Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Let's be honest and put things into perspective.
Trump won the Electoral College and not the popular vote so he really has no national mandate.
As a Floridian this brings back the days of the 2000 Presidential election all over again except these election results are now manifesting itself nationwide instead to what we went through in 2000 on a state level.
I'm just thankful it didn't have to resort to the Supreme Court again.
What was really surprising to me is how Hillary lost 4 Rust belt states in WI , MI , PA & OH which made up 64 Electoral votes.
If she would have carried those reliable blue states she would be President.
She was even close in Florida losing to Trump by just over 1% of the vote here.
Had she won Florida she still would have lost !
The situation regarding the loss of jobs to trade deals over decades really resonated with voters this time in those states I listed above.
Even though President Obama's bail out of the Auto industry wasn't a long enough of a economic coat tail for her and they believe their way of life has disappeared.
Trump has offered these voters Hope in those states that he will bring back Jobs to them even though that economic ship has sailed over 30 years ago.
The mandate comes from winning the Presidency, Senate, House, plus a big majority of Governorships and State offices.
I was shocked and speechless. A businessman with zero political experience who said all the wrong things winning over someone with job experience in politics.
I don't watch TV. Instead, I go to mainstream media websites and in hindsight, I am ashamed to admit that it influenced me into thinking that Hillary would win in a landslide. Donald was seen as an immoral sleaze in the media, wild, uncontrollable, and unstable who reacts emotionally and blurts out the first time on his mind. Yes, Hillary had her e-mail problems, but I thought it was minor compared with his womanizing problems, and I thought he blew his chances with his untamed big mouth, offending everyone on Earth.
It was only after the election that I learned that mainstream media is completely PC and trashed Donald just to be PC.
I'm glad you finally learned. Albeit, the hard way. I don't know about PC, but they are corrupt to the core.
I was hopefully optimistic that Trump might win, but was fearful that Hillary would. When states started coming in for Trump, I was shocked but thrilled. I stayed up 'til Podesta made his silly speech about counting votes and told Hillary supporters to all go home. That's when I went to bed with a happy face.
If anything ever proved how dishonest the media is, this election cycle is proof positive. It sure is fun watching them melt down.
I don't see how, considering how the USA is and how many people think Clinton was full of ****, and how people don't agree with the media moral agenda. Could these opinion polls be manipulated by the liberal media? I'm a pollster, and I have no real bias, i just do things for the truth.
I was not that surprised. The only reason I suspected Clinton would win was that it would be rigged; and I figured it would be. Yet I knew that by and large Trump was the way more popular candidate. So I was slightly surprised that even with the fraud he still won, just figured that with media and stuff that like being so powerful that he didn't stand too much of a chance.
I didn't understand how people were so shocked that he won, I really didn't think it was that much of an upset. Was more shocked that the fraud wasn't enough to beat him, so I was surprised at that; but I knew he was the overall favourite of the public so it was not really all that shocking.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anglonorseman
Could these opinion polls be manipulated by the liberal media?
For sure. Anyone who doesn't understand that is being dupped by the media. Don't listen to the propaganda they put out and you'll have a whole different perspective of things. A more limited view, for sure, but they have an agenda so you're not really getting a much wider understanding of things; you surely think you are, but it's so loaded with bias and agenda-oriented perspective that you're really not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aery11
What I was surprised at though was that Hillary still seemed to have won the popular vote. The fact that she lost even then says a lot about how badly her campaign was run - or it tells me that people who don't exist voted more than we know.
That's what it was, that or other fraudulent activity. If people really believe she got the popular vote... that tells me a lot about the general public. Something I'd really wish weren't true; or if I could just exist in the apparent ignorant bliss like the majority, that would be nice too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MyNameIsBellaMia
I was hopefully optimistic that Trump might win, but was fearful that Hillary would. When states started coming in for Trump, I was shocked but thrilled.
That's how I felt about it too!
Quote:
Originally Posted by MyNameIsBellaMia
If anything ever proved how dishonest the media is, this election cycle is proof positive. It sure is fun watching them melt down.
So my husband told me as well. For that I do wish I paid more attention to media, to see that. But it's just as fun to imagine. I did get some of the news while I was waiting for a doctor's appt the morning after. Couldn't believe people were so shocked about the result. I kept thinking, they really think this is a great upset? I've always suspected people were largely naive and believed whatever the media told them, but hearing about that gives me evidence to back it up. Now of course that is if in fact people were that shocked about the results; it could be that the media was just shocked that they were unexpectedly overthrown. At least some people on here are saying that they weren't that shocked just as I wasn't. So, likely it is just more proof that the media doesn't actually report the facts as I had mentioned before. They just have an agenda. So, why do people bother with it?? I can't understand that!! It's not even real! You're listening to fiction people! My goodness. Well, what can you do, right?
Last edited by Ibginnie; 11-26-2016 at 08:40 AM..
Reason: deleted quoted post
I was very surprised. I had resigned myself to the fact that one of these two dirtbags was going to win, but I decided I would not have anything to do with either of them, so I would not vote for any presidential candidate.
As election day drew near, it became abundantly clear to me Hillary was going to win. It appeared she might likely win in a landslide. I did not want that. That would give her perceived credibility she should not get. Both of them were the two most detested presidential candidates in history according to NPR.
I was the very last person to vote in our precinct. Literally at he very last second, I decided to vote for Trump as a protest vote. Horrible Hillary should not be elected in a landslide. Maybe my little protest vote could somehow reduce her credibility.
Watching the news after I got home they said Trump might win Florida, that meant he had a slim chance to win. Then Pennsylvania, and Ohio were close. I was completely shocked. It was pretty much accepted she had Pennsylvania in the bag and Ohio would almost certainly go blue as well.
For a time, the possibility arose that Michigan’s 16 EC votes could determine the election. Michigan was too close to call.
I was sleepless all night. What if Michigan was the deciding factor? What if Trump won Michigan by one vote? I would be responsible for putting that dirt bag in office. While I think he is probably the less dangerous dirtbag of the two, I still did not want to be responsible for him, or even close to responsible.
At 2 a.m. I learned he had won nearly all the disputed states and Michigan was still too close to call – ergo our State did not matter and my vote would not matter. Hooray! I dodged that bullet. Then I was finally able to sleep secure in the knowledge that whatever disasters this election may bring us, neither I nor my State have any responsibility for it.
Not sure whether they ever did call Michigan. Maybe they are still counting.
I was shocked. Not to toot my own horn, but people I know generally think of me as a pretty savvy political analyst, and I was telling all of them that I was pretty sure Hillary had it in the bag.
I could write many, many paragraphs about why I thought Trump was going down at various points during the campaign, but nobody has time for that. So let me just put it like this:
Imagine, for a moment, a hypothetical Republican candidate. Call him Joe Generic. Joe Generic is from rural Wisconsin, where he started a small business that eventually employed hundreds of people. He sold the business and ran for State Senate, then the House of Representatives, then the U.S. Senate. He's served the people of Wisconsin as their Senator for six years now and has one of the highest approval ratings in the country.
Joe Generic is handsome and charismatic, in his early 50s. He's got a lovely wife and three perfect children in their teens and twenties. Though he's worked in Washington for more than a decade now, he's never failed to stand up against powerful Washington interests, including those in his own party. He's conservative enough to be popular with the Tea Party crowd but has a knack for sounding reasonable and is popular with old-school Republicans as well.
Running a primary campaign on a message of disenchantment with the federal government and a promise to restore jobs and opportunities to a forgotten rural America, he fairly easily dispatches 16 other Republican candidates to win the Republican nomination.
However, things don't go perfectly for Joe Generic. Many of his fellow Republicans have endorsed other candidates, including John McCain, who's endorsed his good friend Lindsey Graham. Things got a little heated during the primary between Generic and a desperate Graham; Generic never lost his cool, but everyone knows there's no love lost between them. McCain has been Generic's biggest critic within the party.
After Generic clinches the nomination, McCain makes a couple of comments suggesting that he'll support Generic, but hints that he may withhold his endorsement unless Generic commits to more military funding, a big sticking point in the primary battle with Graham. It's 11:30 p.m. on the day that McCain made his latest snide remark. Generic is being peppered with questions from the traveling media pool. He's done four campaign events in two states. He's been up since 4:30 in the morning. He's tired and cranky and has another meeting with his staff in front of him before he can get to bed.
"Sen. Generic," a reporter asks, "John McCain suggested today that as president, you might continue Obama's policies that have weakened the military. You've strongly disputed that, but why should Americans listen to you and not John McCain, a war hero?"
"He's not a war hero," Generic snaps.
"He is a war hero, Senator," the reporter fires back.
"He's a war hero because he was captured," Generic says. "I like people that weren't captured, OK? I hate to tell you. He is a war hero because he was captured."
Pandemonium. Generic's staff immediately escort him out as the media frantically shout follow-up questions. First thing in the morning, Generic appears before the media again with a prepared statement:
"Last night, I made a comment about John McCain that was as misguided as it was inaccurate. I'd just spent a long, tiring day speaking to Americans who were worried about their futures and the future of our great country, but that's not an excuse. I want to apologize profoundly to Sen. McCain. As everyone knows, Sen. McCain and I have had our differences over the course of this campaign. But my respect for him has never diminished. He is a great American who represents the best of us and whose sacrifice for the country we both love is almost unfathomable. I want him to know that and I want the American people to know that, as I pray that he accepts my humble apology."
I submit to you that Joe Generic's campaign is over. His popularity plummets overnight, and he goes on to lose the election to Hillary Clinton -- whose popularity is also quite low, but not as low as Generic's -- possibly by a landslide. The day after the election, the post-mortems are all about the moment when Generic lost the election: his McCain comments. It is repeatedly called the worst gaffe in the history of presidential elections, and everyone agrees that it made his loss a foregone conclusion.
Like I said, I can go on, and on, and on. But that story I just told -- even after Trump's win, I have no doubt that it would end with a loss. That's why I found the whole trajectory of the election, but especially Election Day, so perplexing. I think I get it. But I haven't quite decoded the whole thing yet.
now I just hope sledge Trump can break the demirepublic wall down. The transition time from the botched '69 generation's dream time will be, well, awkward. My generation did not have the intestinal fortitude to make the hard choices. People will suffer and die now. Lets not let it be the women and children that were chosen by the Hillary tree stumps. I just hope its worth it for our grandchildren.
I don't see how, considering how the USA is and how many people think Clinton was full of ****, and how people don't agree with the media moral agenda. Could these opinion polls be manipulated by the liberal media? I'm a pollster, and I have no real bias, i just do things for the truth.
Mildly surprised only, my guts were she would lose but my guts are wrong maybe a quarter of the time.
There was very little "straight story" available because the vast bulk of "news" is thinly-disguised enemy propaganda. Not much of what is reported, in the "spin" portion of reporting on facts, makes much sense vs. objective reality. We're laughed at by much of the world due to this twisted bias. But pay close attention to what is happening, and hit the mute button, you'll figure it out.
Once you learn how to see the perversity in MSM, both in their words and (especially) TV appearances, I just assumed they were lying. I know people, and the massive disconnect between people like me, and MSM news-types (top couple percenters, direct servitors of the Oligarchs, mostly White and Asian) vs. how "the Heartland" really thinks. I don't share the "White Guilt" nonsense with my peers, definitely making me an outlier. Nor am I encumbered with excess sentimentality or pollyanna thinking. Clearly a bulk of Heartland voters believe and behave as I suspected...I'm from there...playing their cards close and voting in a showman vs. a more-deplorable stooge of a criminal dynasty.
Also: I'm tempted to ascribe Trump's win in-part to supernatural providence, the lightest touch from God, on removal of that criminal from the world stage to go back from whence she came. And, ushering in someone who at least talks the talk...walk the walk is TBD...on restoration of core American principles and shutdown of the perverts.
My psychology of it, then:
Yin: more clear thinking = less surprise.
Yang: A little mysticism and belief = less surprise (so-called "divine providence.")
Anybody here can search me up for the past year I've been saying Trump just like Michael Moore has said it because he has traveled across the country and seen it. While Hillary's supports are all living in a bubble and been brainwashed by CNN & MSNBC.
When you traveled around the country and talk to people, seeing different towns go down then seeing destruction and crime across cities. Then you come back and hear Hillary's supports said things are great then you are obviously shielded from the rest of America.
[quote=Bobdreamz;46286587]Let's be honest and put things into perspective.
Trump won the Electoral College and not the popular vote so he really has no national mandate.
As a Floridian this brings back the days of the 2000 Presidential election all over again except these election results are now manifesting itself nationwide instead to what we went through in 2000 on a state level.
I'm just thankful it didn't have to resort to the Supreme Court again.
What was really surprising to me is how Hillary lost 4 Rust belt states in WI , MI , PA & OH which made up 64 Electoral votes.
If she would have carried those reliable blue states she would be President.
She was even close in Florida losing to Trump by just over 1% of the vote here.
Had she won Florida she still would have lost !
The situation regarding the loss of jobs to trade deals over decades really resonated with voters this time in those states I listed above.
Even though President Obama's bail out of the Auto industry wasn't a long enough of a economic coat tail for her and they believe their way of life has disappeared.
Trump has offered these voters Hope in those states that he will bring back Jobs to them even though that economic ship has sailed over 30 years ago.[/QUOTE
If we elected by popular vote the campaigns would have concentrated on that. Republicans would have campaigned in Hawaii even though they know they couldn't win but that 2% increase would matter. The same with Democrats in Oklahoma.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
