Youseff wrote:

PSUsarge wrote:

Grotewold wrote:

jerseyhoya wrote:-Anti Trump messaging - As noted above, a lot of people don't like Donald Trump, so this wasn't a failure, but I think they should have done a lot more highlighting his failures as a businessman. They highlighted the anti-women/minority/disabled stuff a ton. They highlighted him saying loose cannon type stuff a ton. I don't know what the 100th airing of an ad with Trump mocking the disabled reporter or them bleeping Trump swearing does because everyone pretty much had that priced into their opinion on Trump. I don't think a lot of people really understood how many failures Trump has had as a businessman. The angles that were tried on his business career highlighted his hypocrisy in making stuff overseas (I liked that Letterman ad during the Olympics and think it was effective) and a little bit about him screwing over his contractors. Don't think there was any real effort to list his bankruptcies and failures and promote the fact that he inherited a ton of wealth meaning he didn't create his company from scratch or things along those lines. People who thought he was a piece of #$!&@ in other respects voted for him because they think he's a historically awesome businessman who could use those skills to fix the economy or whatever. I don't understand why more of an effort to tarnish his business record to pour some cold water on that. It also would've come with the added benefit of driving him completely #$!&@ insane

yep

To piggyback off of this, you have to wonder if these ads actually *hurt* HRC given the frustration over everything having to be PC now.

I'm sure many saw Trump in the opposite light that those ads meant to paint him in - "alright, finally someone else who isn't afraid to say that out loud!"

.

I think you're right that people voted against the concept of PC culture, which is probably the most pathetic thing that someone can vote against. A week ago the most popular thread on Donald's Reddit page was saying exactly that. More to the point they were saying they were tired of people on the internet picking on them for not being PC. So if you follow that to it's logical conclusion, these weak skinned mental children were voting for Trump because they weren't allowed a safe space that they so thoroughly mock. they need wedgies.

thephan wrote:"Gay guy voted Trump because his father raised 3 kids and has a business, and Obama care is endangering his business (no details), and a woman from Texas whose parents illegally crossed the border, but she was born here and she supports the wall.

Grotewold wrote:

thephan wrote:"Gay guy voted Trump because his father raised 3 kids and has a business, and Obama care is endangering his business (no details), and a woman from Texas whose parents illegally crossed the border, but she was born here and she supports the wall.

No shots at you, as this view is pervasive, but who are we to tell anyone which issue(s) to base their votes on? Feeds right into the "they think they know better than me" narrative that drives a lot of this imo

edit: more precisely, let's stop taking any votes for granted

RichmondPhilsFan wrote:So here's a (very slight) upside to this election:

Maybe now that Trump is getting high-level intelligence briefings, he'll finally STFU about so many of these conspiracy theories. Maybe he'll even repudiate clowns like Alex Jones. Maybe.

pacino wrote:why don't you think he will build the wall? it's literally the thing his entire candidacy has been built on.

TenuredVulture wrote:

Monkeyboy wrote:I'm still a bit confused about the vote count. At first I heard it was fantastic turnout, but that seemed to be mostly anecdotal. Then I heard that both parties had less voters, but the dems lost more voters than the gop. Now I'm hearing again that the turnout was the highest ever.

What gives?

Also, I still feel like something isn't quite right. Shenanigans?

1. The media are dumb and don't understand how this works.
2. Turnout was high, and in terms of number of voters, probably highest ever.
3. But remember, the number of eligible voters (typically the number used as the denominator when discussing turnout) is also higher than ever, so as a percentage, it seems turnout was down slightly from 2012. But it was still higher than any election between 1972 and 2000, according to 538.

CalvinBall wrote:

pacino wrote:why don't you think he will build the wall? it's literally the thing his entire candidacy has been built on.

Well he's already said that he will use a fence in some places. I guess his insane supporters don't know there is fencing already.

pacino wrote:Michael Flynn will be the national security advisor. Sheesh.

Romney as SoS would maybe salvage SOMETHING. At least the man is not a complete joke like these others. I disagree with his outlook on things, but he won't embarrass us. I doubt it's real though. Seems like a lot of false stuff or headfakes being put out there right now.

Squire wrote:Apparently Romney is under consideration for SOS and he is meeting with Trump over the weekend. This is crazy.