Patrick Rooney at Indiana University's Center on Philanthropy said, "That's just silly."
Quite a bit more at the link. The board is mostly Trump family and Trump friends with a life time chairmanship for Eric. Also board seats are reserved for any children he might have. When his wife joined the board the children's cancer charity began making donations to animal welfare groups because she likes animals.

Then there is a great entanglement with his father's golf courses.
—The foundation failed to report to the IRS, as required, that it paid $100,000 to a Trump golf club in 2013, a potential conflict of interest. When asked by AP, Scardigli called the omission an "oversight."

The golf club transactions violate a pledge made when Eric Trump sought tax-free status from the IRS. The charity said it wouldn't do business with a company if any of its corporate officers also were on the charity's board; Eric Trump is executive vice president of The Trump Organization, which operates and controls the collection of Trump golf courses. Eric Trump oversees the Trump Organization's golf operations worldwide.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:28 PM on December 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


who doesn't get all wistful and nostalgic for good old-fashioned nuclear arms race brinksmanship at this most wonderful time of the year?

I have it on good authority that this song will be the new national anthem, to be played before all sporting events, movies and Black Friday sales.
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 6:28 PM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


Of course, his idea of "the people" excluding women, LGBTQ+ folks, people of color, Mexicans, liberals, people who don't agree with him...

In other words, the Trump presidency in a nutshell.
posted by Talez at 6:29 PM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


Trump is scheduled to play golf with Tiger Woods tomorrow. I wonder if he will cheat like he usually does?
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 6:29 PM on December 22, 2016


I have it on good authority that this song will be the new national anthem, to be played before all sporting events, movies and Black Friday sales.

I prefer this one.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 6:34 PM on December 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


Chris Kluwe has some pretty strong words for...well, for a lot of people: Fuck you, Donald Trump.
posted by triggerfinger at 6:34 PM on December 22, 2016 [18 favorites]


The truly sad thing ...

Is how delusional he is. I'd pity him if he wasn't likely to end everything in a fiery holocaust.
posted by octobersurprise at 6:38 PM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


@realDonaldTrump [real, sad]
The so-called "A" list celebrities are all wanting tixs to the inauguration, but look what they did for Hillary, NOTHING. I want the PEOPLE!

Can someone translate this for me? What exactly is he saying or implying? I found another comment from today that might put the above tweet in another light.
posted by futz at 6:49 PM on December 22, 2016


[fake] tags, people. In this year even the crazy stuff could be true!

We're in a post-REAL reality. It's all FAKE these days.
posted by kirkaracha at 6:56 PM on December 22, 2016




The so-called "A" list celebrities are all wanting tixs to the inauguration, but look what they did for Hillary, NOTHING. I want the PEOPLE!

Trump cannot get any A list celebrities to come to his inauguration so he is saying he wants "real people" instead. In between he says the A list is worthless because they all wanted to help Hillary but all that added up to nothing because she lost.

TLDR: Inauguration will be karaoke night.
posted by dances_with_sneetches at 6:59 PM on December 22, 2016 [10 favorites]


Can someone translate this for me? What exactly is he saying or implying?

To repeat: if the tweet's message isn't obvious (examples: how dare this gold star father be mean to me, check out sex tape, MAGA), do not waste time and energy to find meaning. The Trumpic Oracle is in fact powered by neurotoxic fumes from a rent in the earth. It's either madness (if he sent it himself) or an attempt to distract or manipulate you (if sent by one of his propagandists).
posted by Rust Moranis at 7:01 PM on December 22, 2016 [8 favorites]


I just realized that Hillary would have the option of attending.
posted by asteria at 7:04 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


I'm trying to put together a list of conservatives who are currently standing up to Trump pretty consistently, but all I can think of is Evan McMullin and Justin Amash. Rand Paul and John McCain are only sometimes doing it. Who am I missing? (I know there aren't many of them)
posted by triggerfinger at 7:05 PM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]




Lindsey Graham.

FWIW, George Will
posted by ocschwar at 7:07 PM on December 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


Lindsey Graham. Ben Sasse?
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:07 PM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


Lindsey Graham has been pretty on point regarding the PEOTUS.
posted by a box and a stick and a string and a bear at 7:08 PM on December 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


Jimmy Carter the only former president to confirm he's attending Trump inauguration

Is it usual for former Presidents to attend the inauguration? And regardless, why is Carter breaking rank? Is it some sort of evangelical thing?
posted by Joe in Australia at 7:14 PM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


That moment when rage-despair (ragespair?) surges up again as I watch a clip of a favorite football player's press conference... and realize that your average NFL star has probably given 30 press conferences since August compared to the big fat ZERO and counting from Trump.

(If you're curious, here are the NFL's rules for The Media Access Policy. If only our PEOTUS were held to such a standard. In part:
Beginning no later than the week prior to the opening of the regular season through the playoffs, each club will open its locker room during the normal practice week (based on a Sunday game) on Monday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday to all accredited media for player interviews for a minimum of 45 minutes. While the actual interviews may be conducted outside the locker room at the club’s or player’s request, the media must be allowed to make the interview request in person to the player in the locker room...
It is the club’s responsibility to deliver access to all players during this time period and each player’s responsibility to cooperate.

posted by TwoStride at 7:17 PM on December 22, 2016


Clinton and Carter went to Obama's.
posted by asteria at 7:18 PM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


Bill Kristol if you can believe it. We're down to depending on fucking Bill Kristol.
posted by chris24 at 7:19 PM on December 22, 2016 [10 favorites]


Oh, and Jennifer Rubin has been pretty good. The last two obviously pundits vs. elected officials if that's what you meant.
posted by chris24 at 7:21 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


dances_with_sneetches,

The reason I ask is this:

Meanwhile sources in the entertainment world say that Trump’s Treasury secretary pick, Steve Mnuchin, who previously worked as a film financier, and White House senior adviser Steve Bannon, who has worked as a Hollywood producer, have been reaching out to prominent players in the entertainment industry to fill out key seats on the stage with bold-faced names.

“They’re emailing old friends with invites,” said a top entertainment executive. “They want recognizable faces in key positions.”


So I am wondering if these "bold-faced names", (is bold-faced names a thing?) all turned trump down and so he got ahead of the impending bad PR and tweeted that 'A listers" were begging him for tix but alas, he had to turn them away because his inauguration was all about the common folk!
posted by futz at 7:22 PM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


Ana Navarro and Ben Shapiro come to mind.
posted by corb at 7:23 PM on December 22, 2016 [7 favorites]


I would actually be OK with Nine Inch Nails performing at the inauguration if they performed Capital G with a few tweaks. It's obviously a rant on Bush-era presidenting, but seems to have become even more relevant with the passing of time.
posted by Jon Mitchell at 7:24 PM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


So I am wondering if these "bold-faced names", (is bold-faced names a thing?) all turned trump down and so he got ahead of the impending bad PR and tweeted that 'A listers" were begging him for tix but alas, he had to turn them away because his inauguration was all about the common folk!

Um, yes, his thought process is about as opaque as a six-year-old who, having been cruelly denied a piece of candy, swears up and down that they don't even like candy anyway you stupid grownup
posted by tivalasvegas at 7:29 PM on December 22, 2016 [6 favorites]


Band That Hung Out With Charles Manson Unsure About Trump

I might tune in to see Mike Love and Donald Trump on the same stage. Just to see if two assholes of that size can orbit each other.

(Interestingly, The Observer was slobbering all over Mr. Love earlier this summer.)
posted by octobersurprise at 7:32 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


If I wanted a song played at the inauguration, it would either be "Fun and Games" by the Barenaked Ladies or "Pigs (Three Different Ones)" by Pink Floyd. The first is technically about Bush but can be refitted easily, and the latter's first verse especially smacks of the Orange One.

Or, alternately, Another Age by Phil Ochs.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 7:33 PM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


Oh yeah - Glenn Beck too.
posted by triggerfinger at 7:35 PM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


For the inauguration I'd choose the marionetted corpse of G G Allin dancing to Godspeed You Black Emperor's "Dead Flag Blues" but maybe that's a little bold
posted by Rust Moranis at 7:37 PM on December 22, 2016 [12 favorites]




Lindsey Graham and John McCain are great at the sanctimonious pontificating in front of the camera, but when it comes down to where it really counts, they vote the Republican line Every. Single. Time.
posted by JackFlash at 7:49 PM on December 22, 2016 [13 favorites]


God, I never thought I'd be on the same side as Glenn Beck. This fucking year.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 7:50 PM on December 22, 2016 [6 favorites]


Oh, wow. I was actually wondering earlier today if Kiss was going to perform. I considered that there might be a chance considering how fucking awful Gene Simmons is. But, alright, no Kiss.

2016, you've been a weird and awful year. Thank you, I guess, for not adding Kiss into the madness. No one needed that.
posted by Neronomius at 7:53 PM on December 22, 2016 [2 favorites]


It's kind of interesting that - so far - no country stars have offered to do it.
posted by asteria at 7:56 PM on December 22, 2016 [4 favorites]


Kiss will do anything for money but they won't do that.

He most likely would have done it but his wife was an adamant NO. And he mumbled something about being on tour in Europe at the time.

Also, I am pretty sure that the performers don't get paid. I have seen several articles that have said this.
posted by futz at 7:58 PM on December 22, 2016


Apparently the Rockettes do not want to perform the inauguration but are being forced by their union.
posted by zutalors! at 7:58 PM on December 22, 2016 [24 favorites]


no country stars have offered to do it.

I'm surprised, too. I was expecting a day of nothing but Bro-Country covers of Lee Hazelwood songs.
posted by octobersurprise at 8:03 PM on December 22, 2016


2016, you've been a weird and awful year.

The weirdest part for me personally is that my main comfort fandom right now to focus on besides this nightmare is an effing horror movie.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 8:06 PM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


Apparently the Rockettes do not want to perform the inauguration but are being forced by their union.

I hate to cite Perez Hilton, but it's the link I could find. It sound like management made the deal and the union (probably in response to performer complaints) just explained that, according to the contract, there was no way to get out of it.
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 8:06 PM on December 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


Apparently the Rockettes do not want to perform the inauguration but are being forced by their union.

Where did you see that zutalors!?
posted by futz at 8:08 PM on December 22, 2016


Yeah, I file this under "don't know": Don't Be Fooled, The Rockettes Don't Have Much of a Choice
posted by Joe in Australia at 8:09 PM on December 22, 2016 [3 favorites]


The weirdest part for me personally is that my main comfort fandom right now to focus on besides this horror show is an effing horror movie.

The fact that the popularity of murder, crime and horror podcasts has ramped up over the past 1.5 years to the point of dominating itunes has to be a related phenomenon. It's like we as a culture are priming ourselves.
posted by Rust Moranis at 8:09 PM on December 22, 2016 [6 favorites]


Yeah, I file this under "don't know": Don't Be Fooled, The Rockettes Don't Have Much of a Choice

OK, yeah, much less benefit of the doubt to the union in this version!
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 8:14 PM on December 22, 2016


The fact that the popularity of murder, crime and horror podcasts has ramped up over the past 1.5 years to the point of dominating itunes has to be a related phenomenon. It's like we as a culture are priming ourselves.

I'm dealing with the fact that right now I only seem to be attracted to dystopian, utter fantasy and generally shows and movies that aren't based on real life so to speak... if they are American based shows. I'm finding it really hard to watch any American show that is set in present day America without ending up feeling physically ill. Before Donald I really enjoyed a lot of US political type shows. Can't watch them at all right now. I tried watching the West Wing and it made me feel ill.

I've branched out into shows from other countries, especially Scandinavian, and those present day shows are fine.

But really, it's the world is really messed up shows and movies that weirdly are the most comforting, though that seems like the wrong word but it's like those shows feel okay.

I just got through watching season two of The Man in the High Castle. I was extremely wary of it and figured that watching American Nazis wasn't going to fly but I was super surprised that I didn't have the reaction I thought I would. It was definitely a more of head trip then the first season but bizarrely I not only liked it a lot I found it cathartic.

I know there's a whole lot of psychology wrapped up in this. It's just weird to be experiencing it and being conscious of it happening.

It's also made me think a lot about how popular culture is going to respond and what types of shows, movies and music is going to come out in the coming years.
posted by Jalliah at 8:30 PM on December 22, 2016 [11 favorites]


I'd love to think that Carter wanting to show up is to show up Trump; didn't Carter have to sell his Peanut Farm before assuming presidency?
posted by porpoise at 8:35 PM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


I just got through watching season two of The Man in the High Castle. I was extremely wary of it and figured that watching American Nazis wasn't going to fly but I was super surprised that I didn't have the reaction I thought I would. It was definitely a more of head trip then the first season but bizarrely I not only liked it a lot I found it cathartic.

Ironically, for me it's The Thing, which is strange because I've been feeling a sense of paranoia - sorting through the people I know, creating a support network of friends I can trust online and IRL, and always uncertain if the stranger I'm speaking to is someone who voted to take my rights as a woman away. It's not a pleasant feeling.

I'm going to attend the movie's 35th anniversary at a convention in March, and that's one of the few slivers of anything remotely good for me to cling to in 2017.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 8:45 PM on December 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


I really don't think Carter's trying to be ironic or Machiavellian by showing up. I think his motivation is similar to why he was brokering peace deals in the Middle East. He thinks he can help. Not sure if he can, but I don't think it's more than that.
posted by krinklyfig at 8:45 PM on December 22, 2016 [24 favorites]


Maybe his union told him he'd be in breach of contract otherwise?
posted by Joe in Australia at 9:11 PM on December 22, 2016 [6 favorites]


I just got through watching season two of The Man in the High Castle.

Same here, and one thing which occurred to me when I was watching it is that I haven't seen or read many stories which take place in authoritarian environments and don't have good models for how to behave in one.
posted by Coventry at 9:12 PM on December 22, 2016


I haven't seen or read many stories which take place in authoritarian environments and don't have good models for how to behave in one.

George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four; Michael Radford, 1984 (DVD; streaming)
Margaret Atwood, The Handmaid's Tale
Richard "Stephen King" Bachman, The Running Man; DVD; streaming
posted by kirkaracha at 9:57 PM on December 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


A U.K.-centric take on this year: 2016
posted by Johnny Wallflower at 10:03 PM on December 22, 2016


Our gift to the UK this year was making them look better by making an even worse decision than Brexit. Merry Christmas, UK.
posted by Joey Michaels at 10:20 PM on December 22, 2016 [9 favorites]


Evil will always triumph because good is dumb.

I keep thinking this literally every day. This is why we can't fight this whole thing. We cannot just get our shit together, gang up, and be as awful and united as the Republicans are. We're dumb and we lost. We pick on each other and argue and "go high" and "give him a chance" and all that nice shit that does not work.
posted by jenfullmoon at 10:28 PM on December 22, 2016 [11 favorites]


I'd love to think that Carter wanting to show up is to show up Trump; didn't Carter have to sell his Peanut Farm before assuming presidency?

The only honest president. Now compare Billy Carter and Billy Beer and what we used to think about the propriety of presidential families cashing in.

FML.


(Meanwhile consider that President Carter's actions around beer industry deregulation made Billy Beer possible, and also your favorite IPA.)
posted by notyou at 10:47 PM on December 22, 2016


Now compare Billy Carter and Billy Beer and what we used to think about the propriety of presidential families cashing in.

There was also Billygate where Billy Carter was given hundreds of thousands of dollars in loans from Libya. It was as much a nothingburger as peanutgate, but it did lead to Jimmy having to state, "I am deeply concerned that Billy has received funds from Libya and that he may be under obligation to Libya. These facts will govern my relationship with Billy as long as I am president. Billy has had no influence on U.S. policy or actions concerning Libya in the past, and he will have no influence in the future."

Simpler times.
posted by peeedro at 11:05 PM on December 22, 2016 [13 favorites]


George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four; Michael Radford, 1984 (DVD; streaming)
Margaret Atwood, The Handmaid's Tale
Richard "Stephen King" Bachman, The Running Man; DVD; streaming


Thanks, I haven't seen Running Man.
posted by Coventry at 11:27 PM on December 22, 2016


I keep thinking this literally every day. This is why we can't fight this whole thing.

Evil is dumb, too. Remember 2008? A ham sandwich with the Democratic nomination could have won the presidency. Republicans spent years wringing their hands about how to repair their "brand," which still hasn't really recovered.
posted by Coventry at 11:32 PM on December 22, 2016


Evil is dumb, too.
All the Evil Masterminds of the Republican Party ended up having to pledge their allegiance to Dumb Donald. Sometimes stupidity succeeds beyond all expectations.
posted by oneswellfoop at 11:40 PM on December 22, 2016 [1 favorite]


Children of Men
posted by angrycat at 11:47 PM on December 22, 2016 [8 favorites]


Remember 2008? A ham sandwich with the Democratic nomination could have won the presidency.

Not Really. A different candidate than Obama might well have floundered, especially if McCain had not made the panicked Hail Mary of Palin. Very little will dissuade ~60 million voters from going Republican every four year.
posted by Candleman at 11:48 PM on December 22, 2016 [5 favorites]


Two articles from the Washington Post about Trump hiring foreign workers at his Virginia winery:

First the conflicts of interest - Trump vineyard seeks Labor Department approval to hire foreign workers:
Federal ethics experts for former Democratic and Republican administrations warned Thursday that President-elect Donald Trump is creating a major conflict of interest by allowing his Virginia vineyard to seek special temporary visas for foreign workers.

Trump, who is president of the Charlottesville vineyard that applied this month for H2 visas for six foreign workers, will soon run the U.S. government, which determines whether to grant those visas.
Second, a running tally of the foreign workers Trump businesses have brought in using the H-2 program, it's quite a list - Businesses associated with Trump have sought to hire more than 500 migrant workers since 2013
posted by peeedro at 12:19 AM on December 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


A different candidate than Obama might well have floundered

Obama won the popular vote by 6.2% and the electoral college by 192 votes, though. That is a lot of leeway.
posted by Coventry at 12:47 AM on December 23, 2016


Children of Men

Thanks. Saw the movie. I should read the book.
posted by Coventry at 12:48 AM on December 23, 2016


You know what's been working better than anything else to keep me sane in the midst of all this? What's giving me hope, even?

Listening to Reverend William Barber. If you haven't checked out much beyond his DNC speech, please do. Work like his, the ideas behind Moral Mondays and the use of Reconstruction-style fusion politics, that's going to be the biggest force multiplier for anything else we can do. You could have a DNC dream team firing on all cylinders and it's just setting us up for the same fights down the road, even if we turn the political tide in the next couple elections, if we can't get down on the ground level and shatter the myths that grew out of the Southern Strategy, reframe the conversation, and this is a framework that works.
posted by jason_steakums at 1:02 AM on December 23, 2016 [34 favorites]


Had my first bet on the 2020 US election today; only a very small one as it's four years off. Amy Klobuchar at 33/1.
posted by Wordshore at 2:38 AM on December 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


A new version of "It's A Wonderful Life"
posted by oneswellfoop at 3:01 AM on December 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


Trump: "let it be an arms race"

Surely, somewhere, in some universe, someone objects to this.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 4:02 AM on December 23, 2016 [13 favorites]


Trump: "let it be an arms race"

Surely, somewhere, in some universe, someone objects to this.


Thank the fates that the glorious city on the hill will be able to make sure that the enemy's rubble is twice as irradiated.

Also, FFS. He isn't even President yet and he's had well over 8 years worth of idiotic comments just between the election and now. This is just lunacy.
posted by jaduncan at 4:12 AM on December 23, 2016 [7 favorites]


“Facts Are Out, Rhetoric Is in,” Ulysses Burley III, The Salt Collective, Undated
posted by ob1quixote at 4:53 AM on December 23, 2016


Ir really is lunacy. We must have more nukes because terrorists? Even the logic of Brigadier General Jack D. Ripper makes more sense than this.

The star act of the inauguration will be a convoy of 18 wheelers pulling toxic waste and rolling coal in tight formation. on their way to dump their load in a lake near Flint, before going on to have the drivers replaced by Chinese robots. I struggle to find any other performance that can encapsulate the frothing machismo insanity which President-Defect Trump is demonstrating each and every day.
posted by Devonian at 5:05 AM on December 23, 2016 [14 favorites]


Trump: "let it be an arms race"

Putin is paying us back for Reagan's Announce-Star-Wars-And-Make-The-USSR-Spend-Itself-Into-Oblivion Strategy.
posted by PenDevil at 5:12 AM on December 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


Reuters: Russian President Vladimir Putin says will go to USA if Donald Trump invites him.

The incoming press secretary, Sean Spicer, has already had a busy morning, saying on the Today Show that there will not in fact, be an arms race.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 5:25 AM on December 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


Pay no attention to the man in front of the curtain!
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 5:28 AM on December 23, 2016 [27 favorites]


@RealDonaldTrump: "Someone incorrectly stated that the arms race was off. Actually, we will always be trying to have an arms race."
[fake]
posted by Too-Ticky at 5:31 AM on December 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


Wow. This 'Presidency' is cost a kings ransom in popcorn. Or nuclear bunkers.
posted by From Bklyn at 5:35 AM on December 23, 2016


Trump's spokesman is off to a rough start:

"Trump spokesman Sean Spicer said in several television interviews on Friday that there would not be an arms race because the president-elect would ensure that other countries trying to step up their nuclear capabilities, such as Russia and China, would decide not to do so."

"U.S. President-elect Donald Trump, asked to clarify his comments about expanding U.S. nuclear weapons capability, said, "Let it be an arms race," and that the United States would win it, MSNBC reported on Friday."

And then there's this gem:

"He's going to ensure that other countries get the message that he's not going to sit back and allow that," Spicer, who was named this week as White House spokesman for the president-elect, told NBC. "And what's going to happen is they will come to their senses, and we will all be just fine."

Link
posted by diogenes at 5:59 AM on December 23, 2016 [10 favorites]


Wow we really are doomed, aren't we?
posted by Cocodrillo at 6:12 AM on December 23, 2016 [11 favorites]


Apparently the Rockettes do not want to perform the inauguration but are being forced by their union.
posted by zutalors! at 10:58 PM


They should perform in full body hazmat suits, complete with gas masks. I might just write them & suggest that.
posted by yoga at 6:22 AM on December 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


We're totally doomed.

I hope someone from the media will ask the incoming Trump Administration how they will handle the missile gap. We might as well go full retro.
posted by honestcoyote at 6:26 AM on December 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


Well, if you really want to start your holiday weekend right, read this Trump interview from 1987 where he talks about how he'd handle nuclear threats and nuclear proliferation. TL;DR, we should team up with Russia to make sure no one gets or uses the bomb. And not just countries like Pakistan or North Korea. He goes off on France having the bomb. So team up with Russia against France over nukes. You can also see just how fixated he is and has always been on nukes. He actually refuses to talk about his business to continue to rant on the nuke issue.

Trump’s Nuclear Experience: In 1987, he set out to solve the world’s biggest problem
It’s a deal with the Soviets. We approach them on this basis: We both recognize the nonproliferation treaty’s not working, that half a dozen countries are on the brink of getting a bomb. Which can only cause trouble for the two of us. The deterrence of mutual assured destruction that prevents the United States and the USSR from nuking each other won’t work on the level of an India-Pakistan nuclear exchange. Or a madman dictator with a briefcase-bomb team. The only answer is for the Big Two to make a deal now to step in and prevent the next generation of nations about to go nuclear from doing so. By whatever means necessary.
posted by chris24 at 6:30 AM on December 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


"In conclusion, nuclear deterrence is a land of contrasts."
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 6:31 AM on December 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


Can we get them off the "nukes" kick and back onto "the navy has fewer boats than it did during WWI" one? At least building ships we don't need won't get everyone killed.
posted by Blue Jello Elf at 6:33 AM on December 23, 2016 [13 favorites]



"He's going to ensure that other countries get the message that he's not going to sit back and allow that," Spicer, who was named this week as White House spokesman for the president-elect, told NBC. "And what's going to happen is they will come to their senses, and we will all be just fine."


*sigh* The US is going to get soooo rolled by other countries and power groups. Yes it is going to be a very dangerous time but this level of stupidity and incompetence is ripe for the picking. Geopolitically this is an world changing opportunity for other power players and those that want to be power players.
And likely there is going to be a whole lot of what looks like other states kissing Donald's ass and Donald crowing about victory after victory as he 'talks and makes the world come to it's senses' but really the states will be walking away and giggling all the way to the money and power bank.

Already got a minor taste of it with the 'amazing' Carrier deal with Donald et al crowing and the CEO laughing at how easy it was to get the better part of the bargain.
posted by Jalliah at 6:34 AM on December 23, 2016 [10 favorites]


Who stands to profit now from a nuclear arms race? Those things are expensive.
posted by ZeusHumms at 6:37 AM on December 23, 2016


Yep, playing the Donald is ridiculously easy, and boy howdy are the Russians and Chinese good at such games.
posted by stonepharisee at 6:38 AM on December 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


With Obama's Signature, U.S. Religious Freedom Law Protects Atheists

"When President Barack Obama signed an update to U.S. law protecting religious freedom late last week, one provision drew special attention: U.S. law now recognizes non-believers as, in essence, a religious group.

Obama's signing of amendments to the International Religious Freedom Act on Friday wasn't widely noticed — except among the community of atheists, agnostics and others who categorize themselves as "humanists."

For the first time, the law — which was originally passed in 1998 — specifies that "the freedom of thought, conscience, and religion is understood to protect theistic and non-theistic beliefs and the right not to profess or practice any religion.""
posted by chris24 at 6:39 AM on December 23, 2016 [32 favorites]


Remember how some people think the Soviet Union collapsed because it couldn't afford the arms race it was in, and that the US only lasted because it was in a slightly better financial position?
posted by drezdn at 6:40 AM on December 23, 2016 [12 favorites]


If you'd like to express your concern at the Rockettes being forced to perform at Trump's inauguration, you can email the producers at:

Jill.DeForte@msg.com
Larry.Sedwick@msg.com
feedbackradiocity@msg.com

And you can call the union who's requiring they perform - AGVA, American Guild of Variety Artists - at 212-675-1003
posted by chris24 at 6:44 AM on December 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


Um, yes, his thought process is about as opaque as a six-year-old who, having been cruelly denied a piece of candy, swears up and down that they don't even like candy anyway you stupid grownup

In other news, surplus seats at the inauguration will be filled by undersea drones.
posted by snuffleupagus at 6:45 AM on December 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


Yep, playing the Donald is ridiculously easy, and boy howdy are the Russians and Chinese good at such games.

They sure are.

Even with bits of evidence after evidence of just how easy it is there is a part of me that doesn't want to believe it's so. That it's just near impossible for someone in his position both in life and now is this playable. I have to think that his scummy bully side has managed to counteract his playable side because for the most part in his 'business' life he has the control he needs over all of the parts. So it works to some extent and what hasn't worked (which appears to be a whole lot) he just knows how to hide and forget about.

This will not work well in the millieu he's in. He's going to have a heap load of trouble dealing with people not doing things just because he said so. But then, it's not difficult for someone who seems to be manipulated so easily to be made to 'think' that he won and people are listening him.
posted by Jalliah at 6:50 AM on December 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


The real difficulty in playing Trump is that he's both completely transparent in the moment, but willing to totally change his statements and actions from one moment to the next, so you can get the response you want immediately, but he'll deny it happened later and do something contrary to "prove it". That won't go over well with the Chinese, though team Putin seems pretty understanding about it so far. Trump's pliability makes him personally tough to play as long as his support holds, but it won't be something I'm looking forward to living through.
posted by gusottertrout at 6:57 AM on December 23, 2016 [1 favorite]




If you are not an MSNBC viewer, or didn't happen to catch Rachel Maddow destroying Kellyanne Conway last night, here's two minutes of horrifying video.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:00 AM on December 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


Jalliah: He's going to have a heap load of trouble dealing with people not doing things just because he said so.

Well, except for launching nukes. All it takes is him giving the order and the Secretary of Defense confirming the order. After that, no one in the chain can countermand the order, except the President. We put a man in charge of the largest nuclear arsenal in the world without a security clearance, a mental health exam, or the same tax documents you need to get a mortgage.
posted by bluecore at 7:04 AM on December 23, 2016 [7 favorites]


Donald's twitter response to the AP story on Eric's charity:

My wonderful son, Eric, will no longer be allowed to raise money for children with cancer because of a possible conflict of interest with...

my presidency. Isn't this a ridiculous shame? He loves these kids, has raised millions of dollars for them, and now must stop. Wrong answer!

Also Putin gave his yearly press conference yesterday and he called the US Democrats sore losers and said that nobody believed in DJT "Except for you and me."

WaPo Putin to Democratic Party: You lost, get over it
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 7:04 AM on December 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


He loves these kids, has raised millions of dollars for them, and now must stop.

Each of those three phrases is bullshit.
posted by Etrigan at 7:07 AM on December 23, 2016 [25 favorites]




> WaPo Putin to Democratic Party: You lost, get over it
“Democrats are losing on every front and looking for people to blame everywhere,” Putin said in answer to a Russian TV host, one of 1,400 journalists accredited to the marathon session. “They need to learn to lose with dignity.”
Wait, no, that doesn't look right:
@realDonaldTrump: Democrats lost everywhere, tried to blame everyone. Sore losers. Sad!
OK, that's better.
posted by tonycpsu at 7:08 AM on December 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


My wonderful son, Eric, will no longer be allowed to raise money for children with cancer because of a possible conflict of interest with...

my presidency. Isn't this a ridiculous shame? He loves these kids, has raised millions of dollars for them, and now must stop. Wrong answer!


My crooked opponent, Hillary, should no longer be allowed to raise money for children with AIDS because of a possible conflict of interest with the presidency. Wasn't that a ridiculous sham I pulled during my campaign?
posted by chris24 at 7:09 AM on December 23, 2016 [13 favorites]


didn't happen to catch Rachel Maddow destroying Kellyanne Conway last night,

I watched the interview. The only people who watch Maddow are Liberals so it was pretty pointless. Conway did her usual lying and spinning and Maddow gave her that platform. Conway does not come off looking good but she wasn't crushed and frankly Maddow comes off as an enabler more than anything. Maddow is given plenty of opportunities to take off the gloves and be blunt, call out Conway on her lying, but she smugly sits back and allows the viewers to make up their own mind. It isn't a game anymore. Maddow and every other journalist out there needs to go out for blood. Watch some BBC interviewers take on some of their politicians if you have forgotten how it is done.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 7:11 AM on December 23, 2016 [45 favorites]


The real difficulty in playing Trump is that he's both completely transparent in the moment, but willing to totally change his statements and actions from one moment to the next, so you can get the response you want immediately, but he'll deny it happened later and do something contrary to "prove it". That won't go over well with the Chinese, though team Putin seems pretty understanding about it so far. Trump's pliability makes him personally tough to play as long as his support holds, but it won't be something I'm looking forward to living through.

I'm not talking about statements, I'm talking about the signed on paper deals. Carrier is a perfect example of this. Carrier management got the best of that deal and although the CEO did come out and say as much they don't care that Donald is crowing about it and using it for his own ego boost.
Of course his contradictions won't go over well with the Chinese and they will use it to their advantage. The Chinese also have absolutely no problem playing longer games and as much as 'saving face' is a thing they also are adept at using that to their advantage as well. Playing the victim, the embarassed victim is as much a strategy as anything else. The Chinese are at the master level of this geopolitical game.

It likely wouldn't be so bad for the US if Donald surrounded himself with people that both understand him AND how this part of the world works but so far there is very little indication that this is happening.
posted by Jalliah at 7:11 AM on December 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


Bloomberg: The Coming Pressure on Professional Women
In the U.S., educated women have benefited from the availability of cheap unskilled immigrant workers from Latin America, while those in the U.K. have benefited from Eastern European labor -- precisely the immigrant labor that voters and governments have on their radar. Reduced immigration will leave us with a choice: Either life will be more difficult for professional women, or professional men will have to do more around the home.

Meanwhile, countries that need immigrants to make up for declining fertility rates among natives will find this source unavailable. Fertility in the U.S. and U.K. has fallen below the replacement ratio of 2.1 and the proportion of women with no children has increased significantly. [...]There have been various recent policy initiatives aimed at encouraging Western women to have more babies. They include cash inducements (as offered in Singapore and Turkey), subsidized child care (popular in Scandinavia and increasingly so in the U.K.), additional paid leave and even national fertility-boosting songs and, in Russia, an annual day earmarked for baby-making.
posted by Secret Life of Gravy at 7:14 AM on December 23, 2016


Donald's worldview is built around superlatives; everything is either the biggest and best or it's not big and good enough. This has gotten him into trouble before; it's why he overspent on the overgaudy and overexpensive Taj and drove his casino empire into bankruptcy, a thing widely considered impossible before both Trump and Steve Wynn showed us how to do it. It's why he occasionally whines that there are buildings in NYC taller than Trump Tower.

So of course he is obsessed with nukes, because nukes are the biggest and best weapons, and he's obsessed with having the biggest and most of them. That Trump would have that attitude is as predictable as the downhill flow of water.

Now, as to the fact that numerous other countries also have enough thermonuclear weapons to seriously ruin our day *cough* China *cough* it is also a thing that Donald doesn't think things through, which again is why he spent far more building the Taj than even a kiddie accountant could have told him it would ever earn out in the well understood gambling economy. He thinks by throwing our weight in with his bud Pootie that we can just overwhelm those wimps like France and they will understood that we are a force not to be trifled with.

What he doesn't understand is the chaos even one bomb would cause, which is also why he thinks it's a perfectly reasonable idea to use a couple of them if we need to in a pinch, because else why have them.

Damn, I was trying to work around to a point but I think the point I have made is that I need to go ahead and open the Jack Daniel's.
posted by Bringer Tom at 7:15 AM on December 23, 2016 [17 favorites]


Conway does not come off looking good but she wasn't crushed

I mean, I don't agree with that at all. Maddow saying, "It's France" pretty much decimated any credibility Conway had on the show last night, which was already almost none.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 7:15 AM on December 23, 2016


Well, except for launching nukes. All it takes is him giving the order and the Secretary of Defense confirming the order.

Which are the actions of someone having a heaps load of trouble dealing with not getting his way.
posted by Jalliah at 7:17 AM on December 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


Bloomberg: The Coming Pressure on Professional Women

So should I just shuffle off to the Unwoman colony now, or wait until January?
posted by mochapickle at 7:17 AM on December 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


@Max_Fisher
One reason the nuclear arms race ended: it almost sparked global annihilation in 1983, spooking the US and USSR. How World War III became possible: A nuclear conflict with Russia is likelier than you think
Five hours into Petrov's shift that night, something he had never encountered in his 11-year career happened: The system went into full alarm. The word "LAUNCH" displayed in large red letters. The screen announced a "high reliability" of an American ICBM barreling toward the Soviet Union.

Petrov had to make a decision: Would he report an incoming American strike? If he did, Soviet nuclear doctrine called for a full nuclear retaliation; there would be no time to double-check the warning system, much less seek negotiations with the US. If he didn't, and he was wrong, he would have left his country defenseless, an act tantamount to treason.

His gut instinct told him the warning was in error, but when he flipped through the incoming imagery and data and he could reach no hard conclusion from it. After a few moments, he called his superiors and stated categorically that it was a false alarm. There was, he insisted, no attack.

Petrov waited in agony for 23 minutes — the missile's estimated time to target — before he knew for sure that he'd been right. Only a few people were aware of it at the time, but thanks to Petrov, the world had only barely avoided World War III and, potentially, total nuclear annihilation.

The US and Soviet Union, shaken by this and other near-misses, spent the next few years stepping back from the brink. They decommissioned a large number of nuclear warheads and signed treaties to limit their deployment.
posted by chris24 at 7:28 AM on December 23, 2016 [13 favorites]


Andrew Reynolds: North Carolina is no longer classified as a democracy
In 2012 [Jorgen] Elklit and I worked with Pippa Norris of Harvard University, who used the system as the cornerstone of the Electoral Integrity Project. Since then the EIP has measured 213 elections in 153 countries and is widely agreed to be the most accurate method for evaluating how free and fair and democratic elections are across time and place.

When we evolved the project I could never imagine that as we enter 2017, my state, North Carolina, would perform so badly on this, and other, measures that we are no longer considered to be a fully functioning democracy.

In the just released EIP report, North Carolina’s overall electoral integrity score of 58/100 for the 2016 election places us alongside authoritarian states and pseudo-democracies like Cuba, Indonesia and Sierra Leone. If it were a nation state, North Carolina would rank right in the middle of the global league table – a deeply flawed, partly free democracy that is only slightly ahead of the failed democracies that constitute much of the developing world.

Indeed, North Carolina does so poorly on the measures of legal framework and voter registration, that on those indicators we rank alongside Iran and Venezuela. When it comes to the integrity of the voting district boundaries no country has ever received as low a score as the 7/100 North Carolina received. North Carolina is not only the worst state in the USA for unfair districting but the worst entity in the world ever analyzed by the Electoral Integrity Project.
posted by zombieflanders at 7:29 AM on December 23, 2016 [55 favorites]


@realdonaldtrump Congrats North Carolina for the best gerrymander ever [fake]
posted by Bringer Tom at 7:32 AM on December 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


Michelle Goldberg, Slate: Why Did Planned Parenthood Supporters Vote Trump?
For opponents of Trump, the recordings make for excruciating viewing. They show how myths about Hillary Clinton’s corruption proved more influential than facts about Trump’s. “I really didn’t trust Hillary at all, and that’s why I went with Trump,” said a new mother in Harrisburg who’d been undecided until the last moment. “He’s more honest than her.” Some of the conversations make clear the role sexism played in the election. “I didn’t know if I was ready for the first woman president,” said a pretty, pregnant blonde 27-year-old woman in Phoenix. “I know how emotional I am, so … “ But if they’re maddening, the focus groups are also revelatory. They suggest that the Clinton campaign made a fatal mistake in depicting Trump as outside the bounds of normal conservatism. Clinton’s camp had hoped that doing so would lead Republicans to defect. Instead, it helped some people who distrust conservatism to reconcile themselves to Trump.
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter." — Winston Churchill (apocryphal)
posted by tonycpsu at 7:32 AM on December 23, 2016 [4 favorites]




How World War III became possible: A nuclear conflict with Russia is likelier than you think

While the anecdote referenced in the tweet from this article is about 1983, the article's main point is how nuclear war with Russia is very possible now.
posted by chris24 at 7:49 AM on December 23, 2016


I've been reading these threads, and I can't decide if I should put all my moneys in my mattress or spend them all since we won't make it past 2018. I guess this is more of an AskMe, but what should I do???
posted by armacy at 7:54 AM on December 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


Boy, if Thanksgiving was tense and hostile for a lot of families, Christmas dinner's gonna be a grim bloodbath. Never have I been more glad that I don't observe holidays or do family occasions anymore. Even though we have ample piles of evidence already to show Trump is completely indifferent to the impact of his words on people and this should not surprise me at all, I'm still somehow gobsmacked that a "world leader" would start tossing off totally tone-deaf alarming one-liners about nuclear weapons escalation two days before the biggest mainstream American holiday.

Peace on earth, everybody.
posted by FelliniBlank at 7:55 AM on December 23, 2016 [14 favorites]


Some of the conversations make clear the role sexism played in the election. “I didn’t know if I was ready for the first woman president,” said a pretty, pregnant blonde

Article on sexism describing speaker as "pretty."

Anyway, I've been thinking of all trumpkins as infantile daddy-complex types. Yet one of my own analogies right now is I feel like a small child who just realized there are no good grownups, no Helpers, in charge.

I mean, this sense of how tens of millions of us are just sitting here watching this unfold, and no one's DOING anything.

Meanwhile, I am probably off shortly for a holiday visit I'm dreading even more than usual. In the meantime, here's my nomination for inauguration music-the Spike Jones Fuehrer's song. ("When the fuehrer says we is the master race, We heil, heil in the fuehrer's face, Not to love the fuehrer is a great disgrace...")
posted by NorthernLite at 8:00 AM on December 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


No big deal, just Trump’s national security adviser partnering this year with a man convicted of trying to sell stolen biotech to the KGB.

"Subu Kota, who pleaded guilty in 1996 to selling the material to an FBI agent posing as a Russian spy, is one of two board directors at the company, Boston-based Brainwave Science. During years of federal court proceedings, prosecutors presented evidence they said showed that between 1985 and 1990 Kota met repeatedly with a KGB agent and was part of a spy ring that made hundreds of thousands of dollars selling U.S. missile defense technology to Russian spies. Kota denied being part of a spy ring, reached a plea agreement in the biotech case and admitted to selling a sketch of a military helicopter to his co-defendant, who was later convicted of being a KGB operative."
posted by chris24 at 8:04 AM on December 23, 2016 [16 favorites]


Hey, ThinkProgress has an eyewitness to the JetBlu incident!, taken from a Facebook post:

That's us in the photo you see on the internet. I am sitting in the next row up from Ivanka and surrounded by her family. The whole incident happened literally 15 inches from me. The article is sensationalizing this a little. Here is what happened.

A man got on and got upset about her and her family. He didn't accost her directly.

When he got on and saw her, sitting behind me, he said "oh my god. This is a nightmare" and was visibly shaking. He said "they ruin the country now they ruin our flight!" (Context: Boarding and therefore the flight was delayed because they needed to get on first through some other way)

He did not yell. He was also not what I would describe as calm. Agitated for sure. His husband behind him was very calm. His son is adorable and sharply dressed.

When the JetBlue staff went back to speak to the man I overheard Ivanka say to them "I don't want to make this a thing." My assessment is that she was happy to let the man take his seat. She handled the situation calmly and with class. Security made the call to remove the man.


Next time we have a discussion in which someone is accused of harassing Trump or a proxy, let's remember this. The Trumps and their supporters love to behave aggrieved, as though they are under attack, and regularly exaggerate what they have been subjected to. And they do this, in part, to create a false equivalency, because their supporters have legitimately been threatening and violent, and this allows them to say both sides do it.

We had an argument on this thread about something that didn't happen. Ivanka was not threatened or screamed at in front of her children. That wasn't an accident. That was exactly the discussion that was intended.

Let's not fall for that again.
posted by maxsparber at 8:04 AM on December 23, 2016 [61 favorites]


Maybe the Rockettes could back a performance of Springtime for Hitler?
posted by mazola at 8:09 AM on December 23, 2016 [7 favorites]


We had an argument on this thread about something that didn't happen. Ivanka was not threatened or screamed at in front of her children. That wasn't an accident. That was exactly the discussion that was intended.

The Facebook post you linked says if they were security, they also would have removed the man. So.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:09 AM on December 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


I don't want to be a complete pessimist, but I will say I've moved a few things off of my bucket list, just in case.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 8:10 AM on December 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


We have to remember this. Grumbling to yourself and your partner about having to sit near a person who is attempting (with all signs of success) to destroy and delegitimize your way of life can be successfully framed as you screaming at a poor innocent family. This is how they are going to handle any form of direct dissent, no matter how minor or toothless.
posted by Rust Moranis at 8:10 AM on December 23, 2016 [43 favorites]


Donald is that uncle that comes over for Christmas dinner with his own six-pack, disappears to the work shed repeatedly for a little tipple out of a bottle, and parks himself in front of the TV to curse out the football players. Maybe he'll pass out before the pies are served, otherwise someone will have to wrestle the car keys away from him.

He has an answer for everything, never mind that he said the exact opposite last Thanksgiving. Some family members refuse to share the same room with him. But in his mind he's just a good ol' boy and doesn't mean anything by it when he insults the cook. He apologized for it a few days later, right? Not that he actually remembers what happened, but that's been normal for him for years. At least that's his excuse.

And yes, there has been talk about his behavior getting more bizarre as he gets older. Someone really needs to sit down with his wife and adult children and talk with them about it.
posted by TrishaU at 8:11 AM on December 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


Update: Rockettes Union Calls Boycotting Inauguration 'Invalid'

I feel for those performers, because those that have fears that they'd never work again if they broke their contract are probably right. The demands for performances like the Rockettes are already so high, and the performers are treated like shit and policed within an inch of their life in spite of it all.
posted by dinty_moore at 8:12 AM on December 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


The Facebook post you linked says if they were security, they also would have removed the man. So.

Yes. Based on an earlier social media post, not based on the behavior on the plane. That's not the discussion we had. We had a discussion about a man screaming at a woman and her children.

So.
posted by maxsparber at 8:14 AM on December 23, 2016 [6 favorites]


We had a discussion about a man screaming at a woman and her children.

I take your point, although it's impossible to know exactly what happened, obviously.
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 8:16 AM on December 23, 2016


I'm not talking about statements, I'm talking about the signed on paper deals. Carrier is a perfect example of this. Carrier management got the best of that deal and although the CEO did come out and say as much they don't care that Donald is crowing about it and using it for his own ego boost.
Of course his contradictions won't go over well with the Chinese and they will use it to their advantage. The Chinese also have absolutely no problem playing longer games and as much as 'saving face' is a thing they also are adept at using that to their advantage as well. Playing the victim, the embarassed victim is as much a strategy as anything else. The Chinese are at the master level of this geopolitical game.


I guess part of the issue then is how anyone would determine Trump does or doesn't get "played". He certainly doesn't care about Carrier making money or not, he only cares about how it looks for him and whether people respond to it like he wants. As long as he gets that, who cares what Carrier gets since Trump stays president. Same with the F35s, He gets Boeing to announce they'll reconsider the price they're charging for Airforce One, it makes headline news, Trump then gives Boeing a boost by questioning Lockheed Martin, so Boeing might end up getting a deal, or not, and Lockheed Martin, might end up doing the same through another set of idiotic transactions that may amount to nothing much more than words boosting Trump. It's all a con just intended to keep Trump out front looking good to his supporters, The rest doesn't matter much, until it does, bigly.

With China, the problem is that Trump's volatile nature makes it difficult to "win" an appearance battle with him. Unlike a reasonable president that might let China get the last word and look good if the US got something they wanted out of it, Trump won't sit still for insults, real or imagined. That staircase doesn't get to Airforce One quick enough, Trump jets off again and Tweets insults. China can retaliate doing the same sorts of things, which might look strong to their citizens, but Trump doesn't give a damn about that either as long as he looks good at home. It's not the deals he makes or doesn't that matter as much as the image, and while US citizens might suffer because of that, as long as he keeps ahead of the fools who voted for him, he'll be happy enough and the Republicans will sack the rest of government. So, sure, China might be able to get something from him in materials at times, but Trump plays too much the same game for them to get much satisfaction beyond that, which suggests breakdown in communications to me.
posted by gusottertrout at 8:16 AM on December 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


I take your point, although it's impossible to know exactly what happened, obviously.

Well, we do have an actual eyewitness to what happened, and no eyewitnesses to anyone screaming, (that claim, unsourced, was from TMZ, which is not especially reputable), so this isn't as nebulous as you make out.
posted by maxsparber at 8:19 AM on December 23, 2016 [19 favorites]


Is there a group I can throw money at that helps fight nuclear proliferation? I've got a huge spreadsheet of possible charitable organizations to throw money at in case of Trump, but I didn't think we'd be travelling back to 1981, so they were left off the list.
posted by dinty_moore at 8:19 AM on December 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


That flight incident wasn't even close to the first time some vague situation got blown out of proportion in discussion, with lots of assumptions being made that later turned out not to be accurate at all. So, I agree, we should be far more careful about asserting blame, cause, or harm without evidence and not get carried away by stories with little factual verification to go on.
posted by gusottertrout at 8:22 AM on December 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


> Is there a group I can throw money at that helps fight nuclear proliferation?

The Ploughshares Fund and Global Zero are two that seem well-regarded.
posted by tonycpsu at 8:22 AM on December 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


We had a discussion about a man screaming at a woman and her children.

We ended up having a discussion about whether it was okay for someone to scream at someone with their children there. It quickly moved on from the the specific situation to a more meta level. And yep it was a conflict ridden one but as far as I'm concerned the type of discussion about responses to Donald and his crew that is going to happen and have to happen in the coming years because even if this particular set of events ended up being hypothetical, issues like it are going to come up over and over and over as more and more people react to what he's going to do.
posted by Jalliah at 8:22 AM on December 23, 2016 [7 favorites]


North Carolina is no longer classified as a democracy

It's called "apartheid". We should start using the right words.
posted by T.D. Strange at 8:25 AM on December 23, 2016 [20 favorites]


I'm frustrated by voter apathy and cynicism more than anything else. I would have thought if anything struck a deathblow to "both sides are equally bad and they're all the same" it would be this.

But so it goes.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 8:27 AM on December 23, 2016 [3 favorites]




It quickly moved on from the the specific situation to a more meta level.

I feel like we should reserve even our meta "Are activists being unfair to the Trumps? Should they be?" until activists are actually being unfair to the Trumps. It starts coloring the issue in a way I am deeply uncomfortable with. There is an entrenched narrative about liberal or leftist activists that has them as tantamount to terrorists, and when you examine the actual stories, there is either nothing there at all (spitting on Vietnam soldiers) or a deliberate distortion and exaggeration (BLM activists rioting).

This is a meta discussion that supports that narrative. Unless it is necessary, and made necessary by actual events and behavior, I don't believe it is useful.
posted by maxsparber at 8:29 AM on December 23, 2016 [25 favorites]


There is an entrenched narrative about liberal or leftist activists that has them as tantamount to terrorists, and when you examine the actual stories, there is either nothing there at all (spitting on Vietnam soldiers) or a deliberate distortion and exaggeration (BLM activists rioting).

There's a long history of leftist protests being framed as riots, and Trump's people are taking advantage of that (i.e, the persistent meme about rioting Hillary supporters, painting them as sore losers). At the same time he can claim that he disowns his supporters' violence while at the same time giving them a wink and a nod.
posted by thedarksideofprocyon at 8:32 AM on December 23, 2016 [14 favorites]


@ThePlumLineGS
I'm so old I remember when some credulously suggested Trump would be more anti-war and balanced on Israel than Clinton.
posted by chris24 at 8:33 AM on December 23, 2016 [16 favorites]


I would have thought if anything struck a deathblow to "both sides are equally bad and they're all the same" it would be this.

He's not in power yet. You might have to give it a year.
posted by Rust Moranis at 8:34 AM on December 23, 2016


Dear Donnie:

I like you. Do you like me?

___ Yes
___ No

Your pal,
Vlad
posted by FelliniBlank at 8:37 AM on December 23, 2016 [14 favorites]


How many days until he takes office? I don't even want to project 365 days. This just isn't getting any better, is it?
posted by TrishaU at 8:37 AM on December 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


Honestly I was way less upset with the actual incident even if there was screaming (people have bad days/get provoked/are out of evens) and mostly was upset by the meta aspect of people saying he should be praised/encouraged and that it was fine behavior.
posted by corb at 8:39 AM on December 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


I don't even want to project 365 days. This just isn't getting any better, is it?

It's going to be a different world in a year, no matter what happens. Know how it feels like we entered a meat portal into the Upside-Down a year or so ago? 2017 is going to make us feel that way about this year. Gotta prepare yourself for that.
posted by Rust Moranis at 8:43 AM on December 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


I worry that it was staged. Another bait-and-switch like the tweets. Same outcome -- never let the left hand know what the right hand is doing.
I don't believe that the couple and their child were a plant, but the timing and venue just seem off to me.
Of all the things to be worrying about, a president-elect that gets approval ratings by staging performance art. There go my evens.
posted by TrishaU at 8:44 AM on December 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


Is this encouraging at all? I can't tell anymore. Robert Gates: There's value in Trump's 'disruptive approach' (WaPo)

“We’ve never had a populist movement or political insurgency quite like this — that actually captured the White House. That means there will be more discontinuities in our foreign policy. I’m telling people: ‘Give us some space here and have some strategic patience. And don’t overreact — even to Trump’s tweets. ... There will be a rough break-in period.”

IOW - Robert Gates: We have an unhinged, vastly unprepared person in charge so please give us a break fellow countries and hopefully it won't go all to shit.

Not encouraging.
posted by chris24 at 8:48 AM on December 23, 2016 [17 favorites]


"He's going to ensure that other countries get the message that he's not going to sit back and allow that," Spicer, who was named this week as White House spokesman for the president-elect, told NBC. "And what's going to happen is they will come to their senses, and we will all be just fine."

We better hope to god everyone else comes to their senses, because we're already committed
posted by Ray Walston, Luck Dragon at 8:48 AM on December 23, 2016 [3 favorites]


I guess part of the issue then is how anyone would determine Trump does or doesn't get "played". He certainly doesn't care about Carrier making money or not, he only cares about how it looks for him and whether people respond to it like he wants. As long as he gets that, who cares what Carrier gets since Trump stays president. Same with the F35s, He gets Boeing to announce they'll reconsider the price they're charging for Airforce One, it makes headline news, Trump then gives Boeing a boost by questioning Lockheed Martin, so Boeing might end up getting a deal, or not, and Lockheed Martin, might end up doing the same through another set of idiotic transactions that may amount to nothing much more than words boosting Trump. It's all a con just intended to keep Trump out front looking good to his supporters, The rest doesn't matter much, until it does, bigly.

Because in the end of it not about Donald. It's about the US, as a whole, it's place in the world, it's hold on power, it's moral authority, it's stature, etc etc. I made a comment about the US getting rolled by other countries because Donald is so easily playable. It doesn't matter if Donald wins, or thinks he wins or in his mind he hasn't been played because he got what he wanted and needs it's about the US getting played in real world fact and becoming worse then it is now. It's got nothing to do with whatever illusions Donald creates for himself.

Donald did get played with Carrier because he really did nothing that the company wasn't prepared to do anyways plus bonus they get tax breaks. The CEO is right he got the better end of the deal and is okay with Trump crowing about how awesome he is at deals. That is the point I'm making. He's an easy man to manipulate into thinking he's making the best deal for himself, which he will say is good for the US blah blah blah, if the people he's making the deal with don't care about ego, or being looked at as 'winning' and the pomp that goes around it because they actually won in reality. They can laugh all the way to the bank because they don't give a shit about 'winning' in the same way that Donald thinks about 'winning.'

China is going to, if they haven't already use Donald's ego against him in their own self interest and because of the nature of who Donald is, and who he's decided to surround himself with the US, as whole, historically speaking, long term strategy wise is going to get screwed right over because Donald et al aren't capable of seeing what is happening. I expect we will see what appear on surface as China saying yes to Donald. I expect we will see a lot of countries and companies and CEO saying yes to Donald and Donald strutting around like a peacock. It will be an illusion.

Another huge factor in getting themselves screw by China and a whole lot of other 'brown people' geopolitical actors is that they are racist. Racism not only makes people do bad things and treat people badly but it also blinds people to their capabilities. Racism of the type that people like Donald subscribe to cause a type of myopia that leads to the inability to properly assess what the hell is going on. In a nutshell, your opponent isn't as smart or capable as you, therefore it clouds any sort of analysis.
posted by Jalliah at 8:50 AM on December 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


> people saying he should be praised/encouraged and that it was fine behavior.

Once again: Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump are not private citizens, they are de facto members of the Trump administration with a great deal of power over public policy. People who take direct action against polcymakers who are working for an administration that's causing them harm deserve our praise and encouragement.
posted by tonycpsu at 8:51 AM on December 23, 2016 [24 favorites]


Well, we agree that it's likely that things aren't going to go well for the US regardless of whether we agree over the distinction of getting played and how or whether that occurs, so I'm content to accept a difference of perspective on the importance image has and will have since we clearly agree on the more important issue of the end result being a bad one either way and there doesn't seem much point to debate the semantics of it or guess about events yet to happen.
posted by gusottertrout at 8:57 AM on December 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


It's going to be a different world in a year, no matter what happens. Know how it feels like we entered a meat portal into the Upside-Down a year or so ago? 2017 is going to make us feel that way about this year. Gotta prepare yourself for that.

People too young to remember 9/11: this sense of the world being a car on a sickeningly icy road sliding out of control is exactly what that felt like, too. And the world I remember from before was gone and it's hard to even explain how different it was.
posted by winna at 8:57 AM on December 23, 2016 [35 favorites]


2017 is going to make us feel that way about this year.

That's actually why I can't calm down, personally. I remember that feeling I had when I watched the towers fall on 9/11, that bone-deep dread I had that things were about to get a whole lot worse for everyone. Except that time, I could sort of emotionally prepare because to me, the outcome was obvious: clearly, we'd go to war. (Silly me, thinking we'd go to war with the people who actually did it.)

This is like that, except I have no idea what's going to happen. Will we all die? Will I end up targeted for a Muslim name on my birth certificate? Will the economy just implode? I have no idea, so I can't shake the feeling this time.

Upon preview:
And winna already said it.
posted by mordax at 8:59 AM on December 23, 2016 [13 favorites]


Going back to the 1987 Trump interview I posted above, Joy Reid thinks his current tweets reflect that same mindset.

@JoyAnnReid
I feel like people are getting the nukes story backward. Trump isn't proposing a new cold war AGAINST Russia. He seems to be pitching 1/

a new Russo-American alliance against OTHER powers: presumably China, Mideast nations, even Europe; enforced by growing nuclear arsenals. 2/

And based on that Putin letter which Trump eagerly shared, a Russo-American alliance based on a Christian vs non-Christian clash of civs. 3/
posted by chris24 at 9:03 AM on December 23, 2016 [19 favorites]


And the world I remember from before was gone and it's hard to even explain how different it was.

We had hope. Idealism was being converted into policy. Strides were being taken in liberal movements and we were well on the track to becoming whole as a nation. NBC was on top of the ratings. Nickelodeon, Disney, TV, and Hollywood were at the top of their game. We could feel the west wing becoming reality.

Then we called Gore a nerd and fucked it all up from there.
posted by Talez at 9:05 AM on December 23, 2016 [9 favorites]


> a Russo-American alliance based on a Christian vs non-Christian clash of civs.

This. We need to be very sensitive to any such framing. Putin's use of the Russian Orthodox church has been terribly effective.
posted by stonepharisee at 9:13 AM on December 23, 2016 [4 favorites]




Putin's use of the Russian Orthodox church has been terribly effective.

Ideally we would play up the fact that no regime that executes political opponents could possibly be considered "Christian," but that would be hamstrung given that our religious right clearly DGAF.
posted by Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish at 9:20 AM on December 23, 2016


If you can't criticize the Trumps in front of their kids you're going to see Barron spending a lot of time as a human criticism shield.
posted by jason_steakums at 9:21 AM on December 23, 2016 [13 favorites]


a new Russo-American alliance against OTHER powers: presumably China, Mideast nations, even Europe; enforced by growing nuclear arsenals. 2/

And based on that Putin letter which Trump eagerly shared, a Russo-American alliance based on a Christian vs non-Christian clash of civs. 3/


Yeah, this is the thing that is really worrying, and which wasn't quite adequately conveyed during the election to many on the left who I saw nervously wondering about a new cold war with Russia due to the hacking. The US working with Russia would be a far scarier thing for the world from my perspective, as it threatens all long time alliances for a resetting of the table based on aggression and immediate benefit rather than any concern over more honorable values. Trying to assert dominance in that fashion can't end up going well for any but the richest and most well connected.

The US has done plenty of terrible things in their history that could call their legacy into question, but it has also generally worked under the guise of certain higher principles that have been heard and echoed by the oppressed in other nations when struggling against dictatorship or terror. To give up even the pretense of those beliefs would make the US a threat to those very values they once claimed as mandate for their actions. Without values, there is only raw power as a measure and guide to the future of civilization.
posted by gusottertrout at 9:21 AM on December 23, 2016 [13 favorites]


And based on that Putin letter which Trump eagerly shared, a Russo-American alliance based on a Christian vs non-Christian clash of civs. 3/

There is nothing in the letter about a clash of civs. That Fake News, fuckin everywhere!
posted by save alive nothing that breatheth at 9:25 AM on December 23, 2016


Holy Zarquon's Singing Fish: Ideally we would play up the fact that no regime that executes political opponents could possibly be considered "Christian,"

Counterpoint: The Inquisition.

...although technically, I believe that the Church didn't execute people itself. It relaxed them to the secular government.
posted by clawsoon at 9:25 AM on December 23, 2016


The Trumps and their supporters love to behave aggrieved, as though they are under attack, and regularly exaggerate what they have been subjected to. And they do this, in part, to create a false equivalency, because their supporters have legitimately been threatening and violent, and this allows them to say both sides do it.

We had an argument on this thread about something that didn't happen.


Meanwhile, the guy's home address remains a right-click away in an image from the real estate listing for his "sprawling" 1100 square foot apartment, right above all the comments calling him a faggot and referring to him as "oven-worthy."
posted by contraption at 9:26 AM on December 23, 2016 [14 favorites]


Yeah, this is the thing that is really worrying, and which wasn't quite adequately conveyed during the election to many on the left who I saw nervously wondering about a new cold war with Russia due to the hacking. The US working with Russia would be a far scarier thing for the world from my perspective, as it threatens all long time alliances for a resetting of the table based on aggression and immediate benefit rather than any concern over more honorable values. Trying to assert dominance in that fashion can't end up going well for any but the richest and most well connected.


What it is in a nutshell is the whole white people throwing a fit at the perceived loss of status and privilege playing out on the global level. There is a reason that white nationalist love Russia and Putin and summarily a reason that Trump and the people using is ID and ego love Russia and Putin.
I doubt that the US will be working with Russia. It's looking more and more that while many in the US will think they are working with it will evolve into working for Russia.
posted by Jalliah at 9:29 AM on December 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


My one quibble with Reid's analysis is that it likely wouldn't be US + Russia vs. China + Europe + Middle East, but US + Russia + Parts of Europe + Parts of Middle East vs. China + Other Parts of Europe + Other Parts of Middle East. I know there's no historical precedent for a fracturing of these peaceful, stable areas of the world, but bear with me.
posted by tonycpsu at 9:31 AM on December 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


Even the logic of Brigadier General Jack D. Ripper makes more sense than this.

I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed. But I do say no more than ten to twenty million killed, tops. Uh, depending on the breaks.
posted by kirkaracha at 9:31 AM on December 23, 2016 [3 favorites]




George Takei Reminds Donald Trump of the Past Horrors of Nuclear Weapons

Every time Trump starts beating his chest about nukes I start imagining a campaign that asks people to send copies of Hiroshima to the White House. I've dismissed it as silly but the idea comes back to me so persistently that I feel the need to ask more experienced activists about it. Effective? Stupid? Pointless? Would it get media attention? Might that lead some people to read the book? The mass market paperback is $7.87 on Amazon, and it's used so often in classrooms that there's got to be tons of used copies floating around for a few dollars. Small, light, cheap to ship. Would it be ridiculous to try to get this going?
posted by sunset in snow country at 9:31 AM on December 23, 2016 [9 favorites]


I doubt that the US will be working with Russia. It's looking more and more that while many in the US will think they are working with it will evolve into working for Russia.

Yes, less a direct backing in most instances, and more a alignment of shared values over white supremacy and interest in some similar areas. Trump has so far shown little interest in working against Russia in any way, so it'll be more that he allows them a freer hand than any US president has to this point and he'll work to further his own similar interests against Islamic states and in some more chaotic fashion in Asia. How much Trump's team of crack (addled) advisers play in determining US policy compared to Trump's own interests will provide some complication, but there has been little signalling that his interests fit those of the EU much or are particularly concerned about other balances of power, as between Pakistan and India, for example, where I suspect Trump's influence could make things very difficult.
posted by gusottertrout at 9:39 AM on December 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


There is nothing in the letter about a clash of civs. That Fake News, fuckin everywhere!

It was a Merry Christmas letter than then segued into how we can rule the world together. Old Vlad didn't say Happy Holidays.
posted by chris24 at 9:40 AM on December 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


Hey, did Trump ever get rid of that Bannon guy, or is he still planning on having an open white-nationalist tool in the White House?
posted by Cookiebastard at 9:42 AM on December 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


My one quibble with Reid's analysis is that it likely wouldn't be US + Russia vs. China + Europe + Middle East, but US + Russia + Parts of Europe + Parts of Middle East vs. China + Other Parts of Europe + Other Parts of Middle East. I know there's no historical precedent for a fracturing of these peaceful, stable areas of the world, but bear with me.

That's my take too. Destabilization and attempts at realignment everywhere.
posted by gusottertrout at 9:42 AM on December 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


Madison Square Garden Company Says Rockettes Can Choose Not to Perform at Trump’s Inauguration

I mean, they have a choice between performing at the inauguration or never working again. I play in a band that, earlier this year, was hired for a private party by a man who was successfully sued for sexual misconduct that makes him a literal monster in my eyes. We had already taken the gig before all the legal stuff made the news, and couldn't think of a way of getting out of it that wouldn't hurt us professionally. The only way I was able to do it with a clean conscience was to donate half of my pay from that to a local organization that works with young women and girls. The fact that I was able to do this (that I could give up at least in part a well-paying job over my convictions) is itself a super privileged situation. If not performing at that would have cost me my career, I probably would have played it, and my stakes are a lot lower than being a Rockette.
posted by OverlappingElvis at 9:45 AM on December 23, 2016 [15 favorites]


Trump team asks State Dept for names of those working on gender equality.

"President-elect Donald Trump's transition team has asked the State Department to list its workers who focus on gender equality and ending violence against women, in what's being seen as an echo of an earlier request for the Energy Department to list employees who work on climate change."

This is fine. We can work with him. Give him a chance.
posted by lord_wolf at 9:46 AM on December 23, 2016 [11 favorites]


Daniel Nexon, LGM: Democratic Backsliding in the USA
It’s when we stop thinking about the United States in isolation that this becomes rather sinister. Trump’s brand of economic coercion invites comparison with patterns in hybrid and autocratic regimes. In such countries, leaders make clear to business leaders that political cooperation yields benefits, but political dissent brings losses.
posted by tonycpsu at 9:48 AM on December 23, 2016 [7 favorites]


Hey, did Trump ever get rid of that Bannon guy, or is he still planning on having an open white-nationalist tool in the White House?

Still part of the administration. It likely foreshadows the ineffectiveness of opposition to the rest of Trump's advisors and cabinet.
posted by jedicus at 9:48 AM on December 23, 2016 [2 favorites]


A new post-election post is live.

Wishing readers of, and contributers to, these threads a peaceful Christmas, and a positive, progressive and healthy 2017.
posted by Wordshore at 10:01 AM on December 23, 2016 [13 favorites]


This is the co-chair of President-Elect Trump's New York campaign. On Paladino's 'wish list' for 2017: Obama dead of mad cow disease [huge transphobia and racism trigger warning]
posted by roomthreeseventeen at 10:02 AM on December 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


Illiberal democracy comes to Poland

Preview of the next four year in America.
posted by T.D. Strange at 10:03 AM on December 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


Nate Cohn in the New York Times: How the Obama Coalition Crumbled, Leaving an Opening for Trump
It is entirely possible, as many have argued, that Hillary Clinton would be the president-elect of the United States if the F.B.I. director, James Comey, had not sent a letter to Congress about her emails in the last weeks of the campaign.

But the electoral trends that put Donald J. Trump within striking distance of victory were clear long before Mr. Comey sent his letter. They were clear before WikiLeaks published hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee. They were even clear back in early July, before Mr. Comey excoriated Mrs. Clinton for using a private email server.

It was clear from the start that Mrs. Clinton was struggling to reassemble the Obama coalition.

At every point of the race, Mr. Trump was doing better among white voters without a college degree than Mitt Romney did in 2012 — by a wide margin. Mrs. Clinton was also not matching Mr. Obama’s support among black voters.

This was the core of the Obama coalition: an alliance between black voters and Northern white voters, from Mr. Obama’s first win in the 2008 Iowa caucuses to his final sprint across the so-called Midwestern Firewall states where he staked his 2012 re-election bid.

In 2016, the Obama coalition crumbled and so did the Midwestern Firewall.
posted by Rustic Etruscan at 10:04 AM on December 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


Wordshore put a link to a librarian article in the body of this FPP.
Did you all not read all the links??!!!


Quietly weeps in corner
posted by Wordshore at 10:27 AM on December 23, 2016 [9 favorites]


I heard Vladmir won't even be celebrating Christmas at all on Saturday.
posted by tivalasvegas at 10:28 AM on December 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


Trump team asks State Dept for names of those working on gender equality.

We are only one step away from Nixon demanding, and getting, a list of Jews who work in the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
posted by JackFlash at 10:30 AM on December 23, 2016 [5 favorites]


How the Obama Coalition Crumbled, Leaving an Opening for Trump

"In retrospect, the scale of the Democratic collapse in coal country was a harbinger of just how far the Democrats would fall in their old strongholds once they forfeited the mantle of working-class interests.

Mr. Trump owned Mr. Obama’s winning message to autoworkers and Mr. Romney’s message to coal country. He didn’t merely run to protect the remnants of the industrial economy; he promised to restore it and “make America great again.”

Just as Mr. Obama’s team caricatured Mr. Romney, Mr. Trump caricatured Mrs. Clinton as a tool of Wall Street, bought by special interests. She, too, would leave workers vulnerable to the forces of globalization and big business, he said."

This presents a yuuuuuuuuuuuge opening for when #MAGA fails because really it just meant tax cuts for the rich all along. Economic messages can still work.
posted by T.D. Strange at 10:46 AM on December 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


This little ditty just came to mind...

posted by notsnot at 11:07 AM on December 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


What I see shaping up, with the dual Trump/Putin tweets about increasing nuclear arsenals -- an Evil Empire alliance between the US and Russia, forming an unstoppable military force that can subdue other nations around the world and exploit them for resources, as climate change increasingly wreaks havoc on our way of life.

While the official party line may be that global warming is a hoax, and the apparent global political response is laughably ineffectual treaties, I believe that the real world powers are extremely aware of the risks of climate change and are preparing, in their own way, for mass societal upheaval, droughts, famines, refugees, all the rest.

It looks like the true response to climate change is this: the powerful countries are preparing to fight and win the resource wars, and leave everyone else to die.
posted by the turtle's teeth at 11:13 AM on December 23, 2016 [11 favorites]


The Trumps and their supporters love to behave aggrieved, as though they are under attack, and regularly exaggerate what they have been subjected to. And they do this, in part, to create a false equivalency

Just a reminder that this is exactly the lens through which Trump supporters view the left: Aggrieved, self-victimizing, histrionic with doomsday narratives of a Trump presidency. Go read r/the_donald for one second and see for yourself - for instance, they've turned "fake news" into a meme, used sarcastically to describe WaPo and NYT.

Doesn't mean you're wrong - but just a mental note of the attitude we're up against.
posted by windbox at 11:15 AM on December 23, 2016


Just a reminder that this is exactly the lens through which Trump supporters view the left: Aggrieved, self-victimizing, histrionic with doomsday narratives of a Trump presidency.

Of course. Because they're liars who project their own behavior onto the left.
posted by maxsparber at 11:26 AM on December 23, 2016 [9 favorites]


Anyone too young to remember pre-GWB : Remember how Fight Club portrays Jack's well-stocked condominium and his successful jetsetting office job as a prison?

Doesn't that seem ridiculous that a film would portray an awesome life that way?

That's because that was the norm before George W. Bush.
posted by Yowser at 11:39 AM on December 23, 2016 [4 favorites]


New Thread
posted by mbrubeck at 11:40 AM on December 23, 2016


Just a reminder that this is exactly the lens through which Trump supporters view the left: Aggrieved, self-victimizing, histrionic with doomsday narratives of a Trump presidency.

Just a reminder that the right's bugaboos about the left are a War on Christmas that has never remotely happened and voter fraud, of which less than 40 cases out of a billion votes cast have been proven -- that is a smaller fraction than the amount of arsenic that is allowed in drinking water.

On the other hand, the left's bugaboos about the right are hate crimes that spiked up this year and voter suppression, thanks to which a Harvard study has determined one of the United States to no longer be a functional democracy.

Fuck optics.
posted by Etrigan at 12:01 PM on December 23, 2016 [25 favorites]


People who take direct action against polcymakers who are working for an administration that's causing them harm deserve our praise and encouragement.

With no barriers? No limits? No lines drawn? Literally nothing separating us from Gamergate-style harassment tactics other than we think we're right? We went from thinking that's terrible to accepting it in the space of six months?

Fuck, I'm tired. Stop the world, I want to get off.
posted by corb at 12:20 PM on December 23, 2016 [1 favorite]


> With no barriers? No limits? No lines drawn? Literally nothing separating us from Gamergate-style harassment tactics other than we think we're right?

Burn as much straw as you like, but the hypothetical we were actually discussing was someone confronting (perhaps screaming at) two members of the Trump administration on a commercial flight (which turns out to not have happened, according to an eyewitness).

If someone has called for unlimited "Gamergate-style" action, please quote them and respond to them directly.
posted by tonycpsu at 12:32 PM on December 23, 2016 [10 favorites]


(Part of me is still half-convinced we're living in a nightmare world created when some careless time-traveler stepped off of the path and crushed a butterfly.)

I think we've entered Bizarro World.
posted by Mental Wimp at 3:41 PM on December 28, 2016 [1 favorite]


...which a Harvard study has determined one of the United States to no longer be a functional democracy.

Totally agree with the sentiment, but my pedantic nature (I have no dog in the Ivy fights) requires that I point out it was a Princeton/Northwestern study.
posted by Mental Wimp at 2:30 PM on December 29, 2016 [1 favorite]


Here’s What Happened When Yahoo! Finance Tweeted, ‘Trump Wants a Much N--ger Navy’ (tl;dr: Black Twitter went in.)

Fat-fingering or Freudian slip? Either way, whoever handles Yahoo Finance's twitter account is probably having a very bad day. (The account has since issued an apology tweet.)
posted by fuse theorem at 9:29 AM on January 6, 2017 [1 favorite]


« Older DUCKTALES! Oh Oh!   |   airborne dildos to the rescue Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments