Trump just won the election

[JohnsonJones]

17 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

If Elon ends up heading some stupid bloated bureaucracy with functionaries wielding unelected and unlegislated power, I will join you in the glorious revolution.

That's just it.  It won't have any power.  All Musk will be is probably a scrape goat.

Congress pulls the purse strings, not the executive.  They can try (much like Biden has tried with student loan forgiveness and other things) but the ultimate power of the purse lies with Congress, not the President. 

I expect they'll do some reforms and changes.  Trump will claim credit, but most of it will be via the Republican Control of Congress.

As I said, if things go south, Musk is going to be an extremely convenient scapegoat for it. 

They aren't going to be able to make the drastic changes Musk is saying they can do, just because of some position he is being given (which spells  D.O.G.E. ironically...I wonder who thought of that...actually...I don't have to think about that, it's pretty obvious) because that's not a power the executive has to that degree. 

 

PS:  If I were Musk I'd probably be trying to get to be Secretary of the Treasury, that one actually has some real power and is not just a position given to someone to appease their ego. 

Edited November 8, 2024 by JohnsonJones

[NeuroTypical]

Here's some good points about what happened being made by someone on the left.   I'd never heard of her before this vid, but her Democrat credentials seem pretty solid.  

 

[Carborendum]

[Phoenix_person]

1 hour ago, NeuroTypical said:

Here's some good points about what happened being made by someone on the left.   I'd never heard of her before this vid, but her Democrat credentials seem pretty solid.  

 

Some good points were made. I'm conflicted about the emphasis on identity politics. A lot of my friends who are queer, women, and/or POC have been down really bad this week. Next week, a lot of them are probably going to be gun shopping. I hate the idea of decentering their safety in future elections, but it may be the only way we win moving forward. And it's not as if the Dem establishment has proven that it gives a crap about them beyond lip service. I'm intimately familiar with rural PA. A lot of Dem voters there don't care about pronouns or Project 2025. They want lower grocery prices and higher wages. Dems need to stop running* on trans rights and other pet social issues and focus more on what swing voters actually care about.

Of course, a lot of leftists won't be on board with that strategy. Some of them are already turning on AOC because they feel she's gotten too comfortable with the Dem establishment. She certainly has, but I don't think that's a bad thing. You don't get big wins by being idealistic, you get them by being strategic. A lot of Dem voters want more AOCs and Ihlan Omars in Congress, but what good is that if they can't effectively lead in the party? How many progressives like that have won Senate races? And at the end of the day, AOC still votes on her principles. She voted against every arms shipment to Israel, and I don't question her dedication to the LGBTQ community. She's learning how do the right things AND say the right things, and those things don't always match.

*This doesn't mean Dems should abandon marginalized communities, but maybe decentering them in national elections is the best way forward. We can't beat moderate Dems and independents by centering people they don't understand. I hate the idea of trying to reach out to people who don't respect my queer friends, but not as much as I hate some of the anti-trans and anti-woman rhetoric I've seen this week from conservatives doing victory laps (not on this site, to be clear). If we want to reach people in the middle, we need to focus on Trump's disastrous economic policies like tariffs and unsustainable tax breaks for the wealthy. It's less sexy than talking about P2025 and J6, but those talking points didn't do a lot of good, did they? Heck, I thought J6 was the one good attack strategy the Dems had, but I guess I underestimated how much it would matter to people who are neither Dems or MAGA Republicans. 

Edited November 8, 2024 by Phoenix_person

[LDSGator]

1 hour ago, Phoenix_person said:

Next week, a lot of them are probably going to be gun shopping.

That’s a good thing, and I’m not kidding. If some wanna be tough guy tries to assault a member of the LGBTQ community who is carrying a 45  it won’t end well. 

[Phoenix_person]

27 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

That’s a good thing, and I’m not kidding. If some wanna be tough guy tries to assault a member of the LGBTQ community who is carrying a 45  it won’t end well. 

Women too, thanks to Kanye's incel buddy.

 

[laronius]

2 hours ago, Phoenix_person said:

 I hate the idea of decentering their safety in future elections, but it may be the only way we win moving forward. 

Why do your friends feel unsafe? Conservatives are opposed to promoting their lifestyle but that does not equate to violence. They would probably feel much safer if they just stopped listening to the liberal talking heads. Fearmongering is how they maintain their influence.

[LDSGator]

11 minutes ago, laronius said:

Fearmongering is how they maintain their influence

What influence? The left just got shellacked. They lost pretty much everything. 
 

Conservatives are about to have an existential crisis. They can no longer play the victim because they are clearly in the majority. So that means no more whining about “the liberal media influence.” It doesn’t exist anymore and this election shows it.  60+ years of conservative whining just ended.   

Edited November 8, 2024 by LDSGator

[mikbone]

 

 

[Ironhold]

40 minutes ago, laronius said:

Why do your friends feel unsafe? Conservatives are opposed to promoting their lifestyle but that does not equate to violence. They would probably feel much safer if they just stopped listening to the liberal talking heads. Fearmongering is how they maintain their influence.

For some time now, various leftist, progressive, and Democrat groups have tried to paint the narrative that if the GOP wins and makes large enough gains then everyone who isn't a straight white male will somehow be either made a slave or eradicated. 

This has led to a considerable amount of fearmongering and terror among various groups. 

[Phoenix_person]

1 hour ago, LDSGator said:

Conservatives are about to have an existential crisis. They can no longer play the victim because they are clearly in the majority. So that means no more whining about “the liberal media influence.” It doesn’t exist anymore and this election shows it.  60+ years of conservative whining just ended.   

I'd say that the election conspiracy theorists on the right are probably feeling pretty stupid right now, but that would require an ounce of self-awareness.

[LDSGator]

2 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

I'd say that the election conspiracy theorists on the right are probably feeling pretty stupid right now, but that would require an ounce of self-awareness.

Oh, agree. This shoots down their theory that the left cheated in 2020. 
 

It’s also fun to see the left come to grips with the fact that they lost women, Hispanic men and are also losing African-American men. 

https://youtu.be/90WD_ats6eE?si=y0_5ZKIHukS1jc3m

 

[Phoenix_person]

52 minutes ago, Ironhold said:

For some time now, various leftist, progressive, and Democrat groups have tried to paint the narrative that if the GOP wins and makes large enough gains then everyone who isn't a straight white male will somehow be either made a slave or eradicated. 

This has led to a considerable amount of fearmongering and terror among various groups. 

Women feel unsafe because abortion restrictions put them in danger of dying as a result of a complicated miscarriage. Queer people feel unsafe because the most anti-LGBTQ people among us feel emboldened by Trump's victory. They're not afraid of Trump himself or his adminstration, they're scared of neighbors and family members who voted for him despite the Right's anti-trans rhetoric.

One of the most heartbreaking posts I saw on FB this week didn't come from an areligious transgender person, but from a faithful LDS mother of a transgender girl. They're all still active and faithful in every other aspect of church life, including the daughter (who served a mission as a boy before she transitioned), but they're really struggling with some of the narratives they've seen around the trans community during this election cycle, including from people in their own LDS ward.

5 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

Oh, agree. This shoots down their theory that the left cheated in 2020. 
 

It’s also fun to see the left come to grips with the fact that they lost women, Hispanic men and are also losing African-American men. 

https://youtu.be/90WD_ats6eE?si=y0_5ZKIHukS1jc3m

 

Some of us have been trying to sound the alarm on Latino voters for quite some time now. Dems didn't listen.

Edited November 8, 2024 by Phoenix_person

[LDSGator]

13 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

Some of us have been trying to sound the alarm on Latino voters for quite some time now. Dems didn't listen

You and I have been wrong about many things, especially lately.  I do remember us talking about Latinos walking away from the left though 

[Phoenix_person]

20 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

Women feel unsafe because abortion restrictions put them in danger of dying as a result of a complicated miscarriage. 

Also, there's been a lot of Jon Millers out there this week.

[Vort]

23 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

28 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

I'd say that the election conspiracy theorists on the right are probably feeling pretty stupid right now, but that would require an ounce of self-awareness.

Oh, agree. This shoots down their theory that the left cheated in 2020. 

How so? How do the 2024 results "shoot down" conspiracy theories about the results in 2020?

[Vort]

4 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

Also, there's been a lot of Jon Millers out there this week.

Those who "added context" are morons and/or liars. Jon Miller's clear, obvious meaning is that the feminists threatening "sex strikes" are women most men would happily pass over, even those men looking to get laid.

Edited November 8, 2024 by Vort

[Phoenix_person]

1 minute ago, Vort said:

How so? How do the 2024 results "shoot down" conspiracy theories about the results in 2020?

That's not what I said. I don't believe that there was election fraud 4 years ago, but my statement was referring to people, including a few on this website who seemed absolutely convinced that Trump didn't stand a chance because the Dems were just going to rig it "again". I can look for specific examples, if you'd like. They won't be hard to find.

[LDSGator]

2 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

That's not what I said. I don't believe that there was election fraud 4 years ago, but my statement was referring to people, including a few on this website who seemed absolutely convinced that Trump didn't stand a chance because the Dems were just going to rig it "again". I can look for specific examples, if you'd like. They won't be hard to find.

Correct, I said it. Simply put, if it was just cheating that won in 2020, why didn’t they just do it again if that was it?

[Vort]

1 minute ago, Phoenix_person said:

That's not what I said.

No. That's what Gator said, as is obvious when you read the attribution quote in my post.

2 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

my statement was referring to people, including a few on this website who seemed absolutely convinced that Trump didn't stand a chance because the Dems were just going to rig it "again". I can look for specific examples, if you'd like. They won't be hard to find.

Go for it.

[Vort]

2 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

Correct, I said it. Simply put, if it was just cheating that won in 2020, why didn’t they just do it again if that was it?

A reasonable question, but a reasonable conjecture to answer it could be that the vote wasn't close enough this time for the Democrats' nefarious scheme to succeed or that the Democrats didn't have their mechanisms in place because of blah blah blah whatever their conspiracy is.

My question stands: How does 2024 shoot down their disputation of the 2020 results? Saying "Because the Democrats didn't do it in 2024" doesn't actually answer the conspiracy questions. Those who disbelieved the results in 2020 are not likely to feel the least bit compelled to withdraw their conjecture based on 2024 results.

[Phoenix_person]

11 minutes ago, Vort said:

Those who "added context" are morons and/or liars. Jon Miller's clear, obvious meaning is that the feminists threatening "sex strikes" are women most men would happily pass over, even those men looking to get laid.

It's crazy how many opportunites he had to clarify that (and no, it wasn't "clear and obvious"), but instead chose to mock women who interpreted it the way I did. And the more I look over his account, the more I think he meant for it to have an ambiguous interpretation. Because rape is hilarious, haha! And apparently he wants Trump to nuke Israel. 

Edited November 8, 2024 by Phoenix_person

[LDSGator]

1 minute ago, Vort said:

A reasonable question, but a reasonable conjecture to answer it could be that the vote wasn't close enough this time for the Democrats' nefarious scheme to succeed or that the Democrats didn't have their mechanisms in place because of blah blah blah whatever their conspiracy is.

My question stands: How does 2024 shoot down their disputation of the 2020 results? Saying "Because the Democrats didn't do it in 2024" doesn't actually answer the conspiracy questions. Those who disbelieved the results in 2020 are not likely to feel the least bit compelled to withdraw their conjecture based on 2024 results.

It’s a moot point now I guess because he won. 

[Vort]

5 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

It's crazy how many opportunites he had to clarify that

Why should he feel compelled to clarify an already clear statement?

5 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

(and no, it wasn't "clear and obvious")

Yeah, actually, I think it was.

5 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

but instead chose to mock women who interpreted it the way I did.

Perhaps because he considered such a ridiculous interpretation to be worthy of mockery.

5 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

This in particular appears to be the perfect response from Andrew Tate. Kate is a lying idiot, "asking" for a President who is not a "rapist". This is a transparent lie from many angles, the most obvious of which are:

1. She's not asking, she's vilifying.

2. Donald Trump is not a "rapist". As I recall, that charge was leveled based on something his ex-wife said, and she later clarified that he had never in fact raped her. So it's a lie.

Andrew Tate might have addressed either or both of the above two points, or otherwise taken her trollish post seriously. Instead, he took it in the same trollish sense in which it was offered. Good for him. Such a post deserves exactly the serious consideration Andrew Tate gave it. Jon Miller simply recognized a brilliant ownage of a troll and reposted it.

Edited November 8, 2024 by Vort

[Phoenix_person]

7 minutes ago, Vort said:

Why should he feel compelled to clarify an already clear statement?

If I made a joke and people misinterpreted it as rapey, I would either delete my joke or clarify in the absolute clearest of terms. Jon apparently is okay with women thinking he's a rapist (and that has been the overwhelming response, contrary to your personal interpretation). Perception matters as much as intention, or at least it should. The fact that he knows what the perception is and apparently is embracing it is disgusting. 

People will make "harmess" jokes like that then wonder why the women in their lives don't talk to them.

Edited November 8, 2024 by Phoenix_person