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.
OP: I would agree, based on several decades of experience and observation (I came of age in 1980), that this is the strangest election and post-election psychological phenomenon possibly in our history, certainly in the last 100 years or so.
There were some similar reactions when Reagan was first elected, the difference being that Reagan won by a true landslide, carrying 44 out of 50 states and 51.6% of the total vote. People on the Left were dejected and depressed, the folk singers polished off their writing implements and got to work singing protest songs, and in general life went on. People accepted the situation after a few weeks.
In 1860, the nation was so divided that Lincoln's election was essentially the last straw before secession of the Southern states. Of course, he wasn't a personally controversial character; he was a great rhetorician who wowed the crowds. But he was an abolitionist and Unionist (national union, not labor union), which set the South unalterably against him.
I don't think our situation today is quite so dire, though there has been talk of secession both in 2008 and today. In each case, the social media have amplified and perhaps exacerbated the situation, with people irresponsibly saying "let'em leave, and good riddance!" rather than asking themselves, why would you want to leave? What can we do to fix this?
Perhaps were it not for Facebook and the like, people wouldn't be venting their inner fears quite so openly, and most of us would just be taking events in stride. We might be boiling inside, but you know, people do cool down after a while. Actually we're already seeing a cooling down process as people move to acceptance.
Your friend who has become dysfunctional since the election perhaps has taken it too much to heart. The fact is that people today are taking these things very seriously, perhaps too much, thanks to our echo chamber social networks on the internet.
I have long believed that we modern Americans have lost a sense of national and local community in much of our lives, because of our isolated and isolating situations, many of us choosing not to have children, lack of shared experience of military service, the fading away of social organizations like Rotary Club, bowling leagues, sewing clubs, reading clubs, etc.
When we're in community, we are balanced and held in check, like animals in a herd or pack. When we're isolated, our feelings and behaviors become more extreme. We're seeing this today with this election. Don't know if any of this makes sense; it's mostly my own theorizing. Anyway, I do hope people see some light at the end of the tunnel. This too will pass.
I seriously believe these people suffer from being out of touch with reality. I can understand if you've had no food for several days or are suffering from water deprivation, are exposed to extreme climates without any shelter or have lost the use of one or more limbs. That's understandable to become non-functional over such matters. But this election? Seriously people. If you have to, get yourself to a third world country like Haiti or something and live with the poor over there for a while. I guarantee you will come back to this country and be glad Trump is president (well, that's probably being a bit optimistic, but at least you won't be that bothered by it).
I agree, they are living in their own surreal mentality of 'everyone wins' and are unable to accept losing. Most were raised with that concept and have never learned that 'not everyone wins', how to lose graciously, and move on.
Plus, many use the media as their Bible and the liberal-biased media has bashed Trump and conservatives since the election process started over 18 months ago.
All the ABC, CBS, and NBC evening news managed to do once the latest Electoral Vote was confirmed was to show video clips of protesters. Those who allow the MSM to rule their lives fall into a further slump of despair. We no longer have journalists giving the news, we have troublemakers wreaking havoc and demoralizing those who refuse, or are unable to think for themselves.
I understand people getting very upset over politics, on both sides.
I also think that people overestimate the effect of their actions or words. The truth is most of us do not have an effect on history. Really we hardly make a difference at all.
It's not that we shouldn't care or shouldn't vote, but we also shouldn't overestimate our role in this whole thing called modernity.
Our time would be better spent focusing on how to make the lives of ourselves and our loved ones and even our acquaintances better. That's where most of us can really make a difference.
After every election the losing party is pretty pissed off and disappointed. This is different because it isn't just a bunch of views people don't agree with - many people believe that this "president" is so unqualified and mentally incompetent that he will actually destroy the economy, embroil us in a world war, or otherwise bring about the end of the US as a world power. They can't get past the shock that this could happen in a country they consider civilized and advanced; that someone could be elected who is truly unqualified and dangerous. Some people even believe he is potentially a Hitler, and although it's cliche to compare anyone to Hitler today, it's not completely without justification. So people are this upset because this is different. And it is even more upsetting to them when other people attempt to normalize it and treat it as any other election, and of course it's infuriating to try to deal with people who actually supported what they see as potential doom and death for all of us.
I avoid the topic with those who clearly aren't interested, or who I know don't agree with my views on it, but it's a relief to spend time with those who are like-minded right now, because it's hard to be so concerned about something and be around people who don't even want to talk about it.
After every election the losing party is pretty pissed off and disappointed. This is different because it isn't just a bunch of views people don't agree with - many people believe that this "president" is so unqualified and mentally incompetent that he will actually destroy the economy, embroil us in a world war, or otherwise bring about the end of the US as a world power. They can't get past the shock that this could happen in a country they consider civilized and advanced; that someone could be elected who is truly unqualified and dangerous. Some people even believe he is potentially a Hitler, and although it's cliche to compare anyone to Hitler today, it's not completely without justification. So people are this upset because this is different. And it is even more upsetting to them when other people attempt to normalize it and treat it as any other election, and of course it's infuriating to try to deal with people who actually supported what they see as potential doom and death for all of us.
I avoid the topic with those who clearly aren't interested, or who I know don't agree with my views on it, but it's a relief to spend time with those who are like-minded right now, because it's hard to be so concerned about something and be around people who don't even want to talk about it.
Totally agree. That's my take. I have voted both R and D in the past, and the reason I am so upset this time is because I believe that Trump is completely unqualified to be president and his extremist views actually frighten me. He has no political experience, no legal experience, and no experience in government at all. Whenever whoever I didn't vote for was elected in previous elections, I was disappointed but I wasn't afraid. This time I am, and therein lies the difference.
Totally agree. That's my take. I have voted both R and D in the past, and the reason I am so upset this time is because I believe that Trump is completely unqualified to be president and his extremist views actually frighten me. He has no political experience, no legal experience, and no experience in government at all. Whenever whoever I didn't vote for was elected in previous elections, I was disappointed but I wasn't afraid. This time I am, and therein lies the difference.
what qualifies one to be president? 8 years ago we got a president with no real world work experience, no foreign policy experience, and next to no government experience.
hoenstly, whats the difference between Obama '08 and Trump '16?
what qualifies one to be president? 8 years ago we got a president with no real world work experience, no foreign policy experience, and next to no government experience.
hoenstly, whats the difference between Obama '08 and Trump '16?
One was a constitutional law professor before taking office, the other thought there were 12 articles in the Constitution.
I don't know if it is simply immaturity, mental instability or bad sportsmanship. I think it has a lot to do with media like CNN and also social media. I have never in my many years of election seasons seen anything like this. The movement of globalism is very strong and well-funded and used the supporters of both Clinton and Sanders in ways that should be offensive to everyone.
So, it is driven by the false hope by those determined to promote the globalist agenda who are using these gullible people. So much false information was put out and for those that remained and needed someone else thinking for them, the outcome has not been good.
Too many being "following" rather than "supporting" based on factual data gathered from multiple sources.
I just avoid people that cannot discuss reasonably and rationally a subject. An election should not be based on "emotions".
Derisive in tone as this post may be, there's definitely some validity to your point. I'm 30, and I've been voting (as left as I possibly can, which usually just means straight Democrat) on an annual basis since age 18. I feel like some of my generational peers really got engaged this year for the first time...and if that's the case, if they're the political participant-equivalent of bandwagon sports fans, then it kind of makes sense that they'd be fully fixated on the presidency.
Well, you may feel that way, but the fact is, that the percentage of eligible voters actually voting has not changed much for quite some time, and remained fairly stable this time around too. The percentage has been hovering at around 55% since the 1950s, if I remember the numbers correctly, the highest percentages of eligible voters actually turning out to vote were in the late 1800s/early 1900s. So, if they were 'engaged', it was most likely merely as spectators, just as with the 'sports fans'...but the BIG difference is, unlike sports games, had they TRULY been engaged they might have been able to affect the outcome.
Most of the people who I know personally, who are complaining the loudest, didn't even bother to vote.
But, I know other people, who have NEVER voted before (and hadn't even been registered to vote) that felt so strongly about not seeing a continuation of 'socialistic' policies that they actually got off their duffs, registered to vote, and DID.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Basiliximab
I seriously believe these people suffer from being out of touch with reality. I can understand if you've had no food for several days or are suffering from water deprivation, are exposed to extreme climates without any shelter or have lost the use of one or more limbs. That's understandable to become non-functional over such matters. But this election? Seriously people. If you have to, get yourself to a third world country like Haiti or something and live with the poor over there for a while. I guarantee you will come back to this country and be glad Trump is president (well, that's probably being a bit optimistic, but at least you won't be that bothered by it).
That's it in a nutshell- many of the type of people who support(ed) Obama/Hillary/Bernie DO suffer from being out of touch with 'reality'. These are the people who see socialism/communism as an ideal system still, even when it has been shown to be a failure in actual practice***, as well as being antithetical to the American ideals and principles upon which the country was founded.
They are NOT grounded in reality, and they think that if they take away enough money from the people who have it, and give it to the people who don't (or who have less), and give all those people 'free' health care, 'free' food, 'free' housing, and a 'guaranteed income' that will afford them some particular standard of living, that everything will be just peachy...
...but everything WON'T be peachy, because a system like that would be virtually indistinguishable from the failed policies of communism that have crumbled in other countries. Worse than that, is that there would be a whole lot of people who would be very unhappy at being forced to give up what they have worked for in order for it to be given to 'other people'...and a lot of those people have guns and they WON'T just sit in a corner and cry about what is being taken from them******.
*That* is the psychology of it- these people feel powerless by themselves, they want the 'government' to be powerful, and use that power to take and to give (according to who they think 'needs' it), and suddenly even that power now appears to have been taken from them and their 'world' is crumbling around them...and they can't do anything about it.
***(Communism/socialism *can* work on a small scale, as it does in a number of currently existing 'collectives', so long as everyone involved retains the same visions and ideals, and the power to eject dissenters from their midst.)
******(With the unique exception of Vermont, it seems to me that the largest areas with the most support for the types of policies favored by Obama/Hillary/Bernie are also those areas with the most laws telling people what they *can't* do and *must* do, AND the strictest gun control laws. It does make sense that those who favor increased government control would want to impose stricter gun controls, because it is difficult to impose your will, control people, and take from them when they have the means to resist. I wouldn't even call this a 'conspiracy', because it really isn't, it's just an extension of the mindset that thinks that the government should take care of everyone, give everyone what they 'need' {by taking it from those who already have}, make sure that everyone is 'happy', 'safe' and 'secure' and no one will say anything that might 'offend' them.)
Well, you may feel that way, but the fact is, that the percentage of eligible voters actually voting has not changed much for quite some time, and remained fairly stable this time around too. The percentage has been hovering at around 55% since the 1950s, if I remember the numbers correctly, the highest percentages of eligible voters actually turning out to vote were in the late 1800s/early 1900s. So, if they were 'engaged', it was most likely merely as spectators, just as with the 'sports fans'...but the BIG difference is, unlike sports games, had they TRULY been engaged they might have been able to affect the outcome.
Most of the people who I know personally, who are complaining the loudest, didn't even bother to vote.
But, I know other people, who have NEVER voted before (and hadn't even been registered to vote) that felt so strongly about not seeing a continuation of 'socialistic' policies that they actually got off their duffs, registered to vote, and DID.
Yeah, it's anecdotal, but by 'engaged', I meant more than merely turning up to vote--I meant devoting energy to tracking primary results, polls, campaign developments, etc. The majority of my friends are at least left-leaning, but many of us were watching all the 10-person GOP debates (Rand Paul and Kasich would've been my choices from that field, btw), and while I would've done this in years past, I'm not sure many of the others would've. All told, it's an 18-month process, and even if the spirit of the engagement for was one of spectating (as it is for anyone who's following but not actively involved in a get out the vote effort), it was...psychological engagement.
I won't be able to look up the numbers until later tonight, but I'd actually assume Obama (especially in 2008) brought out 'young voters' semi-significantly more strongly than either candidate did this time around...but again, I think the circus-like atmosphere of this entire campaign did much more to get the average person 'engaged' in some way or another--even if it was merely to strongly dislike both candidates, which was true for a sizable number of people. This was politics as entertainment more than I can ever remember in my short (compared to average CD poster) lifespan
Gotta go for now--I'll check back in 12 hours
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.
