But I really think this celebration by the American Right will be short-lived. They have the WH, Sen, House combo sure, but Trump is a buffoon who will be found out as no better a President than the 'ezzztabblishmenntttt!!1!' they supposedly hate. All those whites in the rust belt will quickly realise he ain't bringing back anything let alone high-quality manufacturing jobs. And all this while having literally everything at his disposal and nothing to blame liberals on.
On the flip side you have emboldened and I would argue set the course for a unification of the American Left like we haven't seen in decades (assuming the Dems can get their **** together which I actually think they will after their internationally embarrassing loss).
2018 and 2020 are gonna hit the #MAGA crowd like a tonne of bricks and let me tell you it's gonna be a kii!
They colluded with the Clinton campaign because they were sure she'd win the primary. They didn't predict someone like Sanders. Either way, no colluding is enough to affect the huge margin she won with.
That's democracy. You don't always get what you want but you pick the closest thing possible. Democrats didn't do that.
Republicans united behind Trump who is far worse so let's not act like this is all the DNC's doing.
Problem is they shouldn't be colluding with anyone or predicting anything; that disadvantages the other candidate. You let it naturally play out and see who comes into the race or how momentum changes. Look at Obama in 2008.
Republicans gave us the impression that they were sitting this one out to protect their values but they eventually went out in flocks for Trump. Don't fool yourself, those people are snakes.
Just because Trump won doesn't mean republicans united behind Trump.
He pretty much won because he didn't. This fed into the narrative that Trump was against the establishment and you have top republican officials like Kasich, the Bushes, Romney, McCain who were all against him, and then some of the republicans who did end up voting for him did so reluctantly like Paul Ryan and Marco Rubio.
It's there a protest in Houston TX I want to be a part of this
I think there might be. My sociology teacher cancelled class yesterday bc of some "issues related to the election". she could've gone to protest, or just sit down in her room and cry idk
Problem is they shouldn't be colluding with anyone or predicting anything; that disadvantages the other candidate. You let it naturally play out and see who comes into the race or how momentum changes. Look at Obama in 2008.
The DNC colluded with Obama in 2008. That was the whole point of PUMAs. Obama got an unfair number of delegates. And in that election the votes were actually close unlike this one and PUMA's still eventually got behind the nominee.
If you can get a candidate that really invigorates minority groups and latinos more than Clinton did, then you can have Arizona, Georgia, and Texas all turn blue. Add that to states like Florida and North Carolina and you have an electoral college victory of 342/196 without any of those rust belt states back.
**Friendly reminder that Clinton lost Iowa by the same margin as she lost Texas so don't tell me it's unrealistic**
Just because Trump won doesn't mean republicans united behind Trump.
He pretty much won because he didn't. This fed into the narrative that Trump was against the establishment and you have top republican officials like Kasich, the Bushes, Romney, McCain who were all against him, and then some of the republicans who did end up voting for him did so reluctantly like Paul Ryan and Marco Rubio.
He won white women. How is that not proof enough that republicans did get behind him? Lol sorry but only 1 million less people voted for him this year than they did for Romney unlike Hillary's 6 million people. Don't equate the two.
He won white women. How is that not proof enough that republicans did get behind him? Lol sorry but only 1 million less people voted for him this year than they did for Romney unlike Hillary's 6 million people. Don't equate the two.
We're talking about two different things.
I'm talking about the republican party, you're talking about a republican voting block. Both candidates had pretty good party loyalty with their voters. Hillary lost this with independent white voters in the midwest who voted for Obama in 2012 and switched to Trump this time. Not with democrats who just didn't show up.
I'm talking about the republican party, you're talking about a republican voting block. Both candidates had pretty good party loyalty with their voters. Hillary lost this with independent white voters in the midwest who voted for Obama in 2012 and switched to Trump this time. Not with democrats who just didn't show up.
No one cares about the republican officials. They have no impact on the election unless they're Ted Cruz or Rubio.
And if democrats didn't show up, then is losing
The margins were really small in all of the states she lost.
They LOST deal with it.
she could've gone to protest, or just sit down in her room and cry idk
you can't make this **** up