My head hurts,

[wesw]

the biggest mistake that the dems made was calling people Nazis.

dumbasses.....

tyrants don t begin their careers at 70.....

see hitler stalin Chavez napoleon castro amin

ayatollah khomeine is the only one I can think of and he began long before he achieved ruler status

[Long Run]

Others will have their take, but my list:

1. The mainstream media gave Trump hundreds of millions of free advertising during the lead-up and primary season, by giving him non-stop coverage and starving out any good candidates. It sold a lot of ads, and sold out any remaining legitimacy that these are objective news organizations.

2. The D's nominated a highly flawed and disliked candidate. Another candidate like Obama would have won easily (but then that's a problem for the D's, they have a thin bench).

3. The D's have cried wolf about every R candidate in recent memory, and they trotted out the same, puppy-kicking, poor-hating, nuke-happy tripe about Trump. And there is real concern with him, but when the same picture has been painted about Reagan, Bush 41, Dole, Bush 43, McCain and Romney, it is hard for anyone to take this line of attack seriously.

4. Then there are the policies and excesses which led to the Trump phenomenon, which is a revolt against the establishment (R and D versions of that). The rise of Sanders was driven by many of the same forces.

5. Traditional forces favored Trump -- it is very hard to get three wins in a row, and the economy remains far from robust.

Life will go on for most of us pretty much the same, though we will get used to cringing or tuning out our "leader". And if history is our guide, the R's will overreach and there will be a reaction in two years.

[oldr_n_wsr]

Very well said BigRR.

If anything good comes from this, hopefully people (all the average joe's among which I consider myself) will pay greater attention to what DC is doing and speak out, for and against it.

Both parties are responsible as they both tried to bring their established candidates (aka chosen ones) forward. The dems succeeded in bringing forth their chosen one, the republicans didn't. They didn't "give" us Trump, he steam rolled them. He took advantage of the feeling of discontent in the peoples of the USA and rode that to the White house. Both parties contributed to that discontent and neither paid attention to it. Maybe they will now.
One can only hope. As BigRR said, there are checks and balances and maybe now the biggest check is the people themselves.

Lets hope Trump doesn't start with "I've got a pen and a phone".

[Bicycle Bill]

Lets hope Trump doesn't start with "I've got a pen and a phone".

Is that anything like "I have a pen ... I have a apple"?

-"BB"-

[Big RR]

Now my head hurts.

[Sue U]

America has survived bad presidents and bad policies before. It will survive Trump. (Virtually all of the campaign promises he made are economically, logistically and/or politically impossible, so there's that as a limit to the damage he might do.) One thing I've learned from life as a litigator is that in putting a case in front of a jury, you will lose some that by rights should have been won and win some that probably should have been lost, and in both cases not for any truly logical reason.

America has spoken, and the cautionary lesson to take is that facts don't matter, policy doesn't matter, competence doesn't matter, experience doesn't matter, and basic coherence doesn't matter. Politics is now TV reality show entertainment rather than actual governance, and the sooner the political parties embrace that the more chance they will have for ratings success.

Max Romeo has never been more on point: One step forward two steps backward, down inna Babylon.

[oldr_n_wsr]

Politics is now TV reality show entertainment

Yet another reason....

[Joe Guy]

Things are going to change fast now that Trump is president. In my town they're already building a wall around Home Depot.

[Econoline]

Lets hope Trump doesn't start with "I've got a pen and a phone".

Is that anything like "I have a pen ... I have a apple"?-"BB"-

Thank you, Bill. That made me laugh out loud, and I really really needed that!

[Burning Petard]

The part that scares me most is that the GOP will control both houses of Congress. We should see cutting of federal taxes, cutting of federal programs (forget infrastructure) cutting of regulation enforcement, and a growing federal debt. So of course state and local government will have to raise taxes. Or we all learn to live with the level of Government services you get in Alabama or Louisiana.

Good luck to the people of West Virginia. You voted for more black lung disease, more mine fires, more undrinkable water.

Voter suppression? I note that Indiana and Kentucky closed their polls at 6pm.

We get the government we deserve.

snailgate

[Econoline]

This made me feel a little better.

• ---

  New York Times Blog
  NOV 9 | 9:42 AM
  Ending the American Romance[/url]
  
  Some morning-after thoughts: what hits me and other so hard isn’t just the immense damage Trump will surely do, to climate above all. There’s also a vast disillusionment that as of now I think of as the end of the romantic vision of America (which I still love).
  
  What I mean is the notion of US history as a sort of novel in which there may be great tragedy, but there’s always a happy ending. That is, we tell a story in which at times of crisis we always find the leader — Lincoln, FDR — and the moral courage we need.
  
  It’s a particular kind of American exceptionalism; other countries don’t tell that kind of story about themselves. But I, like others, believed it.
  
  Now it doesn’t look very good, does it? But giving up is not an option. The world needs a decent, democratic America, or we’re all lost. And there’s still a lot of decency in the nation — it’s just not as dominant as I imagined. Time to rethink, for sure. But not to surrender.

That last paragraph is something which I doubt that even Lord Jim would disagree with.

[Big RR]

Burning--I would share your fear of the Congress if there were a real republican in the White House, but there is not. Trump is his own animal who has a score to settle with the republicans who insulted him, and I think it will be far more likely they will end up feuding with him, maybe even impeaching him, rather than doing much else. And the majority the repubs have is cannot stop democratic filibusters in the senate, making such legislation less likely. Time will tell, but I'd doubt Trump's relationship with the republican leigislature will be much better than Obama's.

[RayThom]

After this mind-numbing, political apocalypse, do you think the Republican party will refer to itself as the GOP ever again? It sure ceased being Grand last night. How about "POP" -- Powerful Old Party?

"I see RED people..."

Repeat after me, President Trump... President Trump... President Trump...

[wesw]

RR, a simple majority can change the rules and do away with the filibuster....


...one simple quorum call is all it takes

...and harry reid set the precedent.

you can t unring the bell.

[Big RR]

wes--my understanding is that certain actions, like confirmations of nominees can have filibusters ended with less than 60 votes, but any legislation to pass laws is still subject to the 60 vote cloture requirement; further, I do not think there is any requirement for a filibuster to be of the continuous talking kind (like Rand Paul did a couple of years ago). I'll check this when I get a chance, but perhaps someone else knows--Jim?

[Long Run]

from Wiki:

The new rules remove the requirement of 60 votes in order to begin debate on legislation and allow the minority two amendments to measures that reach the Senate floor, a change implemented as a standing order that expires at the end of the current term.[42][43] In the new rules, the amount of time to debate following a motion to proceed has been reduced from 30 hours to four. Additionally, a filibuster on the motion to proceed will be blocked if a petition is signed by eight members of the minority, including the minority leader.[43] For district court nominations, the new rules reduce the required time before the nominee is confirmed after cloture from 30 hours to two hours.[43] Under the new rules, if senators wish to block a bill or nominee after the motion to proceed, they will need to be present in the Senate and debate.[44][42] Following the changes, 60 votes are still required to overcome a filibuster to pass legislation and confirm nominees and the "silent filibuster"—where senators can filibuster even if they leave the floor—remained in place.

* * *

On November 21, 2013, the Senate used the so-called "nuclear option," voting 52-48, with all Republicans and 3 Democrats voting against, to eliminate the use of the filibuster on executive branch nominees and judicial nominees other than to the Supreme Court.

[Burning Petard]

Yes, a simple majority. That would be wonderful. The Donald never got 50% of the vote in any of the primaries, and not in this general election. If we had a requirement for a simple majority, rather than a plurality, we would be looking at a run-off election.

snailgate.

[datsunaholic]

Yes, a simple majority. That would be wonderful. The Donald never got 50% of the vote in any of the primaries, and not in this general election. If we had a requirement for a simple majority, rather than a plurality, we would be looking at a run-off election.

snailgate.

Pretty difficult to do when we don't even have a direct popular vote. Trump didn't even reach a plurality. But because of the Electoral College, there's not even a need to get anything close to a majority. Trump could have theoretically won the election with less than 25% of the popular vote. All he needed was a slight plurality in enough States; the rest could have been landslides for Hillary but not even matter.

Could fix it be eliminating the 18th century "compromise" Electoral College. But try getting THAT constitutional amendment through congress. Because only the losers want it. Plus it would be unlikely to get ratified by enough States, being that it removes some State's over-proportional effect on the election.

[wesw]

yes , RR, but ALL filibuster rules are just rules and can be changed with a simple majority.

at the present it only applies to certain areas, but with one vote all cloture rules could be changed to a simple majority to end debate.

that is my understanding.

[Econoline]

http://www.theonion.com/infographic/how ... ults-54671

• Here’s some advice for talking to your child about the shocking outcome of the 2016 presidential election:
  
  Children often understand more than we think, so start off by asking them if they have any idea what the fuck is happening.
  
  Put their mind at ease by confirming that the results of this election aren’t the end of the world in any strictly literal sense.
  
  Don’t be afraid to openly share your wine with them.
  
  Avoid touching on any topic that might be distressing to a young child, such as the electoral college.
  
  Reassure them that no matter what, the adults in their life will always feel obligated to tell them everything’s going to be all right.
  
  Explain that testosterone is a naturally occurring steroid hormone that makes a person more aggressive and reactive.
  
  Remind them that one day when they’re older, they’ll understand all of this a lot better and will get to decide for themselves whether or not they should forgive us.
  
  Acquaint your daughter with the word “motherfucker” to equip her for what lies ahead.
  
  If they have additional questions, direct them to your Twitter feed.