Google's Leaked Election Aftermath Video

[Adam White]

The Shill versus the Fascist... The USA choose the Fascist... This is what happens when electoral politics is reduced to a plutocracy.

Yep. She's worse than just a shill, though. A corrupt warmonger, too.

Every four years people go on about how you MUST vote Democratic because the alternative is too scary and not worth the risk. If people keep voting for the lesser of two evils, they will always be in this position. And if you vot Dem or Republican, you're not going to get meaningful electoral reform.

[bill]

After the Brexit vote, lots and lots of my colleagues openly discussed and lamented the outcome. I'd say that the vast majority of the people I work with voted to remain. But that has nothing to do with our employer or the company's position on the referendum. Simple minds look for conspiracies because it's (somehow) easier than living in the real world and facing the truth.

How very arrogant and european of you, a company that literally shapes information discussing how upset they were that most Americans did not have the same (enlightened) view that they have and how they were going to get through it. Let them eat cake. Simple minds can see conspiracies because it is on youtube. dumbass

"European". LOL.

When i cannot come up with something drool to say, I lol. How continental.

A) What's "drool"?
B) I'm certainly not 'continental,' unless the continent in question is North America.
C) You also resort to personal insults when you've got nothing of merit to say.

There was nothing personal. Read the following if you have a problem understanding why folks have a hard time with your arrogance and why the people voted against the previous 8 years.

I don't disagree. I'm still waiting for evidence of Trump's collusion with Russia before I decide what happened there. But I know plenty of people who are convinced and talk as if it's fact. And no one really has bothered to explore why so many people voted for Trump in the first place - especially in areas that went to Obama four years prior.

[marcuscnelson]

Every four years people go on about how you MUST vote Democratic because the alternative is too scary and not worth the risk. If people keep voting for the lesser of two evils, they will always be in this position. And if you vot Dem or Republican, you're not going to get meaningful electoral reform.

People need to realize that if they want to see meaningful reform, they have to start in two places: the local level and the primaries. People have to be involved in their local communities, and be aware of the politics that truly influence their everyday lives.

On a state and national level, we need to be picking the candidates who are promising electoral reform, which means picking a party and supporting a candidate through the primaries, not waiting until the general to bemoan whoever got the nomination. The people have to overwhelm the numbers to such an extent that no doubt is possible as to who their choice is.

[I-10east]

10-1 odds none of this would have happened had a guy like John McCain been elected President.

LOL, you mean the warmongering RINO neocon who once said "Bomb bomb bomb bomb bomb Iran?" Okay...Liberals used to tell the truth about him, but just because he kept Obamacare alive (ONLY to spite his rival Trump, NOT because he thought Obamacare was any good), he's a darling of the left now...McCain was an establishment warhawk globalist neocon, that's it.

[Adam White]

After the Brexit vote, lots and lots of my colleagues openly discussed and lamented the outcome. I'd say that the vast majority of the people I work with voted to remain. But that has nothing to do with our employer or the company's position on the referendum. Simple minds look for conspiracies because it's (somehow) easier than living in the real world and facing the truth.

How very arrogant and european of you, a company that literally shapes information discussing how upset they were that most Americans did not have the same (enlightened) view that they have and how they were going to get through it. Let them eat cake. Simple minds can see conspiracies because it is on youtube. dumbass

"European". LOL.

When i cannot come up with something drool to say, I lol. How continental.

A) What's "drool"?
B) I'm certainly not 'continental,' unless the continent in question is North America.
C) You also resort to personal insults when you've got nothing of merit to say.

There was nothing personal. Read the following if you have a problem understanding why folks have a hard time with your arrogance and why the people voted against the previous 8 years.

I don't disagree. I'm still waiting for evidence of Trump's collusion with Russia before I decide what happened there. But I know plenty of people who are convinced and talk as if it's fact. And no one really has bothered to explore why so many people voted for Trump in the first place - especially in areas that went to Obama four years prior.

Yeah, calling someone a 'dumbass' isn't a personal insult. Fake news!

Also - I am not really certain you understand what I posted, based on your reply.

Edit: to clarify - I agree with Matt's joke that people use conspiracies to explain away outcomes they are unhappy with rather than try to actually explore why things happened they way they did. It's easier for some to blame Russia, etc rather than look into why voters in areas that previously voted for Obama would now vote for Trump. It's easier for them to blame everyone else rather than look in the mirror (or at their candidates). Obama ran a compaign based around 'hope' and 'change'. Trump ran a campaign based on change, too - he positioned himself as an outsider, untainted by Washington. Seems logical to me that people who feel left behind by Washington would've voted for Obama in 2008 and then, seeing that things hadn't changed and there was still no hope, would vote for Trump in 2016. But what do I know? I'm 'continental' and arrogant, after all.

And maybe Trump DID collude with Russia. But I've not seen any evidence yet and will withhold judgement until I do, because this is being played out in the media and is very heavy on the speculation. I don't doubt Russia tried to influence the election - makes sense, since we do the same sort of thing. But whether it worked and whether Trump was a willing participant hasn't been shown yet.

[JPalmer]

Is Space Force really going to let the Japanese take over the moon?  This is the fight we need to be fighting.

[Tacachale]

Re bill's "dumbass" comment, we're currently working on formalizing rules for the forum. Name calling and personal attacks will likely be on the list. The expectation is that folks here should treat each other with civility and respect.

[I-10east]

Thanks goodness for the US being a constitutional republic (not a democracy), and having an electoral college. Otherwise we would have mob rule mainly from the Northeast megalopolis and urban West Coast cities. 

[JPalmer]

Politics will always include "National Security" and in the 2008 election it was front in center.  I am very much an agnostic voter and allowed myself to be swayed by a certain candidates promise of a 15 month troop withdrawal strategy.  I of course never believed GITMO would be shut-down within a month of taking office, that was just silly. 

Needless to say the 15 months goal was never achieved and now believe the timeline would had been no different no matter who was elected into office. 

We can all feel let down by either side of the aisle.

BTW, I wonder if the Nobel Peace Prize committee ever felt regret for awarding someone based on nothing more than their campaign promises. 

[Tacachale]

BTW, I wonder if the Nobel Peace Prize committee ever felt regret for awarding someone based on nothing more than their campaign promises.

Have you seen the list of prizes for literature? These people are evidently incapable of acknowledging their embarrassing choices.

[Adam White]

Thanks goodness for the US being a constitutional republic (not a democracy), and having an electoral college. Otherwise we would have mob rule mainly from the Northeast megalopolis and urban West Coast cities.

The US is a democracy (as well as a constitutional republic). The terms aren't mutually-exclusive.

[I-10east]

The US is a democracy (as well as a constitutional republic). The terms aren't mutually-exclusive.

If the US was a democracy, Hillary Clinton would be pres. The highest amount of votes gets the presidency, versus having the electoral college. Right now on wiki (everyone's favorite trustworthy site) the US is listed as a "federal republic" but used to be listed as a "constitutional republic" not long ago; I'm not sure if there's any difference between the two.

[Adam White]

The US is a democracy (as well as a constitutional republic). The terms aren't mutually-exclusive.

If the US was a democracy, Hillary Clinton would be pres. The highest amount of votes gets the presidency, versus having the electoral college. Right now on wiki (everyone's favorite trustworthy site) the US is listed as a "federal republic" but used to be listed as a "constitutional republic" not long ago; I'm not sure if there's any difference between the two.

The USA is a democracy and a republic. It's a representative democracy (it's far too large to be a direct democracy, though it has elements of that - like referendums, for example). The example you use is an example of democracy in action - people vote for the electors who vote for the President.

The 'republic' bit means that the head of state isn't a king or whatever. The UK is an example of a democracy that is not a republic.

As I stated before, the two terms are not mutually-exclusive.

[Gunnar]

How do you vote, if you don't mind my asking? I am only so familiar with German politics and assume I'd vote Die Linke if I had to choose. But, like a lot of left wing parties, it has a lot of unsavoury elements in it. I see the SPD as much like our Labour Party - they abandoned true social democracy in the 90s and embraced Clintonite 'third way' politics.

Die Linke is out of the question for me as they are the successor to the party that ruled communist East Germany, the SED. They have too much blood on their hands and for me they never faced up to their past.

Also, those people ruled a country for over 40 years and we saw what became of that.

Personally, I tend towards labor but see myself in their conservative wing (conservative being a relative term here). With the way the party has gone in the last years, I do not think I will vote at all in the next federal elections.

Really, watching Bill Maher I can identify with his view points - he's no fan of Republicans but at the same time is disgusted of what has become of the side he sees himself belonging to / sees them as idiots.

This quote sums it up pretty nicely:

"Democrats have gone from the party that protects people to the party that protects feelings. From, 'Ask not what your country can do for you,' to, 'You owe me an apology,'"

The problem with the USA (and the UK, amongst others) is that first-past-the-post voting has led to a system where there are only two parties, which means they have to basically barely stand for anything in order to have a chance at winning. And they just reinvent themselves when in opposition to be whatever the party in power isn't. And then when they are in power, they abandon any principles they pretended to have in order to get elected.

Both major parties have lost so many voters in Germany that they are no longer in a position to govern together with a smaller party but rather needed to govern in a coalition with each other. As they are losing their identity, they are also losing voters to fringe parties. I think labor is now below 20%, the Conservatives are dipping below 30%.

I think this is happening across many countries - saw this in Sweden were neither the left nor the conservative blocks (that consist of several parties each) could govern.

[Gunnar]

The US is a democracy (as well as a constitutional republic). The terms aren't mutually-exclusive.

If the US was a democracy, Hillary Clinton would be pres. The highest amount of votes gets the presidency, versus having the electoral college. Right now on wiki (everyone's favorite trustworthy site) the US is listed as a "federal republic" but used to be listed as a "constitutional republic" not long ago; I'm not sure if there's any difference between the two.

Not necessarily - it really depends on the voting system. If you look at the UK, the party that scores the majority in a district gets the seat in parliament, so it may well be possible that a party who gets 49.9% of votes does not have a single seat in the lower house (Adam will probably know this better).

As for the US, historically the system was set-up to find a balance between majority rule (i.e. pure popular vote) and maintaining the influence of smaller states / prevent them from becoming disenfranchised, which is where the Connecticut Compromise originated.

While I find the electoral college to be outdated, I personally have no issue with not having a pure popular vote system.