Glass Ceiling has been smashed!

[buckchuckler]

Well this was civil up until the last two pages. Thanks for ruining a decent conversation boys.

For my part in that, I apologize.  I didn't mean to go down the rabbit hole.  I'm done and out, please continue.

[StillAWarrior]

I think one of the most interesting stories of the election is the fundamental shift in the blue collar/union vote in PA, OH, MI and WI.  For decades these votes have been reliably blue.  Living in Ohio, I first saw this in the eastern-most part of the state.  This three county corridor from Ashtabula up by Lake Erie and down through Youngstown definitely leans heavily democrat.  Tuesday two went for Trump and the third was soft for Clinton.  It's the same thing that played out in the rest of the much-discussed "Blue Wall" of PA, MI and WI.

It will be very interesting to see what comes of this.  Trump managed to appeal to a voting block that has been very reliable over the years.  His, "what have they done for you" message resonated with them.  If he can deliver anything to them, he may keep them.  If not, they may return to the fold.  Much of what is ailing the rust belt is a difficult fix, so we'll see how it goes.

Trump's win may be a bit of a double whammy for the unions.  In addition to losing sway over their members (as discussed above), he may well rein in the extraordinarily pro-Union NLRB.  I deal with a lot of federal agencies in my day to day life.  Many have shown noticeable shifts over the last eight years, and that is to be expected.  But the NLRB is really off the tracks right now.  I certainly hope that becomes one of the new administration's agenda items and they restore some sanity there.

[real chili 83]

I think one of the most interesting stories of the election is the fundamental shift in the blue collar/union vote in PA, OH, MI and WI.  For decades these votes have been reliably blue.  Living in Ohio, I first saw this in the eastern-most part of the state.  This three county corridor from Ashtabula up by Lake Erie and down through Youngstown definitely leans heavily democrat.  Tuesday two went for Trump and the third was soft for Clinton.  It's the same thing that played out in the rest of the much-discussed "Blue Wall" of PA, MI and WI.

It will be very interesting to see what comes of this.  Trump managed to appeal to a voting block that has been very reliable over the years.  His, "what have they done for you" message resonated with them.  If he can deliver anything to them, he may keep them.  If not, they may return to the fold.  Much of what is ailing the rust belt is a difficult fix, so we'll see how it goes.

Trump's win may be a bit of a double whammy for the unions.  In addition to losing sway over their members (as discussed above), he may well rein in the extraordinarily pro-Union NLRB.  I deal with a lot of federal agencies in my day to day life.  Many have shown noticeable shifts over the last eight years, and that is to be expected.  But the NLRB is really off the tracks right now.  I certainly hope that becomes one of the new administration's agenda items and they restore some sanity there.

NLRB, DOL, OFCCP, AND EEOC.

[Babybluejeans]

Well this was civil up until the last two pages. Thanks for ruining a decent conversation boys.

It was civil the whole day until...the arrival of Chicos. Shocking. I'm glad the mods gave us the opportunity to kick some things around with each other yesterday and keep it civil but impassioned, before the thread was hijacked.

[Vander Blue Man Group]

Nevermind.  You're just too sensitive to have any real discussion with.

I disagree with you completely. That has nothing to do with sensitivity.

I got your point, it was just terrible.

If you truly can't understand, you probably have no diversity of thought among your social group.  Instead of just insulting giant groups of people, maybe try to understand them.

I can completely understand why certain people who voted for Trump feel the way that they do.  You couldn't be more off base in terms of my social group.

What is not acceptable to me is the man they cast their ballot for.  And that has nothing to do with politics, left vs. right, etc.

[StillAWarrior]

NLRB, DOL, OFCCP, AND EEOC.

I deal with all of them (although not as much with OFCCP).  You can certainly add OSHA to the list too (but you may have been including them in DOL).  In my experience, none of the others even remotely compare to what is going on with NLRB.  EEOC and DOL are being a bit activist, but NLRB is out of control.

[real chili 83]

I deal with the NLRB less, but I understand your point.  They have an agenda. 

[Vander Blue Man Group]

   "I do consider anyone who did cast a ballot for him to be wholly uninformed, an idiot, or both. The question is how much damage he will be able to do to our country in the 4 years before he is voted out"


  and you don't see the elitism/i know better attitude here?   many felt this same way about 2008 and 2012.  the years of the new normal.  how much damage has been done to our country over the last 8 years?  this is why you have trump.  he kicked PC in the teeth and was saying so many things, we the people were expecting some of the pols to say.  remember debate #1 or 2 between obama and romney?  romney got after obamam on some sensitive subjects and his ratings soared.  the next 1 or 2, romney settled down and guess what?  he lost

I'm not an elitist. My position is based on the type of person Trump is and his lack of experience to lead a country. 

I hope I'm wrong about him.  I don't expect that to be the case.

[4everwarriors]

Y'all just need ta take a chill pill. Dis isn't vaguely close ta Nazi Germany. We will all be just fine and so will da country. I have full confidence in the man, his ability to surround himself wit good people, and to make good decisions, in da best interest, for da country he loves. Prosperity is a beautiful thang and I feel he gives us da best opportunity to experience that.
I can excuse da younguns for der naivety and pollyanna view of da world. They will learn wit time. But, y'all old farts should be embarrassed at your reaction to da election's outcome when da Dem's candidate would have fooked dis wonderful country beyond repair.

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

But adding the two extra electoral votes to each state skews the value of individual votes in favor of the residents of smaller states.

The Electoral College - I was thinking about this more last night.  I certainly don't want to eliminate it, but I don't want to see a differing popular vote winner become commonplace. 

There are 435 representatives and that number is currently capped and the districts are redrawn every ten years, so each rep = approximately the same number in population.  In the Electoral College the number becomes distorted with the addition of the 2 Senators to the number.  Throughout American history, the size of the HoR increased and not simply because states were added.  Perhaps it's time to increase the size of the HoR.  More reps should decrease gerrymandering by forcing more geographic areas and will reduce the numerical difference in each Electoral College weighted vote numbers.  Thoughts?

I'm thinking it means more reps and Electoral votes in California, Texas, Florida and growth South & Western states while maintaining the smaller states 3 to 4 EC votes.

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

I think one of the most interesting stories of the election is the fundamental shift in the blue collar/union vote in PA, OH, MI and WI.  For decades these votes have been reliably blue.  Living in Ohio, I first saw this in the eastern-most part of the state.  This three county corridor from Ashtabula up by Lake Erie and down through Youngstown definitely leans heavily democrat.  Tuesday two went for Trump and the third was soft for Clinton.  It's the same thing that played out in the rest of the much-discussed "Blue Wall" of PA, MI and WI.

It will be very interesting to see what comes of this.  Trump managed to appeal to a voting block that has been very reliable over the years.  His, "what have they done for you" message resonated with them.  If he can deliver anything to them, he may keep them.  If not, they may return to the fold.  Much of what is ailing the rust belt is a difficult fix, so we'll see how it goes.

Trump's win may be a bit of a double whammy for the unions.  In addition to losing sway over their members (as discussed above), he may well rein in the extraordinarily pro-Union NLRB.  I deal with a lot of federal agencies in my day to day life.  Many have shown noticeable shifts over the last eight years, and that is to be expected.  But the NLRB is really off the tracks right now.  I certainly hope that becomes one of the new administration's agenda items and they restore some sanity there.

I think this tweet from Sen. Ben Sasse says more.

Fascinating #s

R vote down
But D down much more

08Obama 69M
12Obama 66M
04Bush 62M
12Romney 61M
8McCain 60M
16Clinton 59.6M
16Trump 59.4M

[Benny B]

I'm not an elitist. My position is based on the type of person Trump is and his lack of experience to lead a country. 

I hope I'm wrong about him.  I don't expect that to be the case.

You do realize that other people have just as strong of opinions of Hillary as you do Donald.  They are both deplorable human beings.  They are both unfit to lead this country.  They are both lying, conniving, back stabbing elitists.

And yet, 96% of you (who voted) voted for one or the other.  Don't whine about how the other candidate is horrible and your candidate is God's Gift (actually, I don't think he's eligible yet).  You're all to blame in my book.  Except chick... I think she may be the only one here who actually voted on principle (I assume).  The rest of you have only lent credence to and perpetuated a system where this year will be the new bar for our presidential candidates.

If ever there was going to be a year where a third party could gain traction, not to mention the 5% necessary for federal campaign funding, this was it.  But instead of voting to improve our government, 96% of you voted for the two party system.  What is ruining this country is binary politics... nay, strike that.... what's ruining this country is the 96% of you who are too dumb, too arrogant or too greedy to understand what this country needs to heal and improve is the obliteration of the two-party system.

But no... instead of voting with your heads and hearts, 96% of you voted against fear, uncertainty and doubt, and in your shortsightedness, you failed to realize you were actually voting for more of it.

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

I think this tweet from Sen. Ben Sasse says more.

Fascinating #s

R vote down
But D down much more

08Obama 69M
12Obama 66M
04Bush 62M
12Romney 61M
8McCain 60M
16Clinton 59.6M
16Trump 59.4M

This in addition to the demographic splits I saw are the best way to see the causals of the result. Very telling

[StillAWarrior]

I'm not an elitist. My position is based on the type of person Trump is and his lack of experience to lead a country. 

I hope I'm wrong about him.  I don't expect that to be the case.

I think a huge aspect of this election is exactly the point that you raise:  "experience to lead a country."  Exactly what experience is relevant?  For years, there was a debate over whether governors or senators made better presidents.  Many felt that governors were better because they had executive experience -- they'd run things before.  Others felt the legislative experience was better -- they new how to make deals and get things through Congress.  But, the debate was always about what type of political experience was better.

Many believe Washington is broken.  In many people's opinion, Trump was the only candidate who might fix it.  Whether he can -- or will even try -- is an entirely different question.  For people who think that way, Hillary Clinton was the absolute worst possible candidate to run against Trump.  Many view Clinton as the complete embodiment of everything that is wrong with and broken about Washington.  She simply never stood a chance with those voters.  Clinton lost the election because she assumed that those voters are all racist/sexist idiots.  If the Dems' takeaway from this election is that they lost because Trump's voters are sexist/racist idiots, they've got a problem.  A huge number of Trump's supporters are decent, intelligent and sincere Americans who believe that our country severely broken and needs to be fixed.  While I understand entirely the claims about hypocrisy, I suspect that obstructionism for the sake of obstructionism (or for the sake of revenge) may be harmful for the democrats.  I also think that ramrodding things through just because he can and not trying to reach across the aisle could be harmful for Trump and the republicans.  I think voters want to see Washington working again.  I think that is what many who voted for Trump hope that is what they were voting for.  They view him as a "hope and change" candidate.  He may prove to be a terrible vehicle for those hopes and dreams, but he was the best one available.

But, back to the original point...what gives a person the experience to lead a country?  A fairly significant portion of the public decided to take a chance to see if leadership in the private sector will translate to leadership in Washington.

I also hope you're wrong about him.  I guess we'll find out.

[GGGG]

The Electoral College - I was thinking about this more last night.  I certainly don't want to eliminate it, but I don't want to see a differing popular vote winner become commonplace. 

There are 435 representatives and that number is currently capped and the districts are redrawn every ten years, so each rep = approximately the same number in population.  In the Electoral College the number becomes distorted with the addition of the 2 Senators to the number.  Throughout American history, the size of the HoR increased and not simply because states were added.  Perhaps it's time to increase the size of the HoR.  More reps should decrease gerrymandering by forcing more geographic areas and will reduce the numerical difference in each Electoral College weighted vote numbers.  Thoughts?

I'm thinking it means more reps and Electoral votes in California, Texas, Florida and growth South & Western states while maintaining the smaller states 3 to 4 EC votes.

The problem is that its hard enough to get stuff done in the House right now with 435 members, most of which don't really do anything but fundraise.  Maybe if the goal is to make it more proportional, you only give each state one vote PLUS one for each Representative.

This would essentially reduce the EC by 51 (including DC).  So instead of 538, it would be 487. 

[StillAWarrior]

I think this tweet from Sen. Ben Sasse says more.

Fascinating #s

R vote down
But D down much more

08Obama 69M
12Obama 66M
04Bush 62M
12Romney 61M
8McCain 60M
16Clinton 59.6M
16Trump 59.4M

That is interesting.  A part of the story -- maybe a small part -- is the 4-5 million votes for third party candidates this year.  Splitting those up would put both candidates' results up into the range that we had been seeing for candidates not named Obama over the last few elections.

[Badgerhoney]

I'm not questioning the citizenry. I'm questioning the man himself.

Dust up? Trump said so himself! It wasn't a made-up story. Trump said it!

He said he would let us know if he would accept the results.  He never said he would not, nor did he say he would.  It appears he has accepted them.  It is unfortunate to see the so many not accepting the results.  The clamor now that he be assassinated, blatant hopes for this on the news last night.  Astonishing, more maybe it isn't. 

Or maybe you are attacking the birther comments.  We agree, not something he should have done.  I would properly point out that Hillary's campaign pushed that long before Trump ever did. 

[Spotcheck Billy]

.

[CTWarrior]

You do realize that other people have just as strong of opinions of Hillary as you do Donald.  They are both deplorable human beings.  They are both unfit to lead this country.  They are both lying, conniving, back stabbing elitists.

And yet, 96% of you (who voted) voted for one or the other.  Don't whine about how the other candidate is horrible and your candidate is God's Gift (actually, I don't think he's eligible yet).  You're all to blame in my book.  Except chick... I think she may be the only one here who actually voted on principle (I assume).  The rest of you have only lent credence to and perpetuated a system where this year will be the new bar for our presidential candidates.

If ever there was going to be a year where a third party could gain traction, not to mention the 5% necessary for federal campaign funding, this was it.  But instead of voting to improve our government, 96% of you voted for the two party system.  What is ruining this country is binary politics... nay, strike that.... what's ruining this country is the 96% of you who are too dumb, too arrogant or too greedy to understand what this country needs to heal and improve is the obliteration of the two-party system.

But no... instead of voting with your heads and hearts, 96% of you voted against fear, uncertainty and doubt, and in your shortsightedness, you failed to realize you were actually voting for more of it.

I voted Libertarian, whose candidate was not exactly a MENSA member, precisely for the federal funding reason because they were the party most likely to reach 5%, Like you and many others, I found both major party candidates to be deplorable.  My wife voted Green Party.  I still don't understand why, in this of all elections, voters didn't make a statement by voting more for other parties.

[Spotcheck Billy]

Y'all just need ta take a chill pill. Dis isn't vaguely close ta Nazi Germany. We will all be just fine and so will da country. I have full confidence in the man, his ability to surround himself wit good people, and to make good decisions, in da best interest, for da country he loves. Prosperity is a beautiful thang and I feel he gives us da best opportunity to experience that.

I can excuse da younguns for der naivety and pollyanna view of da world. They will learn wit time. But, y'all old farts should be embarrassed at your reaction to da election's outcome when da Dem's candidate would have fooked dis wonderful country beyond repair.

You're funny, based on your 2nd paragraph I bet you wouldn't have posted that 1st paragraph if Clinton won.

[Galway Eagle]

Your team blew it.  She was rejected wholeheartedly by the American voters. 

This is what pisses me off. Every conservative seems to be under this delusion that she was rejected by American voters just stop. She won the majority (ok plurality) of voters not Trump, Trump just played the chess game better

[GGGG]

I voted Libertarian, whose candidate was not exactly a MENSA member, precisely for the federal funding reason because they were the party most likely to reach 5%, Like you and many others, I found both major party candidates to be deplorable.  My wife voted Green Party.  I still don't understand why, in this of all elections, voters didn't make a statement by voting more for other parties.

Because while people say they want third parties, I don't think they really do.

[Badgerhoney]

I'm not out of touch in the least. Nor did I label all those who voted for him as bigoted racists.  However a fair number certainly are.

I do consider anyone who did cast a ballot for him to be wholly uninformed, an idiot, or both. The question is how much damage he will be able to do to our country in the 4 years before he is voted out

Donald is no more misogynistic than Hillary and I'm the one that's out of touch?  Thanks for the laugh.

Yes, actually you are.  The establishment, media, liberals, are all out of touch.  That is why you lost, you are out of touch with what America has voted for.   Michael Moore, whom I suspect you align with, could not have said it any better. 

What shows you to be further out of touch, in my opinion, is your attacks on those that voted for him.  That is an elitist, snob attitude that your opinion is more informed, more valued than theirs.  That, puts you out of touch.  I'm glad you are laughing, but you really may want to reconsider what you are saying. 

How much damage was Obama able to do?  $8 trillion debt now at $20 trillion.  Obamacare.  Massive weakening of enforcement of immigration laws.  People said enough. You don't agree with them, which is your right, but both sides will make claims that the other has damaged the country.  An election was held Tuesday, and those that are out of touch, lost.  Today, those out of touch people can either come together, or continue to complain, thumb their nose at real Americans (many of which were died in the wool Democrats) voted against the liberal policies that you hold dear.  That means, you are out of touch.

[GGGG]

A good read for those who want to leave the country.

http://www.wweek.com/culture/2016/11/09/my-family-left-the-united-states-because-of-the-bush-presidency-and-it-didnt-make-our-lives-any-better/

[Badgerhoney]

This is what pisses me off. Every conservative seems to be under this delusion that she was rejected by American voters just stop. She won the majority (ok plurality) of voters not Trump, Trump just played the chess game better

This is a nonsensical argument.  How many Republicans even bother to show up to vote in New York or California?  They don't, so that is why you see big victories in popular voting in those states.

What you should be looking at is the reliably presidential Democrat blue states that rejected 4 more years of Obama, rejected her completely.  Michigan. Wisconsin, Pennslyvania, almost Minnesota (can you believe that?).   Not only did he play the game better, but large swaths of your voting blocs said enough.  Blue collar especially.  Women didn't come home to her. Hispanic voting increased share for him.  African American voting increased share for him.     I'd add that if it was simply about him playing better chess, does that mean Ron Johnson did, too?  How about the predictions that the Democrats would take over the Senate?  Were they all outplayed in chess?  Or did people say enough?