SFP

*

Hi all, Molly here. Sorry, there’s no page today – I’ve been too distraught over the results of the election to focus on art this week. I’m still coming to terms with what we’re facing for the next four years. I’m worried about my civil rights as a gay woman under Trump and Pence, but I’m frankly terrified for other, more vulnerable people.

*

I’m scared for trans people whose right to their own identity could be stripped away. I’m scared for people of color facing deportation and barefaced hostility. I’m scared for people with illnesses and disabilities who rely on Obamacare to physically survive. I’m scared for Muslims and the immediate increase in hate crimes that they are facing. I’m scared for the women who have to watch that man be sworn into office.

*

This is a comic about trying to do good, about how it’s hard and slow and complicated and also the most important thing. I’m still coming to terms with the fact that many (not all, not even half, I have to believe) Americans do not want our country to be the diverse and welcoming place I envision it to be.

*

Also, I’m angry, and I’m ready to fight for that vision. If you feel similarly and have the financial ability, below is a list of charities who we believe are doing important work. I’m also selling a limited amount of commissions – for $100 I’ll draw 1 – 2 characters from this comic for you, your choice, and donate that money to one of the charities below. I’ll ship the finished drawing to you if you live in North America. Buy a commission here. 

update: dang, guys, we raised $1,300 for charity in a very short time. I don’t have time for more commissions at the moment but I’d like to keep this as a recurring thing, so there will be more chances. Thank you all so much for your generosity and the very kind emails we’ve been getting all morning.

*

Charities we are supporting (updated):

The American Civil Liberties Union is a fierce watchdog for violations of the constitution

Planned Parenthood provides critical health care for women and others

The Council on American-Islamic Relations advocates for Muslims in the U.S. and fights Islamophobia 

The Human Rights Campaign fights for equality for all LGBTQ+ people

The Transgender Law Center focuses on helping trans people

The National Immigration Law Center defends the rights of low income immigrants

The Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network is a resource for survivors of sexual assault

The Southern Poverty Law Center works to prevent and combat hate crimes

*

Hey gang, Brennan here. I have very little to add, given how clearly and powerfully Molly articulated our thoughts above (she’s a genius and one of the best and kindest humans on this dang planet, but you guys already knew that). I rarely comment here on the site, or in general, as I feel like you guys are already being awfully nice by reading as many of my words as you do. The only thing I wanted to add was that, if you’re reading this right now, wherever you are, whoever you are, to please know that we love you, and that we want you safe and happy and whole. That’s all. We make this comic out of love, and you are all a part of that love, and always will be.

*

Thank you for reading, be safe, and please be kind to each other.

-Molly & Brennan

sfp-friday

Show Comments
  • Patrick

    Artist must be aloof from the political world. Art must be produced (and that is what you do) seperate from ones political beliefs. If i recall right you have Patreon supporters, who (very unlikely) could well be Trump voters. You offend them by not meeting a deadline that they pay for you not to follow.

    It all amounts to proffesionalism. Trump isn´t a proffesional. He is, what De Niro so well said, a “Bozo” who in the eyes of a large percentage of the world is unfit for the office into which he was elected. Be better than Trump.

    • cha5on

      Wow, are you for real? You must have no sense of empathy whatsoever. Leave them alone.

    • dbmag9

      Art is political. The personal is political. Everything is political.

      (SFP isn’t on Patreon; ‘professionalism’ has one ‘f’; Molly and Brennan don’t owe Trump supporters shit.

    • Jonathan Boynton

      Art has always been involved in politics. It’s the voice of the voiceless, the way people on all sides have always expressed themselves. For you to demand that Molly and Brennan’s art be inoffensive to you or to others means that frankly you don’t care about the artist as a person, which is morally incomprehensible to me. You do not have the right to demand that someone not express themselves in that way. Even with the people on the other side of the political aisle, I may criticize the message of their art, I may criticize their views and opinions but I would never deny their right to make it.

    • Lysiuj

      Your two years are running out… and a 25 million dollar check didn’t save you…
      Deal with it.

    • ∫Clémens×ds 🐙

      Cut the bullshit, Max.
      Pretending to be “Patrick” so we wouldn’t immediately hate your face has the major flaw of a plan that you’re still a clownwad.

    • Valerie Cardona

      let me see if I understand this logic. You are saying in the comments section of a highly political/social issue comic that they need to not express themselves?

      I’m not sure you understand how art works.

    • The Elsewise

      I disagree that “art must be produced seperate from ones political beliefs.” [sic]

      Art is about expression and communication. To deny one’s own biases and beliefs, refusing to let them influence your work, is an affront to what art is in essence. At which point you embrace such a notion, I would suggest that you are not at that point creating art. Illustration perhaps, or simply decoration to please the eye aesthetically; each are more appropriate than calling it “art.”

      • Lysiuj

        (Though I would disagree those things can’t be art… art doesn’t need to be political any more than it needs to be apolitical.)

        • Shweta Narayan

          Art is inherently political. If you try to scrub it of any political sense you don’t end up with “neutral” art. You end up with a very specific political slant, the one you consider “default”, take for granted, and don’t question. Which is to say, you’re actively reinforcing the status quo.

          Being an artist means taking responsibility for what we put into the world.

          • Lysiuj

            Yeah, but someone can still create art purely for aesthetics, or emotional expression, etc. I don’t mean actively removing anything you believe in, I mean that you don’t have to express your beliefs for it to count as art.

          • Guilherme Carvalho

            True, it can still count as art. But it will have political content whether you put yours in deliberately or not.
            Making the choice of creating art for pure aesthetics or “nothing more than” emotional expression IS a politcal stance. And more often than not, it can be one over which such an artist has just given up control. Again, totally their right, and it’s still very much art.
            But as an artist myself, I still feel concerned about it.

    • I have to stand 100% opposed to you there.

      As a disabled writer a large part of what I do I do directly to respond to political forces that seek to prevent improvement in, if not outright worsen, the situation of people like me, or people from other minorities. There is a centuries long, millenia even, tradition of writers and artists doing precisely that. This week I’ve used my writing ability to provide pithy quotes for a journalist writing an article on an area I’m active in, inspired him to write another article about it, and then used them to talk about ways my American friends can engage in activism even if physically limited to the point getting out of bed is a challenge.

      I don’t contribute to the Patreon, limited funds because of the discrimination people like me face in the workpace – and there’s that politics thing again – but if I did I’d be delighted to see what Molly and Brennan wrote today. Because that’s what their art is about, that’s what this comic is about. And if you can’t see that, then you seriously need to reread from page 1 onwards.

    • Art holds a mirror to life. Politics is part of life. Therefore, politics and art do mix.

    • I Am Helpy

      Is there any way of reading this that isn’t highly offensive?

      • Shweta Narayan

        nope

        at best it’s chiding them patronizingly and telling them what to do with their own voices, which is a silencing tactic.

    • Shweta Narayan

      “All good art is political! There is none that isn’t. And the ones that try hard not to be political are political by saying, ‘We love the status quo.” – Toni Morrison

      The thing about being an independent artist is that you *can in fact* be open about your position, as long as you are courageous enough to let people who hate you for it walk. And really if they’re blaming Molly for being harmed by their action, instead of taking a good look at their own hateful selves, and they leave? Well, nothing of value is lost.

      The duo’s decision is not only *perfectly* professional, it is brave, it is inspiring, it’s an example of what conscientious citizenship in a democracy should be, AND it’s a mark of good art. And it is *incredibly* petty and nasty to chide them for it.

      • Weatherheight

        And the courage it took for them to state so very bluntly why they felt unable to create should be honored.

    • Dwight Williams

      Some of the best art in human history to date begins from a rejection of your assertion about aloofness from the political world.

    • SJ

      I guess Alison isn’t the only one around here with the power of super-audacity.

    • JARM

      I have to disagree with your take on artists. In my experience art is often the best medium for shining light on unwanted truths that the people who write history (the winners) would prefer we forgot about. I am Canadian and it wasn’t until I was exposed to university level literature that I became aware of how appallingly my government treated Japanese-Canadians during WWII (Joy Kogawa’s novel Obasan), or how devastating the residential school system was for so many aboriginal people (reams of short stories/poems/plays too many to list but the last school was closed in ’96 which wasn’t that long ago).
      Art can be a means of enunciating pain so that healing can begin.
      America is in pain, and now is when art is needed most.
      Also just want to say; Molly & Brennan I love your comic! I think it stands among the best stories I have ever read. Your deconstruction of the super-hero narrative is brilliant.
      And thank you for this safe space to pontificate 😉

      Stay strong, stay safe, never let go of hope, and know that whatever flavour of person that you are (and there are so many) love is the only way to beat hate.

  • Valerie Cardona

    Now more than ever, THIS comic is needed. It represents exactly the opposite of the results of election day.

    I’m one of those people that are terrified. Half my family is Mexican. I am a Latina woman who works in a male dominated environment (construction). Already I have been told by the only other female co-worker that I’m lucky because finally we have a president who thinks women should be put in their proper place.

    It’s a scary reality, but comics like yours inspire and are needed. Your message here is amazingly beautiful and hits close to home. Thank you for eloquently expressing yourself. I will look forward to the next page.

    • Lysiuj

      Stay strong and safe, I wish you the best.

    • Some people are clueless about their own oppression. I’ve worked in a similarly male-dominated industry, software, and seen my female colleagues hit the glass ceiling and then be driven out, We fight that by the example of people like you, by being good allies where we can, and by drawing attention to it through politics and art.

      So put me down as thinking you’re exactly where your proper place is, and hoping you find the strength to endure.

    • Karla Lara

      Arriba boricua! Not in the USA and not in this beautiful island of Puerto Rico the president will ruin us.

    • Bill

      And what would that proper place be? Tell me you were joking. No, I know you’re not. Gah. I feel sick all over again.

      • Valerie Cardona

        I really wish I was. I don’t think even the amazingly talented artists of this comic can properly capture the expression my face had at the time. According to her “Our place is where our family values are.”

        Allow a brief moment of smugness here, maybe being a former English Teacher turned crew manager (a supervisory position and the only female to have it, btw) I didn’t quite get her meaning right, but I’m thinking she meant going back to the kitchens (for lack of a better expression). Something, that as a single woman of hispanic heritage I refuse to do.

        That said, I’m still hopeful. My all male crew still respects my stances and my authority and me as an individual. We may be scared, but together we can be brave.

        • Bill

          Where our family values are? I shudder to think of where Trump’s family values are.

          Good luck to us all.

        • Dwight Williams

          Wishing your crew continued good wisdom and much prosperity, as you continue with them!

        • Shweta Narayan

          Good luck! Internet-person support!

          I’m reminded of being told by one of the Indian Aunties (all parental friends are aunties and uncles) that we’re lucky we got colonized because we now speak English.

          I think the look on my face might have been a mirror of yours…

  • Lysiuj

    Molly and Brennan, you are wonderful people and the world needs more like you. Thank you for everything so far and everything yet to come, and for encouraging us to help others.
    Everyone else – you are all beautiful and amazing, we have survived and will survive much worse than this.

  • ∫Clémens×ds 🐙

    It’s not my place to comment today. You silly Americans do what you do best and remember why you love your country and each other. I stand with you all.
    See you soon.

    • When someone argues for racism, misogyny, extra-judicial punishment, sexual assault, and all the rest, I think it’s all our places to comment.

    • Micah Matheson

      I scanned the comments for your name. Your words brought me comfort 🙂

  • Blazinghand

    Stay safe, everyone, and don’t give up. I hope everyone makes it as best they can. I will do my part.

  • zellgato

    がんばって.Be well

  • Billy Smith

    Hey Molly & Brennan.

    Yes, things seem bad right now, but there is hope.

    We’ve been having this sort of hassle in the UK since the summer, and we’re still here.

    There’s an interesting perspective here, http://eepurl.com/coeX1n

    And a plan of action here, https://twitter.com/accessjames/status/794899424849920000

    As Jason Nesmith says “Never give up. Never surrender.” 😀

  • Cherre

    Your words mean so much right now. Thank you Molly and Brennan

  • cphoenix

    You didn’t list Southern Poverty Law Center?

  • I’m saddened and worried but I wish I could say that I’m surprised – people voted for Hitler and people voted for McCarthy.

    « sends you good wishes

  • This, what Molly and Brennan said at the top of the page, this is what the comic is about, this is why we read it, it’s as much a part of Alison’s story as the previous page or the next.

    So, Molly, Brennan, keep on doing what you’re doing, because you’re doing a good thing, and you’re doing it right, and by educating people about oppression through art we make that oppression harder to sustain and impossible to justify.

  • Lorcan Nagle

    I’m Irish, and a pro-choice activist. We’ve been fighting against the religious right in this country for 30 years to try and fix Ireland’s awful abortion regieme, and to see the possibility for America to slide so horribly backwards because enough people thought a racist, sexist, serial abuser, conman was a better choice to lead the most powerful country than a qualified woman. If Roe V Wade is overturned, the US may well end up the same position we are, forcing women (and trans men/non-binary people who have the physical capacity to get pregnant) to travel to neighbouring countries to access health options they should have at home for their own safety and wellbeing.

    My thoughts go out to American women, to the LGBT community, to ethnic minorities especially, because you guys have the greatest potential for suffering just because of the hate and bile that Trump has enabled by his campaign alone. But I also hope that his economic policies don’t have too bad an effect on everyone else too.

    • Gus Snarp

      Sadly, we’ve been sliding backwards for a while. We likely won’t reach the point where women have to leave the country to get an abortion, but they are already beginning to have to leave their own states, and in a country this big, that can be just as difficult. The “standards” for abortion providers that many states have passed have essentially made impossible for any to operate, and they’re closing their doors all the time. The court has been the saving grace, blocking many of those laws, but it takes a fight every time. I don’t think anyone knows what this new president will do, but since the Senate has refused to confirm Obama’s Supreme Court appointment, we can be sure appointing a new justice will be an early priority, and even if Cheeto Smallhands isn’t going to govern like he campaigned (who knows?), if he’s actually any good at negotiating as he claims, he’ll want to appoint someone who will make the Republicans who control Congress very happy so they’ll continue to support him. So I expect that when restrictive state abortion laws hit the Supreme Court next year they’ll be upheld and huge swaths of the midwest and south will effectively outlaw abortion, leaving women forced to travel hundreds of miles to get the care they need. Which means the poor and desperate will turn to other means.

      • Lorcan Nagle

        You raise a great point with people possibly having to leave their own states. Right now, in parts of the US where there’s literally one abortion provider for an entire state, and there’s a cooling off-period and the need for an ultrasound before the abortion, it’s actually easier for an Irish person to travel to the UK or the Netherlands.

  • AbacusWizard

    Thank you for doing this. Under the circumstances, reading this announcement has cheered me up more than any comic page would have.

    • Bill

      Me too, actually. Not sure why, but me too.

  • Fluffy Dragon
    • crazy j

      Isn’t Sweden the sexual assault capital of Europe?

      • Clavus

        It’s a dumb myth: their definition of sexual assault is considered much broader and it’s more often reported than brushed off. You could say they’re much more open with their numbers.

        • Santiago Tórtora

          That’s the same thing people said about Florida Man, that he was a myth caused by Florida’s lax reporting laws and they couldn’t really be *that* crazy.

          • Danygalw

            He is that bizarre, but so is every other man, you just don’t know it.

          • Marc Forrester

            No no no, that’s exactly backwards. Florida Man *is* that crazy, and so is everyone else. Other states just hide it better.

            Well, I guess they’ve stopped hiding it now.

        • Alex

          As a Swede, I have grown so tired of debunking that little piece of idiocy.

          Clavus is right on both counts: the Swedish definition of rape is one of the broadest in the world and reporting comes with less stigma. Also, we count rapes differently. If your husband raped you on 30 occasions, this would be reported as one rape in most countries but 30 rapes in Swedish statistics.

          Nice fact: Sweden criminalised and acknowledged marital rape in 1965. In the US, this didn’t happen until the 1970:s and some states held out until 1993…

      • Arkone Axon

        Sweden has the highest number of… honest reports of rape. By contrast, India has one of the lowest reports of rape in the world. They’re also the country known for “honor rapes” where the elders sentence women to be gang raped because their little brother touched the hand of a woman of a higher caste in the village square. Not to mention the acid attacks and women married and then murdered for their dowries and such.

        It’s kind of like saying that you’re not losing weight even though you’re dieting, when in fact you weren’t counting all the juice and soda you ingested as “real” calories. Whereas Sweden is like the dieter actually keeping an accurate record of their intake.

    • Olivier Faure

      Don’t listen to the outgroup! They are hating, inhuman people with evil motivations and no desire to compromise! We must stay strong! We must stay united! We must not be compassionate to them! And we must blame them for saying the exact same thing!

      I hate politics.

      • Shweta Narayan

        False equivalency in Aisle F

        Protecting (all) people’s right to live is not the same as protecting (some) people’s right to kill others. Accepting marginalized people is *not* the same as accepting the people who assault and murder us, and the institutions that excuse them when they do.

        • Santiago Tórtora

          It’s not false. That’s the same thing the right was saying about Obama in 2008. Remember death panels?

          Anyway, by focusing on the outrageous parts you are missing the legitimate grievances of the people who vote for Trump. Advancing technology makes most manufacturing works obsolete or cheaper elsewhere and Trump supporters are too uneducated/alienated to work in the growing sectors of technology/retail.

          The economy is leaving them behind so they vote for the guy who promises economic protectionism (less international trade, less immigration) and weird-ass infrastructure projects (Great Wall, anyone?). The -isms and the -phobias are secondary to them, but since the only politician who takes their economics concern seriously is a whatever-phobic, they play along.

          It’s like the Clintons used to say but have since forgotten: It’s the economy, stupid.

          • Gus Snarp

            The thing is, you’re both right. I mean, it took the right well into Obama’s presidency to invent the Death Panels lie, and Obama certainly didn’t campaign on fear of the other the way the new guy did. The threat is built right into the campaign this time, last time, while many did feel threatened, what they were threatened by was the very notion of a black guy in the white house, and expanded rights for everyone else. It’s pretty well established that when you have privilege, especially privilege you don’t recognize, then anything that tries to equalize things looks like a threat, so they really did feel threatened and we have to recognize that people on the right really do feel threatened and afraid in order to deal with them, but we also can’t pretend that the threat they feel is the same as the threat that minority populations feel now. We also have to acknowledge the real economic problems for white, working class people and how that is terrifying and motivating, but we must also acknowledge that they were willing to turn to a xenophobic, nationalistic demagogue to alleviate their concerns, and we have to be very worried about what that means. Ultimately, what we cannot do is allow this to tear us apart by casting blame. We must work together to ensure that this really is the death throws of a failing ideology. A portion of his support is a backlash to the expansion of rights and power to LGBTQ people, women, and people of color and we must make sure that it’s as brief an ineffectual as possible before we get back to making progress.

          • Santiago Tórtora

            The dominant ideology depends directly on the economic superstructure. You can’t just shove the economic problems under the rug so you can “get back to making progress”. The economic problems have to come first. That’s like Marxism 101.

            Do you think it is a coincidence that the most friendly places for minorities are in the coasts and the big cities? Those places have an economy that depends on trade and services, not manufacturing, so it is advantageous for them to be tolerant and cosmopolitan. People in rural areas don’t have the population density required for a service economy and are too disconnected from the global economy to rely on trade (land transportation is much more expensive than sea transportation). They will never accept liberal city culture because that is economic suicide for them.

          • SJ

            Anyway, by focusing on the outrageous parts you are missing the legitimate grievances of the people who vote for Trump. Advancing technology makes most manufacturing works obsolete or cheaper elsewhere and Trump supporters are too uneducated/alienated to work in the growing sectors of technology/retail.

            The economy is leaving them behind so they vote for the guy who promises economic protectionism (less international trade, less immigration) and weird-ass infrastructure projects (Great Wall, anyone?). The -isms and the -phobias are secondary to them, but since the only politician who takes their economics concern seriously is a whatever-phobic, they play along.

            Those people who claim that they voted for Trump because he promised to bring back their high-paying, unskilled jobs, sure are going to be heated when they realize that he sold them a bill of goods, because those jobs don’t exist anymore, and he also doesn’t raise the minimum wage.

          • Santiago Tórtora

            I know, right? That ship has sailed, those jobs are gone forever, those people are unnecessary in a modern economy.

            What should be done about them?

            https://morecrows.wordpress.com/2016/05/10/unnecessariat/

          • Psile

            This, a billion times this. I get the frustration. They were ignored. We told them their jobs were gone but offered no alternative that didn’t involve just adopting our lifestyle. No one took their complaints seriously and maybe if we had they wouldn’t have jumped into the wagon of the first person who pretended to take their problems seriously. Now that he’s president, Trump is going to do the only thing he’s ever done in his life: make himself rich. His only social concern is money(his own, mind you. Not anyone else’s) and the only special interest group he cares about is his own bank account. If anyone else benefits, it will be purely coincidental.

          • nat365

            Well, as a person from the UK looking in (and seriously devastated by this election and the potential consequences, both domestic and worldwide – I really, truly thought his hate speech would be seen as anathema by enough people to prevent his winning), there is one other factor – his ego.

            I doubt he’s going to want to be remembered as the worst president in history (even though that already seems inevitable). With things like ‘Calexit’, the protests, the general outrage and the utter derision from the world that you all elected such a man… there is a slim chance he’ll backtrack, not do the things he threatened, and actually enact some good policies… very, very slim… but a chance, nonetheless.

          • Psile

            He’s gonna backtrack a little, but Trump has declared bankruptcy several times. He does not care if he is ‘seen’ as a failure. His view of success is purely monetary and fame based. By the way, he’s fine to be infamous. He’s been actively despised for a long time and he just eats that shit for breakfast with gilded cheerios. He has never shown that he gives a shit how people see him.

            Congress and Senate will pass policies. He will let them, unless they are something he doesn’t like and then he will fight with them. In the mean time, his supporters will continue to commit hate crimes and he is going to have to go back to the rust belt in 2020 and explain to them where those jobs he promised are, why the wall hasn’t been built, and justify all the government contracts awarded to Trump Inc. We just have to knuckle down, continue to promote good governing, and wait it out.

          • Izo

            Technically, he did not declare bankruptcy. He had companies he owned declare bankruptcy. Slight legal difference.

          • nat365

            The one tiny, minuscule bit of comfort that could be taken is that his term may well serve as the final proof to those who, in their misery/ignorance/frustration swing right, that right-wing governance just does not work. That economic and social care policies should shore up the bottom rung first, and that’s what helps everyone through the middle and all the way to the top. It’s like how, theoretically speaking (and I’m aware this would be almost impossible to put into practice… in the US at least; I’m fairly sure it’s what Iceland did), the financial crisis would have been solved almost immediately were personal debts all wiped, and banks and large corporations made to take the hit.

            Sure, short term it would have caused a storm, but all those newly debt-free people would feel immediately free to spend again, instead of hoarding any money they get – and that spending in turn would have driven the economy back into safety, and given the banks and corporations that ‘took the hit’ most of their money back anyway.

            Instead, banks and other big businesses were bailed out, but no one had any money to spend with them (or on anything else) and everything’s been slow and horrible and most people are no better off.

            If Trump is as disastrous and hideous as his campaign trail suggests, he’ll either be a one-termer, or impeached (though, god-forbid President Pence, that disgusting homophobic wretch – one thing about ‘the Donald’, I don’t actually believe he’s really a homophobe [at least not more than most straight men in their 70s who are throwbacks to a previous era], just that he used the rhetoric to win votes). Then there will hopefully be a *massive* swing left in 2020 (or maybe even in 2018 with the mid-term elections), because those who are ignorant will have learnt just how mistaken they were, and those who are just racist and/or angry would vote for anyone to take him out because of all his broken promises/making things worse (the way his election was reactionary for that subsection of the electorate, the election of his opponent could be just as reactionary).

            There needs to be some major occurrence in order for the kind of less-informed people vulnerable to the rhetoric of the right to finally learn that this radical and self-interested ‘for the rich but pretending to be for the poor’ system of government does not and will not work for them. Maybe Trump’s (ok, I literally cannot call him the ‘p-word’)… Trump’s time in office will be the final proof of that, and cause a major leftward shift for that demographic. I shall be holding onto that hope.

          • Izo

            To quote a recent comedian:

            “So far, I’ve been wrong about everything I’ve thought about Trump. I thought ‘he’s not actually going to enter the race, this is just a publicity stunt. He entered the race. Then I thought ‘he’s going to drop out right away.’ He didn’t drop out. But I thought ‘He’s definitely not going to win the primary, that’s insane. Look at all the stupid things he’s saying that will kill ANY candidate!” … and he won the primary and beat out 16 other candidates, some of whom were a lot more qualified.’ Then I thought, ‘There’s no way he will win. He has no backers, everyone on the news says he’s an idiot, everyone mocks him like a walking cartoon character, and he’s offending EVERYONE.’ And as the election results started coming out, I thought ‘Well at the very least he will lose by a little, even if it’s close.’ And instead he wins by a lot and not only gets every state the Republicans needed, but he also turned 5 or 6 states from Democrat to Republican. What the f***?! So by my calculations on how everything I’ve thoughts about Donald Trump winding up being the exact opposite, I guess he’ll be a f***king fantastic President.”

          • Elaine Lee

            I must agree. So, I’m a senior citizen, born in the American south, now a New Yorker, and old enough to have lived through and worked for all the various movements that have given people more rights over the years. There’s a problem I’ve been seeing lately, evident many places, but certainly right in the comments section of this wonderful comic. It is this: we lefties have been dividing ourselves into smaller and smaller subgroups, each with its own label and its own concerns, while insisting that the opposition (and believe me, they ARE the opposition) can be categorized as just one thing (racist, sexist, homophobic idiots). Yes, these folks may be wrong about the source of their problems and wrong about how best to solve them, but they are not wrong about the fact that they’re hurting. And we’ve met their pain with derision, calling them trash and laughing publicly at their misspelled protest signs. Now we are reaping the fruits of this behavior. In the comments here, I’ve seen, again and again, well-meaning young men saying, “I’m a cisgender, white male, so I probably shouldn’t even be commenting on this.” Though I believe everyone has a right to comment, I can understand why a certain kind of privileged, educated, white guy would feel this. But that doesn’t mean that every cisgendered, white male is privileged. Take some guy born and raised in a poor, rural area, with lousy schools barely funded by low-end property taxes, whose family isn’t able to help him learn, and who has no real prospect of finding a good-paying job and climbing out of poverty, and tell that guy that he’s a cisgender, white male, so he should sit down and shut up. That’s what we’ve been doing. Now, imagine this guy works all day at Walmart, then works another shift at Burger King, just to keep his family afloat. Maybe, at one time, he had a manufacturing job, so that he could have time off to spend with his kids. He had good health insurance. That’s gone. Sure that guy is blaming the wrong people, but we are wrong in blaming him. Nobody’s looked after him. And he’s so frustrated that if you tell him “well, other folks are much worse off than you,” he’s going to explode. He DID explode. In this election. Even if we don’t want to like this guy, we’d better figure out how to understand and communicate with him, or we are all living in Trump-Land forever.

          • MarvalAlice

            this is exactly what i have been trying to say

          • IE

            Except, he WASN’T the only one to take their economic concerns seriously.

            This is what I don’t get. The people who voted for Trump for economic reasons do indeed have legitimate, painful grievances with a system that makes it hard for them to support themselves and their families. They need change, they need help. Understood.

            They elect a man who hires illegal workers, underpays or completely steals from smaller businesses and contractors with a ‘what are you gonna do about it’ attitude, has had to declare bankruptcy several times, ran a sham school that stole money and opportunity from young people, ran a sham charity that lined his own pockets, and built huge gold architectural monuments to his own ego.

            That, I don’t understand at all.

            I listened to Hillary Clinton time and again talking about the problems facing working and middle class America. She understood that complex problems don’t have simple, sound-bite-ready solutions. Regardless of what you think of her emails or her husband, her career is filled with attempts to improve the lives of other human beings. She didn’t always succeed, but where she failed, she learned, and she never stopped trying. She knows we can’t perform miracles, and she didn’t promise them. *She didn’t lie to us.*

            Trump promised miracles, and the people ate them up.

            So when people say they want Trump for economic reasons, I have to shake my head. It’s the same mentality that sends people to faith healers instead of doctors. The doctor puts forth a plan that’s going to be hard, painful, intensive, and honestly may not work, but might also save your life. The faith healer puts his hand on his head and says you’re cured, I saved you, I was the only one that could.

            So many people picked a pretty lie over a complicated reality, and now we’re all going to suffer for it.

          • Santiago Tórtora

            Hillary’s plan was the best for the economy as a whole, but the unnecesariat[1] would still have been left behind. I never heard her mention any realistic plan that involved them. Can you point me in the right direction?

            [1]https://morecrows.wordpress.com/2016/05/10/unnecessariat/

            From an almost-Trump supporter comes an explanation much better than what I can provide:

            >Lets be honest- Clinton doesn’t give a shit about me. When Clinton talks
            about people hurt by the economy, she means you: elite-educated
            white-collar people with obvious career tracks who are having trouble
            with their bills and their 401k plans. That’s who boomed under the last
            president Clinton, especially the 401ks. Me, or the three guys fighting
            two nights ago over the Township mowing contract, we’re nothing. Clinton
            doesn’t have an economic plan for us. Nobody has an economic plan for
            us. There is no economic plan for us, ever. We keep driving trucks
            around and keep the margins above gas money and maybe take an odd job
            here or there, but essentially, we’re history and nobody seems to mind
            saying so.

            > And let me be honest again- Trump doesn’t have an economic plan for
            me either. What Trump’s boys have for me is a noose- but that’s the
            choice I’m facing, a lifetime of grueling poverty, or apocalypse. Yeah I
            know, not fun and games- the shouts, the smashing glass, the headlights
            on the lawn, but what am I supposed to do, raise my kid to stay one
            step ahead of the inspectors and don’t, for the love of god, don’t ever
            miss a payment on your speeding ticket? A noose is something I know how
            to fight. A hole in the frame of my car is not. A lifetime of feeling
            that sense, that “ohhhh, shiiiiiit…” of recognition that another year
            will go by without any major change in the way of things, little
            misfortunes upon misfortunes… a lifetime of paying a grand a month to
            the same financial industry busily padding the 401k plans of cyclists in
            spandex, who declare a new era of prosperity in America? Who can find
            clarity, a sense of self, any kind of redemption in that world?

            Fuck it. Give me the fascists, I’ll know where I stand…

          • Newbie

            So the mentality is “I’m going down either way, but by god I’m going to take as many other people with me as physically possible? For, what, spite?

            That’s…really disturbing. I think I almost preferred the racism theory.

          • Santiago Tórtora

            The racism theory can be strangely comforting. It means that a little more education and consciousness-raising (or even just waiting until all baby boomers die) can fix everything.

            But like many comforting theories, it’s not true, but something we make up to feel better. We don’t have a solution to help those people, so we act like they are terrible people who don’t deserve help anyway, so we don’t feel bad about not helping. Let them all die, they are “racists” anyway.

            Kind of like the way conservatives dealt (not) with the AIDS epidemic. Just let them die, they are all “fags” anyway.

          • SJ

            No, the racism “theory” is true; it’s just that the spite thing is also true.

          • Santiago Tórtora

            The racism theory is not true because it has no explanatory power compared to the economic explanation.

            Racism also happens to be a fact, but my “theory” is that it is incidental. In countries with no (or different) ethnic tensions, the unnecessariat find some other outlet for their hate. It’s all the same to them.

            In my country we are almost all mestizos, so the ethnic tensions were focused on language last generation and on social class this generation. I wonder what they will come up next.

          • shink55

            Brah, people are celebrating Trumps victory in black face, the KKK is holding victory marches in his honor, and hate crimes have spiked since election day. Your words mean nothing in the face of the actions people are taking. Trumps original voter base way back when he was first making a splash in the primaries was heavily composed of birthers (those who believe Obama is a foreign born Muslim) and other those who held other white supremacist ideas. He built his coalition out from that and at this point the out and out racists aren’t a huge part of his following, but they are and were his core.

          • IE

            https://www.thebalance.com/hillary-clinton-2016-economic-plan-3305767

            A few things she would have done for the working class:

            “The National Infrastructure Plan would allocate $27.5 billion annually to improve roads, bridges, public transit, rail, airports, the Internet, and water systems. The Expanded Childcare Plan and the Early Education Plan would spend $27.5 billion a year for states to make preschool available to all 4-year-olds and expand Early Head Start. Expanded Funding for IDEA would spend $16.6 billion a year to identify and treat children with disabilities. The Energy Plan would pay $9 billion annually to repair oil pipelines, reduce carbon emissions, and fund health and retirements for coal workers. (Source: “The Clinton Tax Hike Plan Revealed,” GOP Research, January 26, 2016.)”

            Who do you think would be hired to improve the infrastructure? Whose children would benefit the most from free early education, as well as their parents’ benefit of not needing to worry about child care while the kid was in school?

            “Create Fair Growth. Raise the U.S. minimum wage to $15 an hour, increase workers’ benefits, expand overtime, and encourage businesses to share profits with employees. Invest in students and teachers. Support unions and collective bargaining.

            Strengthen the Affordable Care Act. Expand job training. Lower college and healthcare costs. Fight wage theft. (Source: “It’s Time to Raise Incomes for Hard-Working Americans,” Hillary Clinton 2016 LinkedIn page, July 13, 2015)”

            And yes, she would have had to raise taxes to do all that, and probably hurt the profit margins of some businesses. There’s a flip side to every coin, an inverse fall to every rise. You can agree or disagree whether the cost would have been worth the benefit or not, but the idea that Clinton didn’t care about or want to help out the working classes is a flat out lie that has been repeated over and over again until people swallowed it as truth. Government can’t help you without also costing you, that’s a tough reality but it’s an honest one. Trump sold the promise of lower taxes AND more help. We’ve seen trickle-down economics in action before – the trickle dries up long before it reaches the bottom.

          • Santiago Tórtora

            The minimum wage is an example of an economic policy that city people love but would be a disaster for people in rural areas. Think about it. Rural areas have a lower cost of living so $15 would be way too much for local businesses to afford. Minimum wage should not be the same in the super-expensive San Francisco and in the more remote rural areas. The fact that you did not think of that and neither did Hillary is what makes country people think that “coastal elites” don’t care about them.

            The Affordable Care Act is also unpopular among the kind of person who votes for Trump, though it’s too complicated for me to have my own strong opinion about it but I heard that Trump supporters hate it.

            In general, those policies seem well-intentioned, designed to boost the economy and adapt to the new realities of global trade and the boom of the finance and service sectors.

            The Infrastructure Plan sounds like something they would like. A non-bullshit, physically demanding job producing something useful and tangible (instead of weird financial instruments or whatever). I think Trump would agree with that.

            Remember that Trump is not your typical “trickle-down” conservative, but the contrary. He is a populist who thinks in terms of what economists call “free lunches” (as in “there is no such thing as a free lunch”). In many ways he is to the left of Hillary on economic issues. It’s the reason the Republican establishment hated him.

          • shink55

            Lots of people just didn’t believe her when she says these things, for good reason. Her populist economic plan really only took off once she realized that Sanders was a threat, and then she shifted and accepted the support of traditional Republican money men come the general. Labor is wary of Democratic promises that don’t pan out, like Obama’s promise to raise the minimum wage to $10/hour, and doesn’t really consider the Democratic party an ally any more then minority rights groups do. Bill Clinton is literally the face of why the Democratic party stopped fighting for the economic betterment of the working class as he shifted the party to the right and founded the Third Way Democrats, so the mistrust is even more pronounced for Hillary then the rest of the party.

            Lastly, those numbers add up to 80.6 billion, the US has an annual GDP of ~16 trillion, 80.6 billion is a drop in the bucket. That’s not a real commitment, and we both know a federal minimum wage increase isn’t getting pushed through congress without a massive amount of political clout being spent for it, and Hillary wouldn’t have that clout, nor would she commit to it hard enough to matter. So no, not only is there good reason to believe she was outright lying about her populist agenda, but also there’s good reason to believe she wasn’t really offering much anyway, especially when you consider that her campaign was bankrolled by a lot of very powerful wealthy people who are on record as opposing populist reform.

          • Dwight Williams

            You can see the sense of that, and yet at the same time, it’s still damned chilling.

          • Shweta Narayan

            I’m missing nothing. You’re missing my point.

            To address *my* point: hating and fearing someone because he is an overt white supremacist who makes the KKK happy is DIFFERENT from hating and fearing someone because he’s Black. The first is actually going to cause people harm. The second hurts only white supremacist entitlement. Thus, any comparison of the two is a false equivalency, and renders any following argument invalid.

            Now, to address *your* point: None of what you said changes the fact that poor people of color voted for HIllary. Any class-only argument runs straight into that. Blaming *anything* other than white supremacy runs straight into that.

            The *only* demographic that voted mostly for Trump was white people, and they did across all demographics that the polls record. Every economic group, every age group, both recorded genders. Guess who hurts most economically? NOT white people. The race-based wage gap shows that really clearly. And poor POC voted for Hillary by *such* a margin that overall, more than half the voters making under $50k/year did vote for her.

            The people who are hurting most, and have most reason to fear, voted Hillary, *despite* her terrible campaign and the fact that she’s managed outreach to *neither* working-class people in general *nor* POC. It’s the people who feel like they’re getting less than they’re *entitled* to (and that they’re entitled to more than the rest of us) who voted for Trump.

            And we’ve already had a number of hate crimes showing just how encouraged the more violent bigots are now. And of course lots of “we can’t PROVE that the sudden huge spike in hate crimes, paralleling what happened in the UK after Brexit, has ANYthing to do with the election” nonsense.

            tl;dr: the people who make racist choices when they’re financially scared were racists all along, actually.

          • Santiago Tórtora

            I did not say they were not racist. Horrible people are people too. They are humans, subject to human biases like loss aversion (what you said about losing privilege feeling like the other side is looking for special privileges) and optimism (when people think Trump was lying when he proposed stupid things and sincere when he promised good things).

            Now, to address *your* point: None of what you said changes the fact that…

            That is the opposite of addressing someone’s point. Try again. Or don’t, and get eight years of Trump instead of four.

          • Shweta Narayan

            I addressed the fact that your point, which supposedly was a rebuttal of my own, was not actually relevant to the point at all.

            And I am sliiightly skeptical of the notion that unless I decide that You Are Right and people’s justified fear and hatred of active bigots is JUST LIKE BIGOTRY, I will singlehandedly bring Trump to power in 2020.

            I happen to think that the only way to defeat fascism is to convince people to *drop* false equivalences and *listen* to the most vulnerable people, and you have said nothing to change my mind on this. Except to change my mind about whether you’re someone worth my time and energy.

            So, bai.

          • shink55

            That doesn’t seem terribly feasible Shweta, as you still need white people on board to actually win. Playing up identity politics to the degree you seem to be proposing has never really worked out for anyone, cause you end up not asking for the vote of white people, and white people are still about 60% of this country’s population. What you need to do is to offer the white swing voters who decided this election something better, something to latch onto and a reason to swing Democratic next time. In short, you need to be Sanders.

  • Sterling Ericsson

    I am still appalled at all of his supporters that have been telling me over the past 24 hours that he isn’t going to actually do all the horrible things he said he’d do.

    How can someone have an actual cognitive defense of claiming that, “No, they were just lying, that’s why I support them”???

    • Dwight Williams

      I saw it too often to a lesser, more incremental extent during Stephen Harper’s near-to-a-decade as Prime Minister of Canada. We’ve just barely got started repairing that damage over this past year and now this…

      • Shweta Narayan

        (I get that the last is a joke but just want to note that disabled and chronically ill people are faaar more often the people suffering than the ones causing suffering, and are one of Trump’s targets. Privileged lack of empathy is something else again.)

        • Dwight Williams

          Point well taken.

    • Bill

      Because they want to believe that they didn’t do what they just did. However, not to worry, because when they DO acknowledge it, they will say that somehow it is Obama’s fault.

      • Lysiuj

        Or, alternatively, they think his policies as president will be X or Y or Z, while all his bigoted statements are just hot air. Here’s hoping…

        • Bill

          I so very much hope you are right.

        • Shweta Narayan

          Yeh our best hope is that everything the person with a hand on the nukes (and the supreme court appointments and the ACA and immigration laws and and) has ever said is a lie. And that we can evade his followers effectively.

          but this cannot *possibly* be the fault of the people who voted him in on the strength of obviously-empty as well as hateful rhetoric because hearing that all problems are caused by Black & brown people made them feel good.

          It’s obviously all our fault, because we’re daring to say mean things about how they just voted someone into power on an overtly fascist platform.

          Oh wait, no I forgot! Us doing this is all Obama’s fault somehow 😀

    • Psile

      The scary thing is that it doesn’t matter if he does all the things he says he is going to do. He’s already legitimized what used to be radical racism. His election was celebrated with hate crimes. Google Trump day one if you have a few hours to get depressed all over again, but the summary is a bunch of people are just horribly racist and actively associate it with Trump’s presidency. I don’t know if anyone has been killed yet, but somehow I don’t see us going four years without it. It blows my mind that some people I thought were my friends consider this an acceptable price for lower taxes or whatever.

      • Lysiuj

        It’s brexit all over again.

        • Jagged

          As someone who voted for Brexit, I resent people constantly attaching the label to Trump. Especially when Trump does it 😉

          • Mechwarrior

            White nationalism fueled both Brexit and Trump. This was obvious from the start of both campaigns.

          • Jagged

            The problem with using “Operation fear” as your argument against something, is that when you lose, the people who believed your fact-free position are left with nothing but empty anger.

          • Mechwarrior

            David Duke personally endorsed Trump for president while Trump ran on a blatant “blame Muslims and Hispanics for ruining America” platform and British white supremacist groups turned out in droves for Brexit and attacked opponents of it, but that’s a fact-free position? Riiight.

          • Jagged

            If you think that played a significant part of the referendum then yes, you are fact free. These white supremacist you talk about are virtually nonexistent. The BNP has evaporated. The EDL is similarly membership starved
            I will tell you about their attempt to hold a rally in my city of Bristol if you want a laugh.

            The fact is that racist political groups are smaller in the UK than the rest of Europe.

          • Shweta Narayan

            Wow, it’s amazing how far people who vote for white supremacy will reach to try and feel better about themselves.

            Your white supremacist groups crumbled because they are *incompetent* and had zero intention of ever implementing any of their promises, and had no plan of how to do so. WHICH WAS OBVIOUS to people who weren’t voting with their racial entitlement. *NOT* because they lacked support.

            And your beloved Nigel Farage loves Trump and if *he* thinks they’re alike, who are you “a mere voter who didn’t have any of that white supremacy RLY” to say otherwise?

            eh. blocked.

          • Jagged

            What do you mean “your white supremacist”?

            We don’t have any. They didn’t crumble because of incompetence or broken promises. They “crumbled” because they don’t have any members!

          • Actually they all hopped the fence to UKIP, And quite a few turned up as UKIP parliamentary candidates. UKIP claimed they had a vetting process in place, It took me _30 seconds_ to google up one of them ranting about the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, Tells you how thorough their vetting process was. People claiming the white supremacists are non-existent are ignoring that UKIP supporters widely hold white supremacist views. And worse. A local UKIP candidate was advocating enforced killing of disabled babies, UKIP dropped him, scores of UKIP supporters protested he had done nothing wrong.

            Meanwhile Farage has just called Obama a ‘creature’, and ‘joked’ about Trump potentially sexually assaulting Theresa May in the Oval Office. The rot starts at the top.

          • Shweta Narayan

            I haven’t been able to look at the UKIP stuff lately so thanks for the update. Have to limit the painful stuff or I get completely useless.

            And I’m sure you’re no more surprised than I am at the ableism pouring out from the so-called progressives atm, since it’s what happens every time. But like, we’re the ones overreacting, rite? >_<

          • Dwight Williams

            It does indeed start at the top.

          • Need I remind you a known white supremacist shot Jo Cox MP dead?

          • Jagged

            You mean “Thomas mair”? Described at his trial as “a loner with a history of mental illness?” It was also said at his trial he had no political affiliations and did volunteer work and asked for medical help the day before he killed Jo Cox. Oh and his brother said he had never heard him express racist opinions and since his brother was mixed race, I think he would know.

            It doesn’t help to build a conspiracy where none exist.

          • That would be the trial due to start Monday and where the prosecution has stated his mental health is not an issue. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/sep/19/jo-cox-trial-will-not-hear-medical-defence-of-thomas-mair

            Mental illness doesn’t exclude being a white supremacist. This is an important point in disability rights. Mental illness can only be considered a reason, or mitigating factor where it actually either directly causes a crime, or results in someone being unable to understand the consequences of their actions, (there’s also a special case where someone is unable to understand the process of justice, though that’s unrelated to the crime). To argue that people who have mental illnesses are automatically unable to be responsible for their actions reduces them to children. Infantilisation is considered a particularly insidious form of disability discrimination.

            Society frequently finds it far more comfortable to blame mental illness for actions, rather than accept that people may have what they consider legitimate reasons for attacking the status quo. We see that in attempts to medicalise Islamic terrorists, to medicalise Trump’s behaviour, and particularly to medicalise any white on white terrorist attack.

            Newspaper reports in the immediate aftermath pointed to specific evidence of links to far right groups. We’ll find out next week whether they were correct or not.

          • Jagged

            I am surprised by that. I got my information from the same newspaper. He’s had mental health issues all his adult life. How can that not be part of the trial?

          • My guess is both the prosecution and defence have agreed it didn’t compromise his judgement and therefore isn’t relevant. (See my previous point).

            There’s a possibility he has instructed his defence not to use his mental health as a defence, but if they disagreed with that and thought it was a factor I think they’d be ethically obligated to raise it. It gets into fairly complex safeguarding issues at that point, and way beyond my amateur knowledge of where the law stands on this.

          • Dwight Williams

            That’s what lawyers call a “stipulation”, right?

          • No idea, to be honest!

          • Dwight Williams

            ‘S’okay. I know a couple of people whom I can ask.

          • shink55

            Y’know, the KKK and other white supremacist groups weren’t a terribly significant part of Trumps voter base either. They certainly helped carry him through the early primaries where he was up against like 10 other candidates, but once the field got smaller they became the respectively small part of his voter base that they are demographically. It’s not the numbers that are important, the fact that you’d never willingly endorse them, admit affiliation, and will openly ridicule them in the streets isn’t important either. What’s important is that you sided with them, for your own reasons, and found common ground with them. The Brexit vote empowered them, much like Trumps election empowered them. Was that your intent when you voted leave? I doubt it, but as they say the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

          • Jagged

            Worst argument ever. You saying we can’t leave an undemocratic and economically unstable organisation like the EU because it might help an organisation you consider racist?

            Should I start looking for unsavoury characters on the other side?

          • shink55

            Nah, just saying that you should own that your decision did that. You acted to empower them, for your own reasons sure, but you did.

          • Rebecca

            You can’t pretend UKIP isn’t a racist organisation. Here, have some ‘Free Facts’

            https://leftfootforward.org/2015/02/is-ukip-a-racist-party-these-15-comments-would-suggest-so/
            http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/02/ukip-party-bigots-lets-look-evidence
            http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/05/19/what-does-ukip-have-to-do_n_5350757.html

            But still, despite similar populations it does have half the membership numbers of the FN. On the other hand, UKIP punches way above it’s weight in impact and vote numbers, if not in membership. So I don’t know that ‘permanent member count’ is a good metric.

          • Jayda Fransen, vice chair of Britain First, was just found guilty of religiously aggravated abuse and wearing a political uniform. She and her uniformed thugs had deliberately gone into a religiously mixed area looking for trouble, as they have done repeatedly for far too long. This time she found a hijabi woman who wouldn’t back down in fear of her.

            I actually had my own incident with Fransen a couple of years ago during the Rochester by-election*. About half an hour after the famous incident where she was photographed arm in arm with the UKIP canvassers, I came out of the grocers to find she and between 8 and 12 of her uniformed thugs had trapped a young, very slight, black woman against the wall of the War Memorial and were demanding to know where she was born. The rest of the High Street was looking on in horror, but I figured if they decked me, a visibly disabled guy, it would be worth it to see them destroyed by the publicity. So I waded in and stood alongside the black woman, who was giving as good as she got. And I got to listen to Fransen spew her hate and fire back a few shots of my own** until one of them realised just how dangerous the publicity could be and dragged the gang away.

            There might not be many of them openly active, but it’s still too many, and there are more who are fellow travellers, if not actively working for their aims inside parties like UKIP.

            *The by-election was called because Mark Reckless MP resigned from the Conservative Party and defected to UKIP. He won his seat back.This is a man who had stated on TV, after I was interviewed on my experience of disability hate crime, that people were ‘entitled to be angry at the disabled’ (this is why I always refer to him as ‘Reckless by name, reckless by nature’). The bigots aren’t just in the extremist parties, they’re in the core ones too.

            ** I suggested if they really loved Britain as they claimed then the best thing they could do for her was emigrate 😉

          • Dwight Williams

            I don’t want their like showing up on Canadian shores, thanks very much. That aside, good on you and good luck in future encounters.

          • Lysiuj

            As someone who voted for Brexit you are surely aware of the spree of racist violence following it, just as racist violence is following Trump’s election.
            And of course you’re not personally to blame, anymore than every Trump voter is pesonally to blame, but in both cases it was sadly an expected outcome.

          • I was just looking at the post-Brexit hate crime figures. 200 a day. And police figures are usually about 25% of the actual rate.

          • Akiva

            I am 100% fine with holding every trump voter (and brexit voter) personally to blame for hate crimes, actually. When white people’s economic anxieties are more important than the basic human rights of immigrants and muslims, that’s white supremacy. Jagged sided with the white supremacists, good job! And it’s not like they were even doing a good job of hiding it. Does Jagged need a hug?

          • Shweta Narayan

            Tough, it’s true. If you feel bad about it, that’s on you. You should feel bad.

      • SJ

        I disagree that this flavor of racism was ever “radical.” In my experience, it hasn’t even been dormant; it’s always been like this. This election merely confirmed, to people who wanted to believe otherwise, that America isn’t nearly as “post racial” or progressive as they thought it was.

        • Shweta Narayan

          It’s more that this flavor of racism was kiinda understood to maybe carry consequences.

          Now that they know that it can go hand in hand w becoming US President, they are emboldened.

        • Psile

          I get what you’re saying. Obviously all this stuff didn’t come from nowhere. The thing is that not very long ago we were worried about micro-aggression and hurtful language. Now people are spray painting the n-word on people’s cars and shit. There was a time where that was looked down on, where people felt that was socially unacceptable even if they wanted to do it.

          • SJ

            Who is “we,” Kemo Sabe? This level of racism didn’t just start back up for some of us; for some of us, it never left.

            What I see is a lot of people looking at the results of the election, and going, “Damn, I didn’t know it was that bad!”, while some of us are kind of nonplussed by that reaction, as we sit here and say, “Yeah, actually, it’s always been this bad.”

          • Psile

            Eh, I can’t tell you how you viewed racism then versus now. If you always thought it was this bad you’re more insightful than me. I can admit to having some blinders on. Maybe I just didn’t see these kinds of actions before because the media didn’t expose me to them. I can’t say, I don’t know what I don’t know. What I do know is that things already seem worse based on the knowledge I have, and even if Trump doesn’t get to do any of the things he wants this will be true.

          • Zac Caslar

            Being a Jew the feeling that I’m always on someone’s “to-do” list has certainly risen in the last few years.
            I live in a small town not far from a slightly larger small town. In September I saw a very stereotypical obese white woman lugging two children into the discount clinic I was limping out of.

            Worthy of anecdote was the fucking SWASTIKA tattoo on her throat.

            There has always been an undercurrent of that crap, but it wasn’t so long ago that it didn’t dare stick it’s face into the daylight.
            Now?
            White Power ink is more common than truck nuts. And this is “so Blue it hurts” Washington State.

          • Without for a moment supporting fascism, criticising her tattoos while deriding her for being “stereotypically obese” just lowers you to her level. I get sick of reminding people that obesity is a consequence of a host of medical conditions and treatments (one of my treatments had me putting on a kilo a month), and when it isn’t it is as often as not a marker of poverty and poor education.

          • Michael Smith

            I don’t think saying “to
            her level” is equivalent. Think about that for a moment. Do you think her having a
            swastika tattoo is equal to him making note that she is
            “stereotypically obese”? Having a symbol that openly declares both
            white supremacy and support for a GENOCIDE is NOT on the same level as simply noting this
            woman’s weight, without any slurs whatsoever. (And you already know, even though you don’t agree, that he’s only mentioning her weight because he believes she’s most likely ill-informed about nutritional
            health and disenfranchised by this system, which makes her then look
            for a scapegoat.) Is this the comfort you offer this threatened person in your
            community at this moment?

            If we don’t have some sense of scale about what’s important and what isn’t, or what’s hateful and what is just language that we personally wouldn’t use, then ten
            percent of the left will always vote for third-party candidates out of moral
            purity, and the whole world suffers for that indulgence.

            And Zac, I’m very sorry you had to see that and feel that woman’s hatred in
            that moment. Far-right Nazi groups are rising all over the world. And this
            election is normalizing that symbol here and it’s terrifying.

          • Zac Caslar

            Thanks. I mean it. +1 for basic sanity and lucidity.

            And like I’ll say I doubt she’s really, truly committed to it like she’s about to declare the Japanese honorary ubermenschen while scheming to pressure Chamberlain into giving up Belgium.

            But that icon has a meaning. It’s a “franchise,” so to speak, a useful shorthand for declaring a rough “true north” political affiliation and one that’s never meant good things for Der Jeuden.

            That _counts_ like black folks having a justifiably negative reaction to hordes of people in sheets and white hoods.

            Maybe some of them -hell maybe all of them- are essentially decent people looking to express a baseline solidarity like it’s a guttering candle in the tempest of history. They’re afraid. They’re confused. They’re clinging together for comfort.

            AND YET THEY’RE STILL BURNING A CROSS ON YOUR LAWN!

            Goddamnit people! The difference between your allies and your enemies is cannot only be that you can hector your allies for their flaws while fantasizing your enemies are “just friends you haven’t met yet.”

            No, they really fucking aren’t. You might be snide and superior towards them -I certainly am- but they want to tear down everything Progressive and do The Klan Shuffle on it’s ashes and that truly is a materially worse outcome than getting a scolding from a Trans Person because you used the wrong pronoun.

            And while you aren’t obliged to match them hate-for-hate if you don’t build alliances and learn to tolerate flaws you’ll discover your Prickly Secular Humanism will be far the inferior to their cloud of #2 buckshot.

            This is the crucial difference: You and I can talk it out because we share a fundamental respect for education and rational discourse and the need to compromise for mutual accommodation and they GET WHITE POWER TATTOOS AND STOCKPILE RIFLES AND MADE FUCKING DONALD J. TRUMP PRESIDENT!

            Goddamn!

          • Michael Smith

            Dude, you DO NOT have to apologize or justify your reasoning for blasting a woman with a Nazi tat! Full stop. You do not need to put it in context or have sympathy for her at all. I don’t care how shitty her life is. How crazy is it that you feel you have to defend being upset at the sight of a swastika! Unreal.
            One thing: they are not possibly nice people who are maybe just confused. They’re siding with the history of murder and pain and genocide. If you get a swastika tat on your neck or burn a cross anywhere, you’re just a piece of shit. Full stop, as the kids say. If the left can’t agree on that without qualification, there is truly no goddamn hope. We have to stop fighting amongst ourselves. And we have to take some responsibility for doing that with this election–at the expense of the entire goddamn world.

          • Shweta Narayan

            Nobody is blasting Zac over commenting on a swastika tattoo. That is horrifying. However, using “obese” to put someone down is also horrifying and also gets people killed.

          • Zac Caslar

            Note: you, and many others, are _assuming_ I intended obese as an insult.
            I did not.
            I was describing, in a fashion intended as brief, a person who’s immediate physical appearance fit a certain trope very perfectly.
            Lady was fat. Hefty. Voluminous. Over-endowed. Volumptuous. Curvy. Reubenesque. Big. Beautiful. Woman.
            And appeared poor, what with her taking two children into a low-income subsidized health clinic.
            Her children seemed, in the seconds of observation I had, pretty normal.
            Was I obliged to make a statement about their apparent physical health?
            Did anyone notice that I _didn’t_ describe them in any negative terms?
            Not to put words into your mouth(s), >_>, but I think I’ve made the case that I could have thought of a few.
            In no way did I characterize this as a negative.
            I didn’t fat shame anyone here; you fat shamed yourselves.

            Incidentally I still use my old Driver’s License from a few years back and in particular there’s the old photo of me.
            When I was 280 lbs.
            I’m 224 now.
            I know a few of the perspectives at work here.
            Good job.

          • “Do you think her having a swastika tattoo is equal to him making note that she is “stereotypically obese””

            Frankly, yes. They’re both commonly used as to indicate other people are lesser.

            For a clearer understanding, try thinking of it as equivalent to categorising someone by any other visible physical attribute, such as nose shape. We all know the appalling history of racist cartoon representations of Jews, and that it’s still going on. But if that’s unacceptable, then why is it acceptable to demean someone by their weight? Especially when we know that causes harm and even death to hundreds of thousands of young women.

            My minority group is disparaged in many ways, and one of those ways is attacks on our physical attributes, whether they originate directly from our disabilities, or are artefacts of treatment. Trump was attacked for his blatantly disablist charade that was supposed to deride a critical journalist’s disability. I don’t see categorising someone negatively by their weight as any different.

          • Shweta Narayan

            Normalized fat hatred is the leading cause of fat people dying. Mostly because of medical abuse but not entirely.

            So, yeah, making sure to point out that she’s fat is in fact perpetuating a climate that kills people.

          • Sam

            Well, no, heart disease is, actually.

          • Shweta Narayan

            I mean we could go yes it is no it isn’t but I challenge you to find the doctors who are willing to say “Yep this patient died because I didn’t care to treat a fat person”, which is what you’d need for the medical reporting to be accurate.

            Meanwhile, doctors at least in the UK are willing to say they think it’s cool to deny fat patients non-emergency treatment. You know, like the kind that *prevents* heart disease? https://www.theguardian.com/society/2012/apr/28/doctors-treatment-denial-smokers-obese

            So like yeah we can restrict our scope and I can say “Well no, lack of oxygen to the brain is” and you could say “well no, cellular death is” but if you’re looking for root causes it’s medical neglect justified by cultural fatphobia.

            (thought question: if tons of smokers die of lung cancer because doctors won’t treat them till they’re dying, are you *really* going to say lung cancer is the *real* cause, nothing to worry about?)

          • Zac Caslar

            If that’s what it takes to make me like _her_, then I’m not real concerned with your approval.

            That’s as politely as I can put that as an illustration of how little you regard education and self examination and the pursuit of wisdom. And what the fuck? I’m not “criticizing her tattoos” like she’s a metropolitan bus driver with lurid ink visible through her sleeves and I’m a testy member of the AARP I’m criticizing that the content of her tattoos states, “I’M A NAZI!”

            I’m not blind to what pressures shapes a person into that and I kinda doubt her Nazi affiliations are so total as to include wanting to invade Poland so as to promote Lebensraum, but the fat *itch has a swastika on her throat and while she has it I suspend my liberal hand-wringing about her problems to express my deep contempt for making that kind of choice.

            Oh, and kids. Kids who’ll ask about what Mom’s funky ninja star means (not that she has a favorite ninja turtle) and who’ll doubtless be sincerely informed about how it means the noble defense of the White Race from the scheming Jews and their henchmen the jealous Mud Bloods.

            I notice, be tee dubs, that you’ve got no similar defense for my claims of hate iconography proliferation of which this woman is merely the ice-bergian tip. They just not matter because I can’t be called out for my missing insensitive and inappropriate critiques of their unfortunate physical flaws? Aren’t they victims, too?

            Here’s my bottom line about this White Backlash crap: these are people with choices. And while they’re probably not well equipped to make those choices I only grant that with the understanding that they still didn’t chose to improve themselves sufficiently as to not ally with fucking National Socialism.

            My IDGAF is off the scale with Trump voters. When the KKK are voting with you and you won’t take that hint I’m fresh out of sympathy. It really doesn’t get more figuratively A Pact With The Devil than that.

            It truly boggles the mind and I don’t care what your circumstances are: she went Full Nazi and you NEVER go Full Nazi.

            So, no. She’s the enemy of both of us, but if that’s all it takes I was _never_ your ally.

          • shink55

            Of course to add to my last post David, what Zac just said. I had faith you’d get torn a new one for attempting to defend a nazi, so I didn’t feel the need. Rather I thought I’d apply my skills to dismantle your attack and show that actually he’s communicating from a pretty high level of education and understanding of the circumstances, and that it was you going off the rails with your emotional response to a well constructed profile. I’m gonna give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that it was in fact an emotional response, as they process faster then logical ones and if sufficiently strong shut down logical ones. This would mean you literally didn’t process the nazi part after you saw the weight mentioned. This is just how humans work, you can look up the psychological studies if you want, I’m not gonna put that much effort into a random forum post for someone who probably wouldn’t read the studies anyway. Of course, this still makes you the guy who didn’t react to the mention of something that is universally considered to be evil by all but the uneducated or the sympathizers, so I’m gonna fully agree with Zac’s prior post here.

          • Who’s defending a Nazi? I’m criticising someone attacking a woman for her weight. If you don’t understand the difference, and that the two attributes can coexist in the same person, then that’s your problem, not mine.

            Any claim that Zac was making an academic point went out the window when he called her a ‘fat *itch’.

            She’s still worthy of our contempt for being a Nazi, but what we absolutely can’t do is attack her for her weight or her sex and claim moral justification.

          • “I’m not “criticizing her tattoos””

            My point wasn’t about her having what I fully agree was an unacceptably offensive tattoo. My point was the derisive referral to her physical weight. 1) It’s a form of abuse, 2) it’s a form of abuse frequently directed at my minority for something people have absolutely no control over, 3) it’s a form of abuse often used to try to justify denying us medical treatment. 4) it’s a form of abuse particularly directed at women.

            Uncontrollable weight gain from medication is something I’ve experienced myself. No change in my diet, no change in my exercise levels, weight going up a kilo a month, and the drug was also making it difficult for me to realise I needed to come off it. I was fortunate, when I did come off it the weight came off me at the same rate it went on. But I know many people who are permanently on medication that leads to significant weight gain. So when I see people criticised for their weight, I remember that could have been me. And that it is entirely likely to be disablism.

            You could have made your point without mentioning her weight and your point would have stood. You didn’t, and it wasn’t unreasonable for me to call you on it. And now you’ve compounded it by calling her a ‘fat *itch’, when you could just have called her a damned Nazi and no one would have disagreed.

          • Gloria Hole

            Eating too much food isn’t an illness. It is also not an excuse to be a victim.

          • Lysiuj
          • Shweta Narayan

            I don’t think links ever work against people who are doubling down on their bigotry. But they help people who are reading along going “I never really thought about this before, is there evidence?”

            so yay for links 🙂

          • Oh wonderful, I seem to have picked up my first web stalker

            Let me introduce Gloria, folks.

            She turned up the other day on a months old thread elseweb on an article in a right wing rag claiming that hate crime is a made up and much exaggerated issue. I’d answered it at the time by talking about my direct experience of disability hate crime and mentioned that at least one female disabled friend have been spat on while out and about in their wheelchairs*. She denied that anyone would do that to a disabled person, and therefore I must be a liar.

            So I provided her with references to multiple news reports and blogs of similar incidents. She denied these were significant, insisted that I was a liar and called me a fascist.

            And now she’s followed me here.

            * Actually not the worst incidents I know of involving female wheelchair-using acquaintainces. I’m aware of at least two unprovoked physical assaults directed at powerchair users.

          • Lysiuj

            So you’re saying, when I spent about half an hour collecting links to show her the complexity of weight issues… that I was wasting my time? 😉
            Ah well, I’ll save the post for some other time someone spouts this bullshit.

          • Seems so, but I appreciated other people saying I had a point.

          • shink55

            Actually, pointing out that she’s “stereotypically obese” is a valid way to complete the image and give the audience more context. Between the discount clinic, the rural nature of the area, and the children you can guess that she is probably in or close to poverty, and that she has health problems. Mentioning the obesity serves to solidify both assumptions, because as you noted health conditions and poverty are both major factors in the average persons weight. The swastika completes the profile, and serves to really drive home the likelihood that the women has a had a poor education (which all the other factors point to, including the children if one could reasonably assume that she had them in her twenties or earlier, although a guess at her age was not included).

            This is called building a profile, and when applied on a case by case basis is frequently wrong, granted. This is usually because people miss things about the other person, have a less firm grasp of demography then they think they do, or have been lead to believe untrue things about the other person based on skin color, culture, dress, etc. When done properly and with a good knowledge of demography it’s accuracy soars, as you yourself pointed out in your post by drawing the same conclusions Zac himself drew from the situation, the main difference being that Zac trusted the audience to infer what you said explicitly.

          • Which might be valid, if obesity wasn’t routinely used as a form of abuse. Using a loaded phrase doesn’t add to the profile, it skews it. Imagine if we reversed the scenario, and a Jewish person was described by physical attributes, such as having a nose profile associated with certain racist views of Judaism. If it’s racist one way round, then can we really justify a similarly loaded phrase the other way around?

            If Zac did mean it as an indicator of socio-demographic status, then it didn’t lower him to the level of the swastika wearer, but it is a loaded phrase that shouldn’t be used unless you’re certain everyone gets the socio-demographic indicators (and in which case why not just say ‘from appearance poor and likely ill-educated’).

          • Shweta Narayan

            I find it telling that it seems suuuuper important for these folks to point out that she’s possibly disabled, probably poor and probably hasn’t had the privilege of a great education. And to label agreement as “sane”.

            But somehow it was not important to “fill out the image” for us to say whether she’s white. EVEN THOUGH it was white people who voted for Trump across every other other demographic. And poor and less-educated POC did NOT.

            I am *pissed off* My awesome fat and disabled Jewish friends and family are *just as important* as this skinny ableist jerk, and more vulnerable since even other Jewish people will throw them under the bus. My lil baby nephew who is already getting comments on being a “BIG baby” is important, and those comments are just as dangerous as the ones where people say how Jewish he looks as though that’s a bad thing. FUCK people who think only some marginalizations matter.

          • John Q. Fakename

            No it doesn’t. There’s a difference between being a neo-nazi and saying something rude about someone’s weight. A very large and obvious difference. Personally if we are talking about problems much more trivial than neo-nazis feeling comfortable in public spaces I’d first want to examine the idea that comparing being rude about obesity to nazism could legitimize nazism or at least slightly suggest that the problem is more trivial than it is. None of this makes it ok to be disrespectful to people because of a medical condition, and to be clear I’m not advocating that, but the equivalency you drew is false.

          • John Q. Fakename

            And I missed comments below this that covered the idea better than I did. My bad.

          • They’re both abusive of minorities, and actually overlap.

            My minority was the first targeted by the Nazis for extermination, and that was preceded by mass sterilization. Sterilization started in the mid-30s, to be followed by the first death in July 1939, with Aktion T4, the mass killing of disabled people, authorised by a decree signed by Hitler in October 1939, though backdated to 1st September 1939. Estimates put the number dead at 250,000, the number forcibly sterilized at 360,000. The machinery of the Holocaust was developed on disabled Germans, Austrians and Poles. Discussions of doing this as soon as war commenced dated back to 1933. So don’t for one minute think I don’t understand the history of what was done.

            Abuse of people for weight is commonly directed at people who are disabled, and is used as an excuse to deny us medical treatment and blame us for our own medical conditions. Both it and Aktion T4 draw on a common othering of disabled people that much of society still holds to be acceptable. (Think about the reasons people are so actively asserting there is no equivalence, what does this say about the way abuse of disabled people is considered?)

            As a disabled person and activist I consider neither the passive display of Nazi symbols, nor the active abuse of disabled people to be remotely acceptable.

          • Swordmaster5

            Coming from Clark County (Vancouver WA), depending on where you are it’s either red or blue, I’ve certainly seen a bit of both. At this point I worry about my moms, and what this all means.

          • Zac Caslar

            Hey, this is fair.
            I’m near Longview. Longview is not liberal, but Sea-Tac is.
            And yeah there’s a lot of folks in this VERY large set of crosshairs.
            I think veryone has someone to fight for, and it’s going to be a long fight.

        • soulpanda

          Ok, so the descriptor “stereotypically obese” does not in fact add anything to the statement except assumed parameters based on common stereotypes we accept as common wisdom. Since this is a problem with all groups that don’t fit the perfect social ideal it should be addressed, particularly since this mindset tends to cause problems.

          The woman in question ascribes to an ideological point of view, at the very least, that is indefensible and horrible as it, in its moderate usage, leads to violence against people. This is understood by everyone thus far and no one is defending the position that she proudly displayed on her neck.

          Apparently from the comments this needs iteration: NO ONE IS DEFENDING HER OR HER HORRIBLE RACIST IDEOLOGY.

          What is up for debate is how she was described. The words “stereotypically obese” were meant to demean and belittle her. They were there to make sure that we found her optimally repugnant. We can also assume that she is less intelligent than ourselves, impoverished, and otherwise a lesser being than ourselves. Even though woman was going to the same our narrator, this is also used as a vindictive against her to prove narratively that she is poor and underclass. None of this needs to be in the narrative for the point to get across about racism in america.

          Now, I believe some personal stories as to the detrimental effects of this type of rhetoric are in order to clarify the situation as to what others are talking about when discussing weight and other “not real issues, shut up” problems that people have.

          Mostly being overweight, or being perceived as such, makes you the target of mental and physical abuse. My best friend went through several of these “events” let’s say. She had a thyroid condition that was untreated, because it was misdiagnosed, for a decade or so, and because of that her weight grew, which is sensible when you account for the fact that the thyroid controls metabolic rates for the body. She had to deal with her own father telling her boyfriend that he was “too good” for his own daughter because of her weight. She also would get mooed at in public or people would make pig noise or the like. I was actually in public with her one time when this happened too. We weren’t in wal-mart, she was dressed very nicely as she was just off of her office job, and someone drove by and cat-called her. She was devastated and I felt powerless. At the time she had a Master’s degree in Biology and a deep and abiding love of the outdoors. She watched what she ate and exercised as she could and gained wait. She was also “stereotypically obese.” No she didn’t have a swastika tattooed on her neck, but she was often considered lesser because of her weight.

          As for my own story, as it wouldn’t be fair to just use another’s tale, I am overweight as well. I won’t go into it too much, but I can assure you that if it was just a matter of not eating a taco or a potato, I wouldn’t be “stereotypically obese” either. I have tried to work out though, and in fact one time I was walking around my college campus, trying to develop the habit, and some guys in a van started driving passed me yelling, “what are you doing fat boy,” “Whooo,” and other things. They drove passed me three different times even slowing down enough to open up the sliding door in the back and yell at him. On there last turn around I had to run to the, thankfully close, busy gas station. They shot me malign looks and drove off. I spent 15 minutes in there, buying a soda I didn’t need, so that I could be sure they weren’t about before I walked home.

          When we talk about how using these words is dangerous, that’s because it literally is as it allows these behaviors. The way it was used was meant to demean in the guise of informing and is typical of this use.

          • SJ

            Ok, so the descriptor “stereotypically obese” does not in fact add anything to the statement except assumed parameters based on common stereotypes we accept as common wisdom. Since this is a problem with all groups that don’t fit the perfect social ideal it should be addressed, particularly since this mindset tends to cause problems…

            Why is this response addressed to me?

          • soulpanda

            I’m sorry I’m used to forum posting where, to be part of a line of discussion like this you reply to the top post in the sub thread, otherwise your post gets skipped in the discourse. Is that not how it works anymore? I usually don’t post comments on the internet because it tends to be a horrible, horrible place.

          • Lysiuj

            Yeah, you should just reply to whatever comment you’re answering. Generally people reply to all the replies their posts get, so yours won’t get passed over.
            “tends to be a horrible, horrible place” yup, but this place is wonderful! And welcome 🙂

          • SJ

            I’m sorry I’m used to forum posting where, to be part of a line of discussion like this you reply to the top post in the sub thread, otherwise your post gets skipped in the discourse. Is that not how it works anymore? I usually don’t post comments on the internet because it tends to be a horrible, horrible place.

            I am not familiar with that particular corner of the internet; in Disqus, you can actually reply to the specific person that you are replying to, you don’t have to reply to the ‘last’ post.

            Also, let this post supplement my previous response, the next time anybody wants to know why I ‘overuse’ the [blockquote] tags.

          • Shweta Narayan

            ohhh is that how you do quotes around here? *disqus clueless still*

            thankyou for mentioning 🙂

        • Varia Vespasa

          Why would you have ever thought America is post-racial in the first place? Removing that kind of thing is a multi-generational process- thinking it just magically went from whatever it was to zero in 8 years is blatantly silly. Electing Obama was just a sign that racism was indeed continuing to fade is all. At least till Obama started doing seriously dumbass racial stuff in the last couple of years, with Trayvon, Michael Brown, Ahmed and his clock and so on. He helped stir up BLM with his rushes to judgement and spurred them to go past helpful to absurd and borderline dangerous. There are unfortunately plenty of actual black/coloured victims they could have used as their martyrs- Trayvon, Brown, and Ahmed were not among them, and holding them up as examples without waiting for the full facts made the President look stupid and unprofessional, and has set back race relations by at least 10 years. To the extent racism was able to be an issue in this election you can thank Obama and BLM for enabling it. (and yes, Trump for poking it with a stick a bit, but that would have come to nothing without fools preparing the way for it)

          You’re gonna need another 2-3 generations after BLM dies down to maybe see the end of anti-black racism.

          • SJ

            “Dumbass racial stuff”? Yeah… no. Miss me with all of that.

          • Varia Vespasa

            He did the whole “could have been my son” thing without waiting for th facts. He did the “Cool clock Ahmed” thing without waiting for the facts, and similar rush to judgement without the race component “The attack on our embassy in Benghazi was a reaction to a film” thing without waiting for the facts. Rushing to judgement on Trayvon and ahmed was dumb and race-motivated. It was dumbass and damaging to his credibility and race relations in the country.

          • SJ

            “Waiting for the facts”? Trayvon Martin could have been his son; he could have been my son. Hell, twenty-five years ago, he could have been me. There was no “rush to judgment.” He had sympathy for a kid who died. He had empathy, as a father, for the parents of the kid who died. That does not require waiting for the facts, and neither does wanting to prevent that sort of thing from happening again.

            “Rushing to judgment” would have been if he had come out and said some derivative of, “They need to give George Zimmerman the gas chamber.” He didn’t do that.

      • DaktariD

        “I don’t know if anyone has been killed yet…”

        Yes. A student from Saudi Arabia was beaten to death in Wisconsin. Early indicators are that it was a hate crime against Muslims. It was on Sunday, before the election.

        • Shweta Narayan

          Sad but unsurprised upvote 🙁
          I’m most scared atm for Muslims (and Sikhs, since Americans can’t tell the difference).

          • shink55

            The first deaths on record in regard to Trump happened like 6 months before the primaries started as some guys beat a homeless Mexican guy to death. Then you had the case where a bunch of white teenagers lynched a black guy in an abandoned parking lot, which while the perpetrators didn’t explicitly cite Trump the connection isn’t hard to draw. The Muslim women in rural middle America who got narrowly saved from getting run over by a person who explicitly sped up there car and aimed for her while driving at night, 3 younger Muslim women who got attacked by (I can’t remember if they got killed, been a while since I read that news article) a white supremacist again in rural middle america. The white supremacist death toll has been ticking up in response to Trumps campaign for a while now.

          • Shweta Narayan

            Yes. And, not a death but there was a Black church set on fire with VOTE TRUMP left on one wall.

            But it’s also unsurprising that they’re coming faster now. There would have been a spike in hate crimes whatever happened but it’s going to be even worse with this.

      • Here’s a Name
        • Izo

          Not that I’m excusing the killer by any reach of the imagination, but the article states that the police do not have any motive for the death. You can’t just say ‘a person who is muslim was killed, and therefore it must be because of him being a muslim and must be a hate crime that was caused because of Trump being elected.’ That’s a massive leap of logic to make. Could it have been a mugging? Could it have been a fight gone awry? Could it have been something that had nothing whatsoever to do with him being a muslim at all? I’m pretty sure a lot of white christian people have died where I can’t link it directly to terrorism, or to black lives matter, or to Hillary supporters being distraught. The fact that the person was a certain color and certain religion, on its own, does not in any way mean you should jump straight to ‘hate crime’ and especially not to deciding that the motive was the election.

      • Here’s a Name

        Someone else committed suicide after direct taunting from their own parents about not being able to have their gender recognized because of the election. It was shared by Bi-notes for a bisexual revolution (a facebook page) and the story checks out. Also apparently the transgender suicide hotline was overwhelmed by callers and crashed.

        • Tsapki

          Taunted by their own parents. Well, biological parents I guess. Not sure if they were emotional parents.

          • Dwight Williams

            Pretty sure that they don’t qualify as the latter.

        • I’ve also heard of an election night suicide by someone (friend of a friend) worried about the continued availability of their medical care.

          • Shweta Narayan

            I’ve been basically on call since then for friends terrified about their medical care, and have talked more than one to a better place at whatever o clock in the morning. Finally hit the wall myself last night and had to tell them I couldn’t for a few days. I’m so scared that they won’t all be there by the time I’m up to helping again.

            Feels like nobody cares about us except us.

          • From what I’ve seen, people’s friend networks are doing a fantastic job of rallying around and supporting each other, so hopefully they’ll have other friends who can step in for you if need be. I think the main worry is probably people who don’t have those networks, unfortunately common with disability, and there’s not a lot we can do for them in the short term.

            In the meantime, caring for friends starts with the self-care that enables you to provide it, so take care of yourself.

          • Shweta Narayan

            Yeah the other concern is most of my friends (who didn’t magically vanish when I got mostly dead) are also chronically ill/disabled, and most of their friends ditto, so none of us has a lot of spare energy to go around.

            But that just means self-care is even more important I guess 🙂 So yes absolutely and thank you for the reminder, I keep needing it.

          • Gloria Hole

            More lies.

          • As I mentioned up thread I’ve picked up a stalker elsewhere on the web who took objection to me talking about my own and my friends experiences of disability hate crimes. Gloria has clearly decided that my backing up my point with evidence is an affront that demands she start stalking me. So that’s where the “More lies” comes from.

          • Shweta Narayan

            …wow. Question, would us blocking the stalker be a bad move & leave you open to more harassment? Cause I was about to block, but reading your explanation I started wondering if it would be better to stay aware of what they’re doing?

          • I basically had two points in mind when I noted it. First that I wanted people to be aware why there might be non-sequiteurs like “You’re lying” popping up in response to my posts here, and second to warn them it’s the kind of poster who might flip over to harrassment if they respond.

            I’d suggest a policy of don’t feed the trolls.

    • Bub

      You don’t need to be a Trump supporter to doubt that he will follow through on all the things he said he’d do. The fact is, he contradicted himself so much that there is no possible way he _can_ follow through on all the things he said he’d do. Furthermore, it’s really unclear how much of what he said reflected his real beliefs, and how much was naked opportunism to get himself elected.

      I wouldn’t be surprised if a lot of his supporters end up being sadly disappointed, as he fails to carry out many of his promises.

      • I hope and pray that you are correct… but I think the real message, here, is that we need to act in order to make certain that his vision does not come to pass.

        • Insanenoodlyguy

          Remember when Obama was going to save the world? I mean, I liked Obama, don’t get me wrong, and he had a lout of problems from the legislative branch, but people expected more of him then he was ever going to be able to deliver.

          Rembmer how hard his numbers fell? That doesn’t mean Trump couldn’t be in for 8 years, and that’s not a great thing at all, but I promise you there will be many people who voted for him today that will be disappointing then. Already people are mad at him for praising Hillary, wasn’t he gonna put her in jail? Course, he couldn’t actually do that yet as an elect, but this is how it starts.

          • That only happens if people make it happen, though. Complacently sitting back and hoping that everything will be okay will not make it so.

          • Insanenoodlyguy

            Oh hey, I didn’t mean to imply people shouldn’t do stuff, don’t get me wrong. Just cause Trump isn’t personally invested in fucking things over doesn’t mean an all republican controlled house and senate and president is something we should just cover our ears about for 2-4 years. Just that we probably don’t need to worry about concentration camps. No, there’s buttloads to do!

          • I grew up around the time that Genesis’s Land of confusion was popular; as of this election, I think the message is still valid, but I think I prefer Disturbed’s take on it:

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YV4oYkIeGJc

          • Dwight Williams

            Design style reminds me more than a bit of Todd McFarlane, but…

          • I think it’s the teeth in the mask…

          • shink55

            Concentration camps? Nah, we don’t need to worry about that. Attempts to dismantle NATO and ban Muslims from the country? That’s stuff he’s repeated enough that we should probably take it seriously. I’ll reiterate that last part for all the UK citizens commenting, Trump might really try and dismantle NATO. Ya’ll leave the EU and NATO folds the UK might find itself surprisingly bereft of allies in short order.

          • MikeTheGirl

            Dude, in 2008 Obama ran *to the right* of Hillary Clinton. She was his (less charismatic) Bernie Sanders. His voters kept telling me he was going to do things that he never said he was going to do. (Although I am ticked Congress blocked his attempts to close Guantanamo. I guess they were always hoping they’d need a place to send us.)

      • KatherineMW

        He’s already saying he may keep the Obamacare section requiring insurers to cover people with pre-existing conditions. I know people on this site were heavily concerned about that, so that’s good news.

        • Izo

          Technically, he was saying that even during the debates and in multiple, multiple interviews.

          • shink55

            If the Democrats have any spine they will filibuster attempts to dismantle Obamacare into the ground, with the tacit support of a bunch of non tea party Republicans.

          • Izo

            I seriously doubt they’ll be able to keep a filibuster up, at least during the first two years, since the Republicans will likely just take the same tactic that the Democrats took when they were in the same situation as the Republicans are now, and just break the filibuster with a simple majority because of the nuclear option that the Democrats used to change the rules. IF they can get about 12 republicans to agree with them, then I can see what you’re saying happening, but since Obamacare was passed in a fairly underhanded way (not illegal mind you, as some conservatives incorrectly claim, just underhanded) with absolutely NO Republicans involved, it’s unlikely that they’d get 12 Republicans to go along with a filibuster. I’d be surprised if they got two, if they were to do what you’re suggesting. Not trying to be dismissive, just realistic.

          • shink55

            The senate only changed that for non-supreme court presidential appointments. Legislation still stands, and we still have an 8 person supreme court. I don’t think the Republicans will go nuclear over Obamacare because the ones in more contentious districts and states realize that doing so would cost them.

          • Izo

            I think you’re just using wishful thinking there. The Democrats changed it for things they wanted. And you don’t think the Republican will as well now that they’re in power, knowing that if they don’t take advantage of being in control, the Democrats will instead when/if they’re in power again?

    • MarvalAlice

      people supported him because he wasn’t the establishment. in case you haven’t noticed th establishment hasn’t been doing a lot lately

      • SJ

        people supported him because he wasn’t the establishment. in case you haven’t noticed th establishment hasn’t been doing a lot lately

        So… basically, what you want us to believe is that fifty-nine million people cut off their nose to spite their face?

        • Santiago Tórtora

          Apparently yes. Mark Ames wrote something very interesting in 2011 about the Bush-Kerry campaign that I think applies even more to our times.

          http://exiledonline.com/we-the-spiteful/

        • Insanenoodlyguy

          Honestly, yes. While I don’t pretend racism and homophobia did nothing in this election, I think there’s a lot of people out there who had this as their primary movite, and a full examination of themselves would not prove it wrong.

          • Shweta Narayan

            It’s not only active hate that defines racism and homophobia. “I don’t actively want to kill you I just don’t give a single damn if you die”? ALSO bigotry.

          • MarvalAlice

            belief isn’t morality. morality is based on actions. or do you think the person who hears about a massacre, says “that’s terrible” and goes back to eating their lunch, is morally the same as someone who hears the report says “that’s terrible”, goes there and volunteers to help? they both believed the same thing after all.

          • Shweta Narayan

            I’m actually talking about actions too. What I am saying is that the person who goes “that’s terrible” and forgets all about it is *no better* than the person who says “those slurs had it coming” and forgets all about it.

            The fact that they said something nice helps nobody only their own feeling of being a good person. I do not care whether you feel like a good person or not, when my friends are in real danger of dying.

            Speaking of which, I read the rest of your posts and wow I’m done talking to you bai now ^-^

          • MarvalAlice

            why? what’s wrong with them? I really try not to go to far online, and would like some input. it’s important to understand people…

        • MarvalAlice

          No. I want you to believe that 59 million people felt they were be so ignored, so misrepresented, that they would take the hurt to make something happen. as i said before, i neither voted, nor supported trump(I think a Trump presidency is hilarious, that’s mostly just because I’m sick of seeing my identity appropriated) but i know that if you refuse to try to understand your opponent, you will loose.

          • SJ

            Hilarious, huh? In my experience, the sort of people who would find this hilarious (frankly, in any sense of the word), are most often the sort of people who can opt out of the worst of it.

            “Best case” scenario? That Trump was lying about all the racist and sexist stuff that he’s said. That doesn’t change the fact that legitimately racist and sexist people have been emboldened by his rhetoric, and are going to continue to be emboldened throughout his presidency. You think that it doesn’t matter that Trump was endorsed by the KKK, because he “denounced” them? Ask the black freshmen at Penn how that’s working out for them today? You think that the sudden spike in anti-Muslim behavior and violence is going to stop, because Trump started to call for “unity” after he won? Hell no, it’s not going to stop; it’s too late.

            Whether he meant to do it or not (and why should I believe that he didn’t mean to do it, when he campaigned on it?), Trump has given voice to millions of hateful people, and validated their hatred, in their eyes, by winning the election. I don’t think there’s a damned thing funny about that.

          • MarvalAlice

            if you think a trans woman who can barely pass can opt out then, good for you? I don’t think the democrats had my best interests at heart though, the current party is more interested in treating me like a unicorn then like a person. that’s the reason a lot of minorities(though not me) voted trump. because their identity isn’t their biggest concern.

          • SJ

            I don’t think the democrats had my best interests at heart though…

            Not to worry; I’m sure that the Trump Administration will be much more relevant to your interests! [/sarcasm]

            And here’s the thing: if you want to say that life for trans people wasn’t going to get any better under Clinton, that may be a fair statement. But I’m willing to take it to the bank that it wasn’t going to get any worse; I don’t have anything resembling such confidence in President Trump.

          • MarvalAlice

            you are entitled to your opinion just as i am to mine. i really should go to bed now:)

          • shink55

            Isn’t that the issue though? It’s not really about how you see yourself, it’s about how your potential victimizers see you. Granted, the Democratic party barely knows what to do with a trans person, you’re definitely more a unicorn then a person to a lot of Democrats. Clinton also didn’t ask for your vote, instead she swung around the other way and fully accepted the support of the former Republican money men. I can totally see not supporting a candidate that starts iffy and swings right.

            On the other hand, and I think a lot of the reason people don’t understand a perspective like yours, is that not going for the party that treats you like a unicorn is accepting the party that not only doesn’t see you as human but actively sees you as sub-human. It’s the guy that quoted Mussolini and defended that action on television, the guy that refuses to condemn the killing of minorities in his name. If you got beaten up at one of his rallies earlier in the year, he would’ve paid the legal fees for your attackers defense attorneys. If someone killed you while invoking his name, he’d respond neutrally, refusing to condemn those actions. This is all based on stuff he’s said and done before, granted it’s generally racial minorities that receive this kind of treatment, but I wouldn’t doubt for a second if a trans rights activist had shown up at a Trump rally that their odds of getting beaten by the crowd would be lower then a BLM supporter. This is course just talking about Trump, Pence sits in the same vein of religions zealotry that Cruz did, and Cruz actively accepted the support of preachers who advocated killing the gays.

            So then why no fear? In the face of all this hatred, you say you’re disappointed in the Democratic party for treating you like a unicorn, with no acknowledgement of the evil that rests on the other side.

          • SJ

            Also, late reply, only because an edit two days after the fact would be kind of grimy:

            if you think a trans woman who can barely pass can opt out then, good for you?

            I don’t know enough about your age, ethnic background or socioeconomic status to answer you in the specific but, in the abstract, I think that Kaitlyn Jenner has proven that, if you have enough other privilege “chips” to cash in, you can indeed opt out, even if you are a trans woman who can barely pass.

          • MarvalAlice

            You mean like being rich? that has always been a get out of jail free card. I do not have that card, but i do have a sense of humor so use what you got i suppose…

      • Lysiuj

        Well… they supported him because they percieve him as not being the establishment. He is the establishment, but because he’s not a politician he can pass himself off as counterculture.

        • Shweta Narayan

          yeah I guess that’s easy to do when he was only threatening people they don’t care about anyway 🙁

          One thing I’m learning here is that the people who “didn’t vote for trump but for the sake of argument” feel they must yell at us for our pain.. they don’t care about us any more than those who did vote for him.

          • MarvalAlice

            why should they if you don’t care about their pain? honestly, if you don’t care about them, why should they care about you? because that would make them better people? then who? the people who don’t care about them? i think that we should all care about each other, but i also accept not everyone feels the same, and (as pointed out in this comic) trying to force the right thing on people just makes one a tyrant. a tyrant leads by force, and she can affect a lot more, but only for her lifetime. a savior has to lead by example, she cannot affect as much, but her works will out live her.

      • Grant

        And whose fault is it that the establishment hasn’t been doing anything? Their own party has all but said that they were gonna break the government to prove that it was broken. If you’ll remember, the Republican party shut down the government, the Republican party held 50 votes to cripple or repeal Obamacare, the Republican party wasted millions of tax dollars to prove eight times that Hillary was not responsible for Benghazi.

        And now they control Congress, the White House, and soon the Supreme Court, as well. They’ve shown time and time again that they think the only good government is one they rule. Watch this next year, see if they start trying to do things other than hinder the Democrats and the White House. Fuckin’ hypocrites.

      • I Am Helpy

        yeah, aside from low unemployment, the highest average wages ever, and a massive improvement in healthcare availabiliy, what has Obama even done

        /snark

        • SJ

          … And also making huge strides towards repairing our reputation internationally, after it was decimated by Bush 43, repealing DADT, and putting the country on the right path towards equality for LGBTQ.

          But yeah, what besides that?

          • Shweta Narayan

            i mean he’s gravely disappointed those of us who hoped he’d keep his promises about warmongering and torturing people but compared to Bush, yeah.

        • MarvalAlice

          i lost my healthcare after the healthcare bill. I cannot get my needs met anymore. I didn’t vote trump, i didn’t support trump. but i know that you cannot convince people to see things your way when you come across as arrogant, or self righteous, if you want people to listen you have to project humility.

          • I Am Helpy

            Then you lost a garbage policy that didn’t cover anything.

          • Izo

            Marval: “You should show humility, even in defeat. When you act arrogant and tell people they’re stupid, you make people not want to listen to you.”

            I Am Helpy: “That’s a stupid thing to say. You’re stupid. Your stupid opinions are stupid, stupid. I was always right and you should listen to me because I’m right, stupid.”

            You know that’s what you just came off seeming like, right? MarvelAlice was making a pretty valid statement.

          • I Am Helpy

            I am not required to be nice to people who support fascism. I’m doing them a favour by pointing out that their reasons – as MarvelAlice’s were – are completely fictional (and would be insufficient even otherwise).

          • I Am Helpy

            NB: I am saying that MarvelAlice’s reasons were nonsense, not that they are a Trump supporter.

          • shink55

            This whole fight and…wow Helpy, y’know Marval never actually stated they didn’t vote for Hillary? It’s literally just you assuming they didn’t.

            Secondly, Izo, yeah enjoy your right wing echo chamber. Trump followed the shotgun smear tactic against Hillary this election and dug up every conspiracy about Hillary since she was first lady, hoping something would stick. Clearly, the “Hillary killed people”, one stuck with you. That’ll never be stated outside of the right wing echo chamber, which is generally a pretty good reason to believe it’s false. I mean, American news media would never say it if it were true, or BBC. AJ would likely be less inclined to pull their punches.

          • Arkone Axon

            Actually, the “Hillary killed people” had less to do with Trump and more to do with… well, as ONE of the recent examples this year, a DNC worker involved in attempting to prove vote fraud being shot in the back of the head, twice, by a “mugger” who didn’t take his wallet or phone. The facts – that he was shot twice in the back of the head, that the assailant did not rob the body after murdering without even a warning, that the victim was working on proving vote fraud – are openly acknowledged; the only dispute is that the police are calling it a mugging when everyone else is pointing out that petty criminals usually start things off with a threat along the lines of “your money or your life,” and also TAKE THE MONEY.

          • Izo

            “I am not required to be nice to people who support fascism.”

            And you’re going to do this by shouting down others making reasonable arguments without any basis for your statements. She outright said she does not support Trump. In fact, you …. are sounding sort of fascist actually.

            I’m not even being sarcastic about this for a change. What Marval said doesn’t sound fictional at all. It HAS happened throughout the country to many people, actually. People who did have good healthcare beforehand, also. You’re just coming off as arrogant and cruel without any descriptive basis beyond namecalling, which ironically was also Marval’s point.

          • Giacomo Bandini

            God Help me, i agree with you.

          • I Am Helpy

            What “reasonable arguments”? It’s completely false. And how the hell does pointing that out sound “fascist”? You are deranged.

          • Izo

            “What “reasonable arguments”? ”

            The reasonable argument that people’s premiums started skyrocketing, even in the first year compared to what they had previously. The more insurance ou had needed beforehand, the higher your premiums were after Obamacare was passed. Especially in states with smaller populations. This was a reasonable argument that she made. Another reasonable argument she made is that if you act arrogant and like a bully, it’s people’s natural inclination to not capitulate to the bully, especially in this country. Most Americans are a lot more like Churchill in mentality and a lot less like Chamberlain.

            ” It’s completely false.”

            How exactly are you determining that her telling you that her premiums skyrocketed is false. I wasn’t aware you had her records. Perhaps you’re Snowden or something?

            ” And how the hell does pointing that out sound “fascist”?”
            The manner that you use to dismiss her and to shout down her right to have a differing opinion, and be told by you that she’s a liar without any reasoning on your behalf, and then for you to immediately engage in ad hominem and character attacks in the absence of logic and facts. That’s what sound fascist. You trying to snuff out opposing viewpoints is what sounds fascist.

            “You are deranged.”

            Wow, you’re so convincing. Sadly, all your arguments seem to be of this caliber. You really need to calm down.

          • I Am Helpy

            That’s not anything they said.

          • MarvalAlice

            i made more then one comment.

          • I Am Helpy

            And all of them were false.

          • Izo

            In your rage, did you forget how to read? That IS what she said.

          • I Am Helpy

            Nope.

          • Izo

            Nope you did not forget how to read? I think you mention below that you just don’t read past the first sentence anyway.

          • I Am Helpy

            Sorry you want to yell at me because you got something wrong.

          • Izo

            I swear it’s like you’re reading a different thread and responding to that one…

          • I Am Helpy

            Also, it’s pretty clear that they voted for Jill “anti-vaxxer” Stein or possibly Gary “Ban All Schools!” Johnson. When they said they weren’t a Trump supporter, they were wrong.

            I’m sorry you’re more mad about a Trump supporter’s lies pointed out than AN ACTUAL FASCIST WINNING BECAUSE OF THOSE LIES. The key lesson of 2016 is NOT “we have to be nicer to people who throw us under the bus”.

          • MarvalAlice

            are you talking about me? you don’t know me. you don’t know what i value, or what i care about but you seem pretty comfortable telling people what kind of person i am.

          • I Am Helpy

            You specifically stated that you weren’t a Trump supporter, yet never said you voted for Hillary. Based on that, and your other statements (and it is weird how “I’m not a Trump supporter, but…” sounds so much like “I’m not a racist, but…”, isn’t it), I draw the obvious conclusion: you are Herbal Tea Party.

          • MarvalAlice

            my politics are none of your business. i said i’m not a trump supporter because i am not a trump supporter. nothing more nothing less. the herbal tea party sounds amazing. I’m not here to tell you why trump is the new muhmjesdah, I just think there might be some things you haven’t thought about(also I’m really disappointed with the lack of comic update:c), and debates are never won by pretending the opponent has no case.

          • I Am Helpy

            And my reasons for holding you in contempt are none of yours, but here they are anyway: you helped an actual fascist take power, whether directly or indirectly. No amount of self-righteous posturing changes that.

          • MarvalAlice

            wow, you really hate me don’t you?

          • I Am Helpy

            Yep.

          • MarvalAlice

            I’ve never been hated for political reasons before. I’ve been hated for being trans, but not for supporting a politician enough. thanks for the new experience;)

          • I Am Helpy

            OK, rest assured that I’m mustering as much sympathy as possible for you and all the other entitled white people who were forced to help Trump into power for made-up reasons.

          • MarvalAlice

            your also assuming my race? interesting.

          • I Am Helpy

            OK as long as you can joke (about how you threw the most vulnerable members of society under a bus because of completely fake reasons).

          • MarvalAlice

            i’m note joking.

          • I Am Helpy

            Yes I get that you want to keep doubling down on how gross you are. I don’t understand why, but then I’m not trying to; why would I care.

          • MarvalAlice

            I don’t understand what your talking about o_O I just think it’s important to understand each other and look past our differences. how is that gross?

          • I Am Helpy

            See previous post.

          • MarvalAlice

            Okay whatever. Do be safe though.

          • I Am Helpy

            OK sorry that your attempt to get sympathy and approval from the people you couldn’t be bothered helping didn’t pan out.

          • Izo

            “Also, it’s pretty clear that they voted for Jill “anti-vaxxer” Stein or possibly Gary “Ban All Schools!” Johnson.”
            Wow, way to reduce different candidates to a two or three word description. I guess you’d prefer that they vote for Hillary “I kill people” Clinton. News flash. She can vote for anyone she wants. She can even choose to vote but leave the presidential pick blank. But you don’t seem to understand that.

            “When they said they weren’t a Trump supporter, they were wrong.”

            The concept that if you do not vote for Hillary, you are voting for Trump is so massively idiotic. Third party votes do not take away from Hillary. They might take away from Trump. Or they more often might be from people who would otherwise have not voted for anyone. But you’re acting with a fascist mentality of ‘if you’re not with us, you’re evil.’ You’re being a bully.

            “I’m sorry you’re more mad about a Trump supporter’s lies pointed out than AN ACTUAL FASCIST WINNING BECAUSE OF THOSE LIES.”

            No, I’m more angry about people like you attacking people who either voted for third party candidates or for no one, rather than your EXTREEEEMELY flawed candidate, instead of the other extremely flawed candidate. Hey… why didn’t you vote for a third party candidate. IF everyone voted for a third party candidate, like Gary Johnson, then Trump wouldn’t have won there either. I guess by your ‘logic’ you’re a Trump supporter too.

            Go figure, you can’t figure out that she’s not a Trump supporter from her subtle clue of her outright saying SHE IS NOT A TRUMP SUPPORTER. And if she was, what would you do about it? She’s not. Are you one of those criminals in Oregon who are dragging people out of their cars and beating them up on the suspicion that they might have voted for Trump? So much for you not being a fascist.

            Seriously, the logic of ‘don’t vote for a third party, you’ll throw your vote away’ is like that Simpsons House of Horrors cartoon with the punchline of ‘I voted for Kodos.’ That’s you. You choose between Kang and Kodos, and actually think that you’re making a good choice either way.

            Also, Trump didn’t win because of lies. Yes, he lied a lot. And Hillary lied a lot. Go on – tell me Hillary did not lie a lot. I could use a laugh, given the current climate.

            Trump won because Hillary was a really bad candidate who ran a really bad campaign, who had radio science with no interviews or anything for over 270 days straight. Who tried to have as few debates as possible. Who tried to stage events instead of actually answering questions. Who lied time after time after time, and used underhanded tactics and collusion with the DNC to screw over a more viable candidate during the primaries. Who was MIRED in criminal investigations that were entirely of her own doing. That’s why Hillary lost. She lost because she was such an awful, horrible candidate that she couldnt beat someone who was as dumb in his campaign speeches as Trump was. She lost because she played the victim card while at the same time being arrogant and acting like she was ENTITLED to be President, rather than having to work for it. And she lost while spending over 1.1 billion dollars (including a lot of money from people who WOULD be expecting a return on their investment, including foreign donors) compared to Trump spending under 100 million (mostly of his own money).

            So it’s not Marval’s fault that she lost. It’s Hillary’s fault that Hillary lost.

            I don’t like bullies. You’re being a bully. Do the logic.

            “The key lesson of 2016 is NOT “we have to be nicer to people who throw us under the bus”.”

            Marval did not throw you under the bus. She did not vote for the person that you have demanded that she vote for. Guess what? You’re not in charge of anyone else.

          • I Am Helpy

            Yeah I don’t really care what right-wing Koch brothers smears you’ve bought into. I stopped reading after the first sentence.

          • Izo

            1) Yeah I sort of expected that you’re the type of person to make insults about things he doesn’t even bother to read up on. That explains how you would call Marval a Trump supporter when she outright says that she is not a Trump supporter. You just don’t know how to read past the first sentence.

            2) Where did we get into Koch Brothers? Is Koch Brothers even a relevant thing anymore? Did I miss something where the Koch Brothers were all supporting Trump? I know they werent donating to him. Especially since he mostly self-financed.

          • I Am Helpy

            You literally just called Hillary Clinton a murderer. She is not. Stein, however, is an anti-vaxxer. She does nothing but spread conspiracy theories in order to justify what she has decided is Pure. She is EVERYTHING that is wrong with the left.

          • Izo

            And you literally just said Gary Johnson wants to ban all schools (hmm, I notice you left that out). Your point?

            I’m not a fan of Jill Stein btw. She’s looney. She also doesnt have a trail of bodies behind her or multiple criminal investigations. If you’re going to vote for someone ENTIRELY based on their gender though, there you go.

            My point, since you seem to not be able to get it, is that reducing a candidate down to a few words, then dismissing them and attacking people who voted for them, while blatantly ignoring the MASSIVE problems with your own candidate, or your own lack of ability to defend your candidate’s massive problems or poor campaign strategy, is the height of hypocrisy.

          • I Am Helpy

            “a trail of bodies”.

            You are a joke.

          • Izo

            I’m not sure if you’re just being rude, or being ignorant…

          • I Am Helpy

            Rude, definitely rude – I’m always rude to conspiracy cranks, because they are dangerous idiots. You are citing a right-wing conspiracy theory that was stupid decades ago, even before it was exhaustively debunked by Snopes. It’s a real timesaver when people try to tell me that the Earth is flat or that 9/11 was an inside job; it means I can safely ignore all of their other opinions.

          • Izo

            You might not realize the implication of ‘rude’ including that you’re actively trying to lie about Hillary’s bodycount and criminal investigations. I was suggesting you might be ignorant as an excuse for you not being a liar. I guess you’d rather be known as a rude liar than an ignorant dupe.

            But hey, if you admit that you’re a liar and rude, that’s fine. I’m also not citing any conspiracy theories from decades ago. Some of these deaths occurred RECENTLY. It’s so prevalent in general knowledge that it’s basically a meme now.

            Here’s a joke.
            http://www.3840khz.net/008IENDORSEDHILLABEAST1.jpg

            Keep on keepin’ on in your echo chamber though. It’ll make it that much easier for the other side to beat you in future elections if you don’t learn from your mistakes.

          • I Am Helpy

            As a crank, you are incapable of accepting that you believe idiotic nonsense. This is why you don’t deserve even basic politeness; it’s wasted on you.

            Hillary Clinton hasn’t killed anyone; you are a moron.

          • Izo

            Me (or anyone else talking to Helpy): Gives a reasoned, well argued position.

            Helpy: “BWAAA! You’re a crank! You’re a moron! You’re stupid! I don’t have to listen! I’m not listening! I’m not listening!”

            You’re just so precious….

          • I Am Helpy

            I understand that – as a conspiracy theorist – you have nothing but personal attacks. Your ineffectuality isn’t my problem, however. Again, Hillary Clinton is not a murderer, and only very stupid people think she is.

          • Izo

            Says I have nothing but personal attacks, despite my having written long posts without insults, mostly with reasoned information.

            Same sentence – makes a personal attack at me.

            Next sentence. Makes another personal attack.

            Last sentence. Makes a third personal attack.

          • I Am Helpy

            I cannot imagine what you think you are achieving.

          • Izo

            Well, showing that you are incapable of arguing a point logically, for one thing. Read some of my arguments, and maybe respond to them, instead of your talking points of insulting the other person and just claiming they’re liars or they’re delusional.

            Making you look foolish is just an unintentional side effect, although you’ve been behaving like a real bully to other people repeatedly with ad hominem attacks and namecalling

          • I Am Helpy

            Uh huh. See previous post.

          • Izo

            I just responded to your previous post.

          • I Am Helpy

            See previous two posts.

          • Izo

            The hilarious thing is one day people will look at your post history and wonder wtf you were doing 🙂

          • I Am Helpy

            See previous three posts.

          • Shweta Narayan

            This but also, ftr, there is no point to arguing with Izo. it’s a game to them; they just move goalposts and keep going.

          • I Am Helpy

            Disqus makes it hard to see the order of posts, but this was posted before he started spouting x-files plots as facts – I was giving them the benefit of the doubt.

          • Shweta Narayan

            Yeah I replied before seeing that they were pestering you faaar beyond that post. IDK what they’re saying cause i learned how to block people on disqus *specially for them* but thought maybe I could spare you some of the grief I got.

            I was toooo laaaate though 🙂

          • I Am Helpy

            Hillary murrrrrrdered so many people, according to his sources (talk radio or w/e). In my first reply, I linked him to the Snopes article where some obsessive journalist went through every name on the list and investigated them; you’ll be surprised to find out that the list is 100% garbage.

          • Shweta Narayan

            u mean…. ppl LIE… on interwebs? for… POLITICK????

          • Shweta Narayan

            also yeah i’m sooo convinced by ppl who are like “I’m not racist I just think the dude who’s actively eager to use nukes is less of a warmonger”

          • Puissant

            I don’t know MarvelAlice, and I don’t want to sound insulting or condescending, but her statement doesn’t always ring true. Voters elect and re-elect arrogant assholes all the time. Arrogance is a term that people use when referring to someone whose views don’t match their own. Furthermore, being humble in the face of a fascist won’t win them over to your side. They’ll only see your humility as weakness.

          • Izo

            “I don’t know MarvelAlice, and I don’t want to sound insulting or condescending, but her statement doesn’t always ring true.”

            I don’t know her either, but I know what she’s talking about. And actually it does ring true, because people’s premiums – especially people who already had health conditions, especially in certain lower-population states, and people who have families, HAVE seen their premiums skyrocket each year since Obamacare was passed during a recess session. And next year it was going to skyrocket. The basis for Obamacare’s funding was simply flawed, and if people can’t recognize that, they can’t fix it. Keep the parts which are good – which are really only a couple of things – the increase of the age under which you can be under your parents and the elimination of the pre-existing conditions ban. And get rid of the rest as long as you have another plan to fill the gap – which Trump seems to have already, and Paul Ryan also seems to have a few possible plans in case Trump’s is untenable (which it doesnt seem like it will be from an economic standpoint).

            “Voters elect and re-elect arrogant assholes all the time.”

            This is true. Most politicians are arrogant. And they get more arrogant the less they are held to their promises or the longer they are in a state of political power. And Democrats have been in political power a long, long, long time. And Hillary especailly has been in one position of political power or another for a long, long, long time.

            “Arrogance is a term that people use when referring to someone whose views don’t match their own.”

            I agree about this statement that you’re making too. Arrogance is assuming the other side has NOTHING correct to say, and painting them as evil simply for disagreeing with you.

            “Furthermore, being humble in the face of a fascist won’t win them over to your side. They’ll only see your humility as weakness.”

            I agree with this as well. We seem to agree on a LOT. 🙂 Being humble in the face of an aggressor will only serve to have that person be more aggressive. OR that people be more aggressive. Or that criminal commit more crimes. Or that politician to ignore more laws, or take more voters for granted without delivering on promises made. Or a religion to keep on killing homosexuals and treating women like property, or treating others not in the same religion as second class citizens or the enemy needing to be killed.

            In fact, its sort of a mantra of Reaganites (I’m not a reaganite, I’m too young to have even been alive back then, but I do think Reagan was a pretty good President, and if I was born back then and was of voting age, I’d probably have voted for him).

            Peace with strength. Trust but verify.

          • Puissant

            Thank you for your civil reply. I wasn’t disagreeing with MarvelAlice about the insurance premiums, but about the humility versus arrogance thing. I feel that the US should have universal healthcare under a single payer system. Insurance companies profit too much off of people’s misery.

          • Izo

            “but about the humility versus arrogance thing.”

            Well the rude responses from Helpy to Marval was about the premium thing. the humility vs arrogance thing was more of an opinion, and everyone’s entitled to their opinions. Helpy was claiming Marval was a liar though, about something which she was NOT being a liar, simply because he didn’t like facts that did not fit the narrative that he wanted to believe.

            “I feel that the US should have universal healthcare under a single payer system.”

            That’s one opinion. I think there are problems with a single payer system when it comes to the effective use of how health care is distributed under such a system, ‘death panels,’ etc. I think opening the health insurance system to more competition between states would be a more natural way to force companies to lower their premiums through normal market forces. It’s at least worth trying before going into another money pit like Obamacare or socialized universal health care. It works in every other form of sale of goods and services – no reason it shouldnt work for health insurance as well. Heck, even just giving each person in the country X dollars a year to spend on health care would be less costly and more efficient than a single payer system or the ACA.

            But we can have different opinions on that. But either way, the ACA is corrupt and inherently flawed, was passed in a very shifty manner, justified in SCOTUS in a way counter to how even ther writers said it was meant to be used (as a tax, which it really is NOT), and going bankrupt, requiring massive increases in premiums which defeats the entire point of Obamacare in the first place.

            “Insurance companies profit too much off of people’s misery.”

            On this point, you and I are in full agreement. Insurance companies are vultures and I can’t stand that they profit so much from people’s misery (and lobbying). And they’re also making out like bandits thanks to Obamacare, btw.

          • Puissant

            If you get a chance, read up on the French universal healthcare system. It’s a mix of public and private. The plan covers alost 80% of all healthcare, and of the 20% that isn’t covered, 70% of short-term care is refunded, and 100% of long-term. If you choose to, you can also purchase private insurance that refunds an additional 3.7%.

            Their premiums are based on income, and if you’re not self-employed, your company covers half. They don’t buy insurance from corporations, but from non-profits that negotiate every year with the gov’t on the costs.

            Their premiums are higher than most of Europe, but much less than what we pay. Last year, the average European country spent around $3500 per person on healthcare, France spent $4124, while we spent $9523. They’re able to keep prices down because there’s only one customer, the French gov’t. When you only have one customer, that can better negotiate costs.

            You also get to choose your own doctor (who doesn’t work for, but bills the gov’t), and you can go to any hospital. You get reimbursed at a lesser rate if you choose to get a second opinion, but referrals and specialists are reimbursed at the regular rate. There’s no such thing as an out-of-network doctor or hospital. Speaking of hospitals, some are gov’t run, but they have private and non-profit hospitals as well.

            Their care isn’t worse than ours either. They have a longer life expectancy, lower infant mortality, and a smaller percentage of preventable deaths.

          • Izo

            Here. Some reading for you as well.

            http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-01-03/frances-health-care-system-is-going-broke

            http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp1504547?af=R&rss=currentIssue&#t=article

            http://reachfinancialindependence.com/french-healthcare/

            http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/lynn-davidson/2007/08/27/french-health-care-expert-frances-system-broken-should-copy-us

            Easier for me to just post these links since my post would be really long and describing most of what these articles are explaining as the flaws to the reality of the increasingly broken French health care system.

          • I Am Helpy

            Also, I’m not too clear on what purpose of being nice to racist lunatics who want to make everything worse would serve? They literally cannot be reached with logic or facts; they have – like conspiracy theorists always do – abandoned reality.

          • Puissant

            The problem with what you said about not coming across as arrogant, or self-righteous is that persona that Trump projected during the campaign was all about arrogance and self-righteousness. Humility was not on the agenda. He won.

          • MarvalAlice

            but his supporters did not(some did I’m sure, but not compared to the other side). it’s really weird but, we seem to like arrogance if we don’t personally have to deal with it(Dr. House anyone?). but as soon as we have to deal with someone who “just knows they’er right, if only everyone else would just listen”, Or the old “Shut up and listen to me rant about how your wrong”(that’s not the best example but you know the kind of thing I’m talking about right?) it’s not so fun, and really I’m talking about the supporters. after all, trumps not going to listen to me, neither is whoever the next demo candidate will be.

      • Sterling Ericsson

        And yet everyone he’s adding to his cabinet and staff are firmly and completely “Establishment”.

        • Izo

          Um…. no?

          Not to mention he hasnt added anyone to his cabinet and staff yet? Not sure how you’re saying everyone is firmly establishment when he hasn’t added anyone yet. You’re sort of showing a bias without a basis for that bias by doing that. Although at this point, I’m thinking that if you will say non-existent choices are establishment, you’ll probably find any choice he does eventually make to be establishment, regardless of if it is or isn’t.

          • MarvalAlice

            people are angry and afraid. right now a lot of people seem to be looking for even more reasons to be angry, and afraid. this is unexpected and counter-intuitive, the response is to just assume they’er silly and laugh.because people are being funny. the fact that the united states elected a reality television star to presidency is funny. laughter is an excellent way to preserve your mental health.

          • Izo

            I agre that people are angry and afraid. I just think they need to stop looking for reasons to be more angry and more afraid, because they’re going to pieces. I wish I could just think they’re being silly, except there are people rioting in the streets and attacking people suspected of voting for Trump over this, while other non-Trump supporters are having nervous breakdowns and threatening suicide. I can’t really find it silly. I just find it scary that people are getting like this about a legal election, as if the world is literally going to end.

            It’s not like it’s the first time that the US elected someone based on their celebrity status and/or lack of experience. Barack Obama himself had almost no experience whatsoever – he was a first year senator who had spent most of his time as a Senator…. campaigning for President. Before that, what experience did he really have? None. And he was going up against Hillary Clinton at the time, who back then was at least running a more competent campaign and she didnt have the same criminal scandals on her. Obama had one main strength though – his cult of personality.

            We’ve also elected a Hollywood actor, Ronald Reagan (who was admittedly also a governor beforehand, but most people still recognized him as a celebrity).

            California has elected Arnold Swartzenegger as the Governator. Sonny Bono. Fred Thompson (from Law and Order). Clint Eastwood. Jesse Ventura. Jerry Springer. Shirley Temple Black. Ben Stein. Al Franken. Jack Kelly. Clay Aiken.

            Celebrities get elected all the time. I mean cmon… JERRY SPRINGER was mayor of Cincinnati. Jerry ‘Help my pre-teen daughter is out of control’ Springer. Why are we surprised that a reality star was elected President?

            I wouldnt be surprised if Trump was elected again in 2020 with like… massive minority support, simply because he said he would and people said that wouldn’t happen either and that sounded insane. Because so far every time I’ve thought something he said was not going to happen…. it winds up happening.

            Then in 2024, we will elect Kanye West.

            (okay, I tried to be a LITTLE funny, because yeah, it IS weird)

          • MarvalAlice

            i guess that’s why i turn to humor, the world is so dark right now, wallowing in misery won’t help anythng. and just because i’m laughing now doesn’t mean that i won’t take action ounce the giggles stop. some times you need aa break to clear your head;)

          • Izo

            Good enough point.

          • Arkone Axon

            I’m actually thinking of a much, much, MUCH worse joke. That Trump will be reelected in 2020 in a massive landslide… because he actually turned out to be the best president we’ve had in a century.

            And the history books will say something like, “Trump’s strategy of appointing moderately capable underlings to do all the work while he goofed off and fooled around with groupies turned out to be just what was required. His seeming inability to even comprehend basic business practices proved to be utter anathema to the military-industrial complex, which found itself unable to sway him into cooperating with its schemes. The anger of his more bigoted followers at his seeming betrayal (by refusing to condone or encourage their hate crimes) ebbed with the legalization of marijuanna and the resulting “weed wave” that spread across the nation, while the associated side effects (often referred to as “the munchie epidemic”) proved to be a vital shot in the arm of the economy. Historians remain baffled at how such an idiot could have been such an effective president, and speculation continues as to what this says for other presidents of that time period.”

          • Shweta Narayan

            wow, do you find Feral being constantly tortured hilarious too? Or is it just us real people whose pain and endangerment you think it a huge joke?

            Either way you are an objectively terrible person.

          • Arkone Axon

            Yes, yes, I am a Deplorable. Of course I voted for Johnson (because I couldn’t vote for Stein). But that was just as good as a vote for Trump, and it’s all my fault because Clinton was the messiah and it’s our fault for not realizing that being in bed with Wall Street, pushing legislation that led to the mass incarceration of black Americans in the 90s, fighting to pass laws that enriched corporations at the cost of the rapidly diminishing middle class, and the many many other things that Deplorables like me cite are all just lies and/or things that happened in spite of her. Because she could have saved us from everything, even though she was somehow too weak to have stopped all those things from happening around her and then other people making it seem as if she were responsible. She was Liberal Jesus, but the entire world was involved in a conspiracy to make her look like a lying hypocrite.

            Also, I am undoubtedly one of the Deplorables you now find yourself surrounded by, because I actually think it would be a good thing if Trump actually DOESN’T screw up. Y’know, since he’s going to be our President. Which of course means that Obama is ALSO a Deplorable, since he’s encouraging Trump to do well and is going to be helping Trump as a consultant and advisor, on the grounds that if Trump succeeds… America succeeds. No, the only decent people left are those brave souls such as yourself who know that comedy is a sin – and more importantly, it’s better this nation collapses rather than Trump ever be seen as anything other than the Devil.

          • Shweta Narayan

            Deplorable, check.

            Comfortably ignorant enough to not even be ashamed of it, check.

            Zero interest in becoming less ignorant cause you’d rather believe reassuring lies than see the truth, check.

            Bai.

          • Arkone Axon

            YES! YES! MUAHAHAH!

            *rips off the mask of human skin, revealing the hideous chitinous visage of an insectoid horror from the darkest depths, then breathes in the delicious aroma of human suffering*

            YES! FEED ME YOUR DESPAIR AND ANGUISH, MORTAL! IT PLEASES ME! MUAHAHAH!

          • Sterling Ericsson
          • Izo

            ,,, do you know what a cabinet and staff are, or what a presidential transition team is?

            Also do you realize who Peter Thiel is? Most of the people you even mentioned are NOT ‘establishment.’ A lot of even the transitional team are political outsiders, at least in part. With the exception of Pence and Sessions. I’d include Gingrich as establishment except he’s been on the outside for quite some time since he left Congress.

          • Dwight Williams

            Thiel and Pence at the same table?

            That’s going to be interesting.

          • shink55

            http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/us/politics/donald-trump-administration.html?_r=0

            That short list from the NY times seems pretty establishment friendly to me, for the most part, with a few notable exceptions (Palin for interior secretary yo). And of course his Chief of Staff is the current head of the RNC.

          • Izo

            Um…. what exactly is your concept of establishment?

            Aside from Priebus and Sessions, I don’t see what you’re seeing. Most have been retired from office for years, or were never in office, or when they did have an official position they were considered outsiders, even among the establishment.

      • Puissant

        If people supported him because he wasn’t establishment, how does that explain why they cast their votes for senators and representatives who were clearly part of the establishment?

        • MarvalAlice

          good question! maybe you should ask someone who who voted for them while thinking they are anti-establishment. it’s good to get dialog going 😀

    • pidgey

      I am actively not a Trump supporter, so don’t take it like I am, but I feel like it’s worth pointing out two things. First, the majority of people who voted for Trump didn’t do it because they thought he was a good candidate, but because Hillary was viewed as an even worse candidate. To that extent, you can pretty much blame the Democratic Party for Trump getting into office. I think a lot of Dems looked at what the Republicans were fielding and thought, “hey, they’ve got no one who can make a serious run at the presidency, so we should run out the most politically unpalatable candidate we can, just to show those jerks their time is over” and they got super punished for what I can only call hubris.

      Secondly, I don’t believe anyone can be president and actually do the stuff Trump promised to do, so I’m not particularly worried. The president just ultimately doesn’t have that much power to change that much over the course of his term, and he has obligations toward the whole nation that he is actually incapable of ignoring. Even if he tries to implement ridiculous things like deportations, the political barriers will make it impossible. The cause for large-scale fear here is small.

      Honestly, nothing here has really changed. Whether Trump had won or lost, he would still have gotten just about as much of the vote as Clinton did, and we knew that going in. This was a game deliberately played on tight margins. The only surprise here was that there were a few hundred thousand people close to the center who got swayed a different way than expected. That is no broad indicator of the US as a whole.

      That doesn’t mean there won’t be catastrophic consequences for certain people on a personal-scale, of course, but that would have been true with any candidate. I don’t think we have cause yet to believe Trump is going to be anything but an annoyance to the country. We survived Bush and Obama, we can survive this too. And hey, if he can actually apply any of his supposed business acumen to the government to make it work more efficiently, then it won’t be ALL downside; the government is in dire need of more efficient procedures, regardless of its priorities.

      • Mechwarrior

        Trump’s business “acumen” is that he somehow manages to convince people to keep giving him money after going bankrupt six times. That’s not an admirable skill.

        • pidgey

          Ok, I understand where that’s coming from. I really do. I’m not going to fault anyone for hating on Trump.

          But I am really, really tired of partisan politics, and I’m even more tired of arguments designed to turn the discussion away from anything productive. The fact is that we are going to have a president with a whole lot of bad sides that we’re going to have to put up with for a while. But nobody is the literal antithesis of progress. Trump does have certain characteristics which can be seen as advantages, in the right light.

          For example, he’s proud of his status and success in the private sector. That ego can potentially be used to push him into doing an actually good job with reforming it. This is a realistic thing that could happen, assuming we don’t turn it into a confrontational party-war. Trump has a demonstrated skill at getting money out of rich people – that is not a bad talent for a politician to have! Downright useful, in fact. My point is, we as the American people can still direct the flow of US politics, and it can be done without resorting to turning everything into a fight between Ds and Rs. I think the past 20 years have done a pretty good job of demonstrating exactly why that particular tactic ought to be retired, in any case.

          • Mechwarrior

            What the hell is productive by pretending that Trump has traits that he’s never once demonstrated or promoting the idea that he’s somehow going to start acting in a totally different manner than he’s demonstrated? Trump started a charity that he used as his own personal fund. His skill at getting money from people has been used exclusively for his own benefit, not for wounded veterans or endangered species or promoting LGTBA rights or whatever else. He’s promising to eliminate government regulations to make things easier on lobbyists. He’s promising an isolationist policy that’s going to utterly wreck the US economy if actually followed. He’s appointing white supremacists, people who believe in LGTBA conversion therapy, and climate change deniers into key government positions. The Republican party as a whole has a platform of “oppose everything liberals do, block them at every opportunity, and shut the whole thing down if you can’t get your way by any other means.”

            President Obama spent 8 years trying to work with Republicans and all he got from it was endless opposition. His Supreme Court nomination was blocked for almost a whole year by Republicans, despite being a man who many of them had previously praised as a moderate. The ACA is a bloated mess of compromises from its original form that was specifically overhauled by Republicans in order to make it less useful.

            The fight you’re advocating not starting is something that began a long time ago, and the only thing that’s going to happen by “just getting along” is further rewarding the obstructionist party.

          • Shweta Narayan

            I think it’s just easier to go “I’m sure it’ll all be fiiine you people are overreaaaacting why can’t we all get alooong” than to rethink white supremacy :/

            There’s a fundamental laziness of thought to the “just get along with the people who want you dead” variety of moderate.

          • Shweta Narayan

            LOL “not turn this into a confrontational party-war” you’re funny! You said that like the left has the power to snap their fingers and undo the fact that the right has been doing it for years and it’s their main political strategy!

            Oh wait, you’re not joking. Here, have a read.

            I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a “more convenient season.” – Dr Martin Luther King Junior, Letter from a Birmingham Jail

            https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html

          • pidgey

            Okay, but we don’t actually HAVE to start and end every argument with “but they started it”. Sure, yes, there are legitimate grievances. And yeah, there’s definitely going to be a lot of problems trying to work with people who are actively opposed to so many things about your vision of what America ought to mean. This is not ideal, I totally get that.

            But, I mean, you can’t seriously believe that the way forward is refusing to adapt to the new political realities of the country. Or, maybe you can? I guess political gridlock has been the way things have worked for so long now that there are actually people of legal age to vote who have never seen what loyal dissent can look like. I feel sorry for the nation if we’ve actually forgotten how to do that.

            Try to look at it this way: the history of humanity is basically full to the brim with leaders who were clueless or terrible. It just isn’t something people get right very often. But history gives us examples of the tools we need to get through it. We need people who are interested in participation in government as it exists, who are willing and capable of making the best of a bad situation, rather than in undermining it and hoping that whatever replaces it is magically less corrupt.

            To get a bit metaphorical, all that ever happens when you tear down what’s around you is a race to the bottom, and Trump is already way closer to the bottom than you are, so you won’t win that race, even if you wanted to. The only thing we can do is try to build on the foundation that exists, rather than complain that the foundation sucks, because we are never going to get a better one.

          • Shweta Narayan

            As Dr King said, the white moderate “prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice”, and you’re demonstrating that beautifully.

          • pidgey

            Come on. I really hope you can see that the function of that argument is to shut down discourse, rather than enable it.

            If you have a constructive suggestion for successfully getting your way in the face of the outcome of this election, then by all means, let’s hear it. Otherwise, recriminations against everyone who has different priorities from yours is all you’ve got, and that remains as unproductive as it has always been.

          • Arkone Axon

            Dr King also pointed out that rage and hate and violence is a poor substitute for effective action. He didn’t push for riots and demonization of white people, he pushed for peacefully proving that the Jim Crow “Dixiecrats” were the bad guys despite the narrative being pushed, and appealed to white people to join him in doing the right thing, after convincing them that this was the right thing to do. If King had simply screamed at white people “You’re evil! Now give us what we want and accept that you’re evil even if you do it!” then he would NOT have succeeded. Instead, today Malcom X is respected for his convictions – but MLK is revered for his accomplishments.

          • Shweta Narayan

            “And I must say tonight that a riot is the language of the unheard. And what is it America has failed to hear?…It has failed to hear that the promises of freedom and justice have not been met. And it has failed to hear that large segments of white society are more concerned about tranquility and the status quo than about justice and humanity.”

            — Dr MLK Jr, “The Other America,” 1968

            But nice historical revisionism. If it wasn’t intended, here’s a link for more quotes you don’t get taught.

            http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/riot-language-unheard-9-mlk-quotes-mainstream-media-wont-cite

          • SJ

            It’s not at all surprising: they always have their favorite King quote ready for some “Turn the other cheek,” “Give peace a chance” type of yang, and always want to act like the more critical stuff he said never happened. It’s not unlike when religious people cherry-pick their holy texts to justify whatever fuck shit they wanted to believe in the first place.

          • Shweta Narayan

            Yeah except mostly they don’t even have quotes, just this vague “shit i remember from third grade”

            And it’s absolutely stuff most of them believe because they remember it vaguely from third grade.

          • Arkone Axon

            Yeah. I just looked through them. Most of them were either scathing criticisms of corporate greed and the exploitation of the working class, or pointing out that black people in the 1960s had good reason to feel frustrated and pissed (given that lynchings – i.e. domestic terrorist activity – were still a very real occurrence). Otherwise he’s not talking about hating white people, he’s complaining about the frustration of convincing them that yes, things really ARE that bad.

            Which is how he ultimately succeeded; he proved that things really WERE that bad. He showed the “moderates” (i.e. the majority of people who fail to fall into a given extreme) that the media and government were lying and that the southern blacks were telling the truth. After which the moderates sided with the civil rights movement and change was inevitable. That is how King succeeded. That is how King won, destroying the collective of terrorist organizations and their state sponsors (i.e. the Klan and the Dixiecrats).

            But nice cherry picking, picking quotes of things he said and wrote in his frustration during his long, difficult struggle to imply that he actually endorsed the exact opposite of the strategies he successfully employed.

          • Shweta Narayan

            …Have you even read his writings? Just from Letter from a Birmingham Jail alone:

            “First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension
            to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action” … Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.”

            “Actually, we who engage in nonviolent direct action are not the creators of tension. We merely bring to the surface the hidden tension that is already alive. We bring it out in the open, where it can be seen and dealt with.”

            “You speak of our activity in Birmingham as extreme. At first I was rather disappointed that fellow clergymen would see my nonviolent efforts as those of an extremist.”

            If you think the REAL PROBLEM here is poc being TOO MEAAAN to white people after they overwhelmingly voted for a white supremacist who’s making appointments that have the KKK celebrating, you are EXACTLY who he’s reprimanding. If you believe he’d agree with you here, and with who you’re spending your energy arguing with, you haven’t read his work. You’re going on misrepresentation that’s been sanitized for white comfort.

            (And in before y’all bring Gandhi in, as white people love to do when people know too much about MLK to believe you, allow me to note that Gandhi was an antiblack, classist, casteist misogynist who helped destroy India’s chances of actual justice, and equality by using his social power to leverage exactly the tactics you’re using now. So he’s all yours, feel free, we don’t want him.)

          • Arkone Axon

            No, the REAL PROBLEM is describing everyone who “helped get Trump in” as being a white, racist, sexist bigot. I did not vote Trump, I voted for Johnson (because I couldn’t vote for Stein), as I’ve stated repeatedly elsewhere on these threads. I refused to vote for Clinton because as bad I KNOW Trump to be (I spent a few years in Jersey), I also know that Clinton is objectively worse in almost every respect. I WANTED to vote for Bernie Sanders. Y’know, the guy who marched alongside King… who fought for civil rights and for minorities and homosexuals and against the banks and Wall Street. Instead I was told I had to vote for Clinton or else “THE DEVIL WILL WIN!” And this was the same “DEVIL INCARNATE!!!” that they had no problems with when he was winning the Republican primaries, because they wanted a weak opponent that could theoretically be beaten even by a horribly flawed candidate like Clinton.

            Also, the people who DID vote for Trump (as I did not) include not just whites… but also women, blacks, hispanics… and also asians and the other “forgotten” groups that don’t get mentioned because they’re not as easily politicized for race baiting purposes. People who decided to do with their votes what you’re lauding the rioters for doing with improvised weapons and gasoline; they decided to try to tear it all down and send a message about how they’d had enough. The only two differences are that 1: they didn’t do it by attacking other people and engaging in physical violence, and 2: they ACTUALLY VOTED (whereas it’s turning out that a lot of the rioters that were arrested did… not vote last week. They’re eager to scream and raze now, but where were they when it was time to push the buttons and count their votes?).

          • shink55

            Nah, we absolutely need people who are willing to put themselves on the line and relentlessly push for the progress they want. These people will always be frustrated, always be partisan, always be angry because as Dr. King mentioned, to win they’ve gotta push the middle, and pushing the middle is hard. The middle is happy and content, it doesn’t want to move. But it has to, because the reality of the world is that it changes a lot, and changes fairly quickly, these extremists help us keep up. In everything from technological change to the new social realities created by social media, we need extremists who understand it to push us into policies that make sense.

            The same is true for social issues. These extremists remind society to have a conscience, to be fair. It’s important to be fair because when they get angry enough, those society doesn’t treat fairly decide to burn everything, and we get ourselves a self proclaimed fascist in charge of a party that’s made it’s mark by getting more extreme at every turn. This said society as a whole should never give extremists everything they want. Extremists by necessity tend to have tunnel vision, and their utopias tend to leave others in a position of anger extreme enough to go burn everything. Then of course we have white supremacists, extremists so used to getting there own way that losing ground at all makes them respond by trying to burn everything. We need those guys reined in for the betterment of society as a whole, and that fight has been going on for centuries.

            The other half of this arguments rests on the success of the corporate right over the last few decades. They don’t let up, they don’t get discouraged, they just keep sending supremely highly paid lobbyists to Washington year in year out, they keep giving money to candidates, slowly inching their way to their goals over the course of decades. Set backs like tax increases or minimum wage increases don’t make them give up, much to the contrary when they think they might lose the coffers really open and they pour millions of dollars into creating media spin and send all their best people to go fight it. Relentless, endless pressure is how you change society and craft it into your image.

            So no, we need extremists, and we need them to push the rest of us unceasingly because while a lot of what extremists want is usually not good for society as a whole, most groups of extremists generally have something to offer that’s useful or necessary for the well being of society. The right wing corporate movement has created massively increasing inequality but their agenda is also lifting millions out of poverty. the trans rights groups have a purity streak that’s every bit as destructive and knowledge denying as anything the right has to offer on it’s more extreme edges, but they also offer a world of greater liberty and a potential benefit to us all as trans people become as free as the rest of us to better society through the exercising of that liberty. Such it is for most all extremist groups. Well, except white supremacists, if they ever had redeeming qualities they’ve been getting their way for so long that it’s become incorporated into the heart and soul of society and is no longer associated with them,

          • pidgey

            So, you’re saying that all the extremism in party movements makes living in the middle more viable? I guess I can understand that perspective, but the actual point I’ve been trying to make isn’t even that trying to move the middle is bad. The argument I’ve been trying to make is that people can accomplish their goals without treating everyone who doesn’t share their priorities as opponents. That really doesn’t have much at all to do with centrism vs extremism.

            Look at Alison in the current arc of the comic, for a surprisingly pertinent example. She could have chosen a path that didn’t require her to treat Max like an opponent, and because she did, bad things are going to happen. This is practically an allegory for the Democratic party’s history and fate.

    • Arkone Axon

      Mainly because (as I stated in my own comment today) Donald Trump embodies what I call the East Coast Attitude. In other words… he’s full of hot air.

      Also, since winning the election he has quietly dropped his talk about a wall, he has quietly dropped his pro-life stance, and to top it off he had a long meeting with Obama and said he’s planning to have Obama stick around as a “consulting president.” Meaning… another four years of Obama, kind of.

      (Which makes sense, since one of the things he said that I DO believe he meant is “I’m going to make other people do the work as much as possible.” Which is how he’s “managed” his more successful businesses, in fact – they tend to do best when he’s only the figurehead and other people make the decisions)

      • Lysiuj

        Are you telling me he’s basically keeping Obama around as president?
        Wow, I could almost believe this will turn out all right.

        • Izo

          He actually did say something along those lines after his meeting with Obama during the initial transfer of power, where he’s first included in the daily Presidential briefs.

        • Insanenoodlyguy

          I mean, it won’t go that well either. But the thing a lot of people didn’t realize is that Donald Trump is a GREAT politician. He’s already learned to lie so well.

          So it won’t be that he has a change of heart and becomes a great man, so much as… he doesn’t care. That’s not a good thing, but it does mean he won’t do insane things because, say, “God” needs him to. Don’t get me wrong, this is not great, healthcare is probably royally fucked for a long time coming, who knows what’s goign to happen with the court, but I doubt he’s ever seriously going to persue putting Hillary in jail or build any real wall. He might build something, but it won’t be the impenetrable border paid for by mexico.

          • Mechwarrior

            The problem isn’t that he’s also unlikely to do anything to reign in the theocrats in Congress as they try to dismantle women’s reproductive rights, gut education, or eliminate anti-discrimination protections for people based on race, gender, and sexual orientation.

          • Insanenoodlyguy

            Well, can’t argue with that.

          • Shweta Narayan

            The other problem is that a person who doesn’t care will switch his positions based on *any* pressure. We know he’s a panderer. But the thing is, he will pander to *whoever* is being loudest atm.

            And the left is really good at being complacent and not doing things, past brief shows of outrage. So yeah. Of *course* he’s swinging left right now, question is what will he do the moment we quiet down and stop paying attention.

    • baklazhan

      Not much you can say to that. Just to wait, and to hope that–against all odds–they’re right. We will surely find out in time.

    • Retrikaethan

      quite frankly, people make up far stupider excuses to defend their religious beliefs/texts. it’s utter insanity and completely terrifying that these people apparently outnumber everyone else.

      • shink55

        They don’t, Trump won cause Hillary wasn’t an attractive candidate. She got about 5 million less votes then Obama did in 2012, Trump only got a few hundred thousand more then Romney did, and still lost the popular vote.

    • Because anyone can go back a few years and see that Trump’s positions changed in a lightning-fast manner.

      He was pandering to the GOP base.

      That being said, I didn’t vote for him, but I didn’t vote for Hillary, either; I didn’t see any difference, and if we’re going to have a megalomaniacal poltroon leading the country, I’d just as soon it was a Republican on the off-chance that we might get a decent alternative in 2020.

      • Akiva

        that’s fine and comforting to anyone who’s white, straight, cis, christian, male, middle or upper class, and doesn’t depend on having healthcare. have fun surfing out the next four years like the Too Cool Dude you are, the rest of us are going to be over here dying.

        • Who said that I was any or all of those things? Hey, I can’t get health insurance without the PPACA.

          But I also have a son in the Marines, and Hillary was about to start World War 3 to distract from her corruption in order to win a presidential election.

          Trump has already flipped back on gay marriage, so the straight and cis (I love this new SJW insult to throw around; what, now only the 0.2% of the population that is trans is allowed to speak?!) bit went out the window.

          On everything else, exactly how was Clinton going to be any better? She was no friend to minorities; she was opposed to gay marriage until AFTER the Supreme Court made it legal; she helped start the whole “faith-based initiative” crap; and her biggest priority was more tax cuts for rich people.

          As for male, I am, although I have no more hope that Trump will address any issues facing men today than I did that Clinton would do so.

  • J4n1

    I’m a straight white male living in the other side of the planet, and looming future of President Trump fills me with existential terror.
    I can only imagine what it feels like to people living in the US, especially those who are not white, straight or male.

  • Jeremy Cliff Armstrong

    You people do know Hillary was against gay marriage, right? I don’t think she’s the great defender of LGBT rights people here think she is. Don’t assume just cause a candidate is not openly bigoted and is a member of the historically minority-friendly party that they automatically share your point of view. Educate yourselves.

    • Lysiuj

      Nonetheless, a lot of people are rightly afraid of a culture of hatred and bigotry that may soon be strengthened.

      • Jeremy Cliff Armstrong

        Yeah… that scares me too. :-/

      • Shweta Narayan

        Is already. Hate crimes are up.

        • Lysiuj

          Sad upvote… stay safe.

    • I Am Helpy

      “Against gay marriage” is not the same as thinking she (correctly) didn’t think it could get passed decades ago.

      There is LITERALLY NO EXCUSE for not supporting Hillary Clinton in 2016.

      • Rumble in the Tumble

        >LITERALLY NO EXCUSE
        Well, I dunno

        Not wanting to start World War III with Syria and Russia seems to be a good reason, for example :^)

        • Gray

          Syria is a non-country with no viable remaining government forces of it’s own, operating as a vassal state of the RSU (Restored Soviet Union). You’re talking about war with Russia.

          You’re also basically suggesting that the only way to avoid World War 3, is to let Putin’s RSU violently annex any country they like (Georgia, Ukraine, Syria) with no opposition from the rest of the world. If that’s the case, then World War 3 has already started, and you want to surrender.

          Trump’s history and rhetoric would mark him as in favour of the ‘American Soviet Socialist Republic’. Which is insane.

          • Weatherheight

            One of my favorite thoughts from Steven Brust’s Jhereg series goes a little something like this:

            It is the defender who begins the war.
            The aggressor wants to avoid war at all costs – war implies resistance and the aggressor wants to make gains and avoid anyone standing against them.
            The target who stands up and fights back becomes the defender, and they who defend begins the war.

            Vladimir Putin is cut from the same cloth that Our New Leader in that both have taken advantage of feelings of “things were better before” and “let’s make our country great again.”

            What so many Americans have forgotten is how we were living a mere 50 years ago. Color TV, FM Radio, and the Touch Tone phone were all just getting started. Cell phones, personal computers, and the Internet were 20 years or more away. Credit Card debt was practically non-existent for most US citizens in 1966, since it wasn’t until 1958 that revolving debt became available. Student Loans were just becoming available to the general public at large. Smallpox and Polio vaccines were still pro-forma at that time in the US. Medicare and Medicaid were just getting started in 1966, being passed into law the year before.

            I could go on, and the providence of some of these things is quite debatable, but Americans have an exceptionally high standard of living compared to even 50 years ago – and that’s just in terms of material wealth. Maybe we could spend some time doing with fewer luxuries and learn to appreciate the bounty we have.

            And I type this on my personal computer via the internet – I am quite aware of the ironic hypocrisy here. 😀

          • You get an upvote for the reference to Dragon…

            That said, while I agree that luxuries are just that, I am also aware that they have developed in direct relation to things that really are not luxuries. So, yeah, we might be able to survive with more limited access to the internet, for example, but wouldn’t we be better served by trying to increase the access to luxuries across the board instead of artificially limiting access to a lower level?

          • Weatherheight

            Well said. 😀

          • Definitely not disagreeing with this idea; I just happen to believe that a lot of the things we dismissively write off as unnecessary luxuries may also serve as part of the solution to those bare necessities that are so fundamentally lacking for so many people.

          • Weatherheight

            This is also my hope.

        • Santiago Tórtora

          Trump is more likely to get a World War started with his isolationist policies. Without the protection of the Pax Americana, European countries will have to spend money to grow their own military power, which might start an arms race.

          • crazy j

            Russia already has them outnumbered and these “allies” of ours are more then willing to capitulate to the dictates of Moscow.

          • Rubbish. Come back when you’ve got a clue.

          • crazy j

            The U.S. has more soldiers stationed in Ft Bliss TX then there are in the entire German Army.

          • I was referring to the insulting, if not bigotted: ” these “allies” of ours are more then willing to capitulate to the dictates of Moscow.”

            Our alleged willingness to capitulate to Moscow is rather undermined by the longstanding rotation of European forces through the Baltic states, and now Romania. Meanwhile all those troops in Fortn Bliss? They’d be the ones who used to be in Kaserne’s in Fulda and the like.

            1988
            USAR 771,847
            USN 592,570 USMC

            197,350 USAF

            576,446
            2,138,213

          • crazy j

            The same NATO allies were constantly given the soft jobs in Afghanistan. The Germans were responsible for RC North. Taliban are now back in Konduz. The Brits were responsible for only one damned province, that place ended up such a disaster we had to replace them with Marines. The US constantly has to make appeals to NATO nation’s to send more personnel.

            Sure France, UK, Germany, all contribute Special Forces for the war effort, but these groups are small and located on bases we are running. Exactly how many divisions has either France, Germany, or Britain deployed since 2001? In total troop commitments between all Allied Powers in Afghanistan, it usually comes down to the US, countries that used to be apart of the Warsaw Pact, and followed by a distant third by everybody else.

            And speaking of Defense cuts, here is this little tid bit out of Great Britain:
            http://www.spectator.co.uk/2015/11/britains-armed-forces-no-longer-have-the-resources-for-a-major-war/ The UK no longer has the ability to fight a major war. What is the exact message you are sending to Moscow when you guys do this type of stuff? All of the bluster about standing up to the Kremlin is nothing more than sabre rattling, and if things get really bad, the Americans will save us.

          • NATO has an ongoing reinforcement of the peripheral NATO states such as the Baltics because of the Russian threat, that’s not just US troops, but British, French, German etc. Trump’s whittering about isolationism and making NATO pay for US support actually increases the risk of Russia trying to cross the tripwire.

          • Izo

            Need to mention that Trumpdoes not have isolationist policies – he has trade policies, which are by its very nature not isolationist. Neither candidate was an isolationist. And Hillary was poised to go to war with Russia. She even mentioned this in one of the debates, and a general had said, under oath, that the only way to implement what she was saying was war with Russia. If we were lucky, a cold war. If we were unlucky, a hot war, which would not take very long. Since both sides have nuclear weapons.

          • Santiago Tórtora

            Trump wants to build a literal wall, reject that Trans-Pacific deal and renegotiate NAFTA so that factories can be profitable again. His trade policies are very isolationist or at least protectionist.

            He also said that the US is spending too much money on defending NATO and the other countries should defend themselves instead of relying on the US. That’s the sort of thing that can start an arms race.

            By war with Russia you mean that time Hillary said she planning to put a no-fly zone over Syria, right? She clarified later on that she meant she planned to do that with Russian cooperation, and would never do it against their wishes.

          • Izo

            “Trump wants to build a literal wall, reject that Trans-Pacific deal and renegotiate NAFTA so that factories can be profitable again. His trade policies are very isolationist or at least protectionist.”

            He wants to build a wall to prevent illegal immigrants from entering, not to prevent trade with Mexico. And he wants to renegotiate NAFTA, which means he wants the trade deal to be more fair to the United States. That means he wants trade where it’s profitable to the US. That doesn’t mean he doesnt want trade at all. Having trade where it’s not profitable is stupid. Trump actually has a history of making good trade deals with these countries, in fact, regardless of what one might think of his political acumen.

            “He also said that the US is spending too much money on defending NATO”

            That’s probably because we are, in fact, spending too much money on defending NATO with NATO nations not following through on their contractual obligations.

            “and the other countries should defend themselves instead of relying on the US. That’s the sort of thing that can start an arms race.”

            Or it’s the type of thing that can force the other countries to start meeting their NATO contractual obligations if they want the US to keep footing the majority of the bill. Trump’s a negotiator, and he tends to negotiate from positions of strength. Again, not talking about his political ability – I’m talking about his ability to make deals, which he has several decades of, mostly quite successful.

            “By war with Russia you mean that time Hillary said she planning to put a no-fly zone over Syria, right?”

            No, I mean where Hillary in a speech threatened to use Military power against Russia if Moscow was even SUSPECTED of being involved in hacking or cyberattacks. Putin wound up saying if Hillary was president, Russia would be closing off diplomatic ties with the US. The thing with Syria was just additional fuel for the fire.

            Here’s a direct quote from Hillary:

            Hillary Clinton: “You’ve seen the reports. Russia’s hacked into a lot of things, China’s hacked into a lot of things. Russia even hacked into the Democratic National Committee. Maybe even some state election systems? So we gotta step up our game. Make sure we are well defended and make sure we are able to take the fight to those who go after us. As president I will make it clear that the United States will treat cyber attacks just like any other attack. We will be ready with serious political, economic and military responses.“

            Military responses. With Russia. This was even stated in the debate.

        • Mechwarrior

          “Not wanting to start a war with Russia”.

          Neville Chamberlain didn’t want to start a war with Germany. How well did that work?

          • In defence of Chamberlain, there’s a strong argument he thought war was inevitable and was buying us the couple of years we needed to complete rearmament.

            Of course he did that by selling Czechoslovakia down the river.

            Actually there are parallels here with Alison and Max.

          • Izo

            Well Chamberlain also capitulated to German aggression. That’s why it did not work out for him.

          • Mechwarrior

            Meanwhile, Republicans want to suck up to the authoritarian ex-KGB manly man in Russia because he’s able to crush civil rights and be militant in ways they can only dream of.

          • Izo

            1) I don’t see where the Repubs have been sucking up to Putin at all. Are you advocating a war? With Russia?
            2) Where were the Dems NOT capitulating to Putin when he basically invaded Crimea and crushed civil rights and autonomy there? I don’t really think the Dems have much of a way to say they were on the right side of history there.

          • Mechwarrior

            Dude, if you haven’t seen how pro-Putin Republicans have been for the last few years, you haven’t been paying attention. They openly praised him for the anti-gay laws he passed, his crackdowns on the free press, and his actions in Syria.

          • Izo

            Actually I saw a lot of Republicans being very hawkish about wanting to make Obama do something about what Putin was doing in Crimea, and Obama didn’t do anything. So no, I saw the exact opposite of what you’re saying. If any Republicans did praise Putin, they’re in the massive minority, and probably twits.

          • Tsapki

            You do recall Republicans had a very strong “whatever Obama does, we need to hate it and disagree with it no matter what it is” vibe going? Their whole modus operandi for those eight years were obstruct, smear, and slow him down. Do you recall at least how they have been stonewalling his placing of a new Supreme Court Judge for the better part of a year because they wanted to let a Republican make the call?

          • Izo

            Uh… yeah? (btw, actually 6 years, since the first two years they couldnt do squat). That doesn’t change that they didn’t like Putin, or change that they were very hawkish in their mentality. They wanted a strong response to Putin, and would have had that mentality whether or not Obama had one.

            If Obama actually stood up to Putin, the Republicans wouldn’t have complained about that. They also wouldn’t have stopped complaining about something else. Although there were some Republicans which did not complain about it, because the Republicans are not a particularly unified body, and haven’t been for most of the Obama administration.

            None of what you just said actually refutes any of what I just said. Everything you said was a total non-sequitur.

        • I Am Helpy

          Yeah, no excuse based on real things and not right-wing smears.

        • I Am Helpy

          I mean, if you honestly think Clinton is somehow a hawk and Trump is a candidate of peace, there’s no hope for you.

    • Shweta Narayan

      Whatever she believes, she’d never overturn it. It would be political death for her.

      The other guy chose a VP who wants to send gay teens to conversion therapy. IE protracted abuse that drives a lot of them to suicide.

      There’s a reason queer kids are a LOT more scared of that atm, and if you’re not already aware of how radically different those two positions are, perhaps educate yourself on the matter.

    • Danygalw

      The quote people bring out for her being anti-gay marriage is from the time when she was arguing against enshrining man-woman marriage in your constitution.
      So. You know. Context.

    • SJ

      I”m pretty sure that there was no threat of Clinton appointing a justice to the SCOTUS that would have overturned any progressive rulings, including many here recently that declared several anti-LGBT laws to be unconstitutional.

      Believe whatever you want about Clinton’s personal stance on SSM, I’ll bet you all the money that she would never have nominated a SCOTUS justice that would have put that in jeopardy. Trump, on the other hand…?

      • Izo

        I’m pretty sure that Trump has already made public a list of his SCOTUS picks, months before the election.

        • SJ

          That’s not a refutation.

          • Izo

            Well it’s a partial refutation if you look at some of the picks.

    • srkelly08

      No point comparing Trump to Clinton anymore. The race is over. Now we can talk about him without muddling the conversation with whether he’s better or worse than anyone else. Trump is a vile man on his own, and unworthy of the Presidency.

  • I just went to youtube to watch Daily Show bits about Trump in the hope of some laughs. Now, they’re just depressing.

  • Arklyte

    And we thought that Hitler and Stalin were bad. Who could have known that Trump is the Satan himself?
    Don’t you, people, go a “LITTLE” over the top with assumptions?

    • Lysiuj

      Speaking of going over the top, you do remember that there’s a middle ground between “this person is bad” and “this person is literally Hitler”?

      • Shweta Narayan

        Though also, Holocaust survivors have been saying for months that his methods remind them of Hitler’s in the mid-30s.

        • Lysiuj

          Fucking hell

        • Dwight Williams

          Mike Godwin (yes, that Godwin), though not a Holocaust survivor himself, did have some recent thoughts of his own to share about people who know the history making informed comparisons under the present circumstances…mainly that he has no qualms about letting such comparisons stand. At all.

          • Lysiuj

            In other words, a Holocaust survivor doesn’t invoke Godwin’s Law, because they know, personally, what they’re talking about?

          • Dwight Williams

            Exactly.

          • Glad to hear that, because when UK disabled people started pointing out that the Tories were using exactly the same kind of language to demonise us that the Nazis had, people pooh-poohed it and cited Godwin’s Law. The problem was if you actually know your Nazi history, there absolutely were direct parallels (and I saw at least one rabbi acknowledging that), but so few people actually know the history, especially about what led up to Aktion T4. Or even that there was an Aktion T4 before there was a Holocaust.

          • Dwight Williams

            I’d forgotten about “Aktion T4” by that name, but remembered from history classes and independent study that the like had existed. Thank you for the memory-refresher.

    • Replace “Muslim” with “Jew” and “Mexican” with “Slavic people”, does that remind you of anyone. There’s also the anti-intellectual streak that both share, a claim that they will make it great again, a violent outlook, etc.

      • Lysiuj

        “Would you relax? Nothing bad is going to happen.”

        “We’ve learned our lesson, we can’t let horrible people lead us to horrible outcomes.”

        “Would you relax? Nothing bad is going to happen.”

      • Arklyte

        Yeah, every other politician. How exactly the lifes of Muslims improoved during Obama’s times? What was Hillary going to do? Shut down your imperialistic policy that was going on since the start of 20th century(and even beofre that)? Ban use of oil in your country? Take back all the weapons and training that were provided to those who had become terrorists once political focus changed and moral compromise wasn’t profitable anymore? I’m listening!
        P.S.: one more attempt to joke/angle point of view about Hitler and what he had done to my country and how you compare your “universal tragedy” to it… and sadly we’re just two annonymous persons on the web and you’re allowed to say whatever you like with no repercussions.

        • Newbie

          I’m…not an expert on this topic, I won’t even pretend I have solutions to our problems, but to my understanding the train of thought wasn’t so much “Hillary will end islamophobia and make things better for Muslims” as it was “Trump will make it all much worse.”
          At this point though, what’s done is done and all we can do is wait and hope that if/when the other shoe drops it won’t drop too hard.

    • I Am Helpy

      Sure, he wants to introduce ethnic, religious, and gender-based cleansing to America, but why overreact?

      /snark

      • Arklyte

        OMG, you need to run from this terrible country when this person alone will decide everything unlike all who have taken position before! Вы ребята совсем уже зажрались:

      • Lostman

        Having read World War Z? read the part of the great panic.

  • Manuel Simone

    I’m not even american but I feel sorry for poor american people who don’t like this narcissist, stupid and possible fascist clown. But lets just hope that there’s not going to be a civil war also this clown will not do whatever he said he’ll do, usual the barking dog never bites (anyway, a thing is for sure, he can’t deport people and neither he can legalize rape/sexual harassment). I’ll pray for you all and may nothing bad happen to you.

    • Lysiuj

      Unfortunately he can do plenty… I doubt he’ll manage to legalize rape but there’s nothing to stop him deporting people.

      • Rumble in the Tumble

        Oh no, he’ll deport illegal immigrants, the devil!

        The exact same thing Obama did before him!

        http://www.snopes.com/obama-deported-more-people/

        How could he even DARE to do such a thing!

        • Lysiuj

          Ah yes, those “illegal” people… how wrong of me to care about their wellbeing…
          You did notice I wrote that previous administrations did the same right? And before you ask, yes Clinton would have done the same too. There’s still every reason to worry that Trump will do worse.

          • Rumble in the Tumble

            There’s a certain point where you need to start to look for yourself, before you can start looking out for others.

            Bear with me while I construe a shitty metaphore, but ~of course~ it’s a good thing to help out people who got the short end of the stick. Volunteer in shelters, organise charities, donate money, all that. I just don’t believe you should accept and carry on with people breaking into your home and deciding to squat there.

            Apart from that,
            >You did notice I wrote that previous administrations did the same right?
            And before you ask, yes Clinton would have done the same too.
            So, if everybody does it, why is Trump the literal Hitler here?
            >There’s still every reason to worry that Trump will do worse.
            Like what? Gas chambers? Gulags in Alaska? Straight up death squads, hunting ~illegals~ on the streets?

            I understand that your candidate lost, and surely there will be changes that you won’t approve of (but the other half of America will), but you’re writing up an Apocalypse here. Trump is a president, not the Emperor of Mankind.

          • Gray

            If the other half of America approve of a racist, sexist, homophobic, science denying, worker-suppressing, repeat-fraudster, incestuous, ADMITTED RAPIST; then this might actually be an apocalypse.

          • Lysiuj

            A. Clinton wasn’t my candidate, but I still think Trump will be worse.
            B. Let me answer your not-so-shitty metaphor with shitty reality – if you break into every house in your neighborhood, steal their things, make them your slaves, send your friends in to rule those families and send you their paychecks, and kill a lot of your neighbors for good measure, and then you build yourself a real nice house with the money you made from slavery and murder… then you can’t very well act like the victim when some of the neighbors try to sneak into your house so they can live a little better after you ruined their houses.

          • Incendax

            Because Trump actually made it part of his campaign platform, and whipped up / inspired other racist, sexist people to feel justified and normalized. Even if Trump does none of these things, he is responsible for the people who think they can now advance their hateful agendas.

          • crazy j

            Notice how there is no rage directed at these third world sewers people are trying to leave. When have you ever seen a Progressive complain about Mexico needing to get its act together?

          • palmvos

            what good would it do? seriously. story-
            some years ago I was talking to a guy with a PhD in a technical field who was from Venezuela about what it was like to live in Venezuela. he ended with a cry that the United States should ‘do something’ about Chavez. I asked what he wanted us to do, He couldn’t come up with an answer. I suggested that all that could be done was an invasion, and asked if that’s what he wanted. he didn’t have an answer. remember all the debate about what Alison did to Max? do you see any parallels?

          • crazy j

            I maybe a little bit older then you, that’s why I still remember all the protests against South Africa and it’s apartheid government.

          • palmvos

            and the Cuba, Venezuela, and North Korea ones did so well…

          • crazy j

            It got Mandela out of jail, didn’t it?

      • Walter

        You doubt he’ll “manage to legalize rape”?

        *blink*

        uh….I don’t think he is trying to do that. I mean, I agree with you that that isn’t something that a president can do, but I don’t think anyone, anywhere, is trying to legalize rape. Maybe I’m too optimistic, but I think you are wrong about this.

        • Lysiuj

          Well I was just replying to Manuel’s examples. But yeah, I wouldn’t put it past him, if he thought he could get away with it. He’s already the worst example of rapists, primarily men, who can go on with their lives and suffer nothing, and even achieve great success, even after everyone knows they’re serial rapists. You really don’t think he’d want to make it easier for himself and his ilk?

  • Andi Pegler

    My love to you all, from Australia xo

  • Shweta Narayan

    Thank you, Molly and Brennan. And please take care of yourselves! Your voices matter, but that’s also true of everything else about you.

  • Mira Thompson

    Thank you so much for posting this, and for the generally thought provoking nature of this comic. It has always been enjoyable that both the comic and the commenters are thoughtful and respectful of the content and each other.

    I am devastated by the outcome of this election. It makes me feel as though the world of hate has grown over my country; it makes me see that I isolated myself from what is clearly a reality that almost half of my country who seek a return to the “good old days” through a rhetoric of racism, bigotry, xenophobia, and religious dogmatism. Before Wednesday morning, I thought this was an impotent rage from a minority (because I deliberately protect myself from it and genuinely believed that the majority of people are better than this).

    There are many things to blame for this insurgence of hateful rage at the non-white, non-male, non-christian population. But at the heart of everything, I think that its important to understand that people everywhere want a simple and fast solution to what they perceive as problems. It is easier to blame another group of individuals for ones socioeconomic plight. It is easier to claim that things were better “back in the day” when minorities were disenfranchised. It is easier to shout and rage than try and find a solution. It is easier to claim that a system is “rigged” and needs to be brought down than to do the long, hard, slogging work to try and fix it. But democracy is not EASY. It is hearing a plethora of voices and finding compromise. Compromise is not easy, it means that progress is slow and difficult. True change is achieved only incrementally and often painfully. Now, more than ever, it is important to continue fighting as Molly and Brennan suggest.

    It is the time to stay political, to stay active, to keep voicing opinions that challenge privilege, misogyny, racism, xenophobia, and hate. Vaclav Havel, a Czech playwright, philosopher, and political dissident against the totalitarian Soviet regime and first president of Czechoslovakia after the collapse of the USSR in 1989, wrote The Power of the the Powerless. While it regards political activity against what he calls the post-totalitarian state, which is not what the US confronts, his notion of “living in truth” remains salient. Living in truth entails that every individual speak out against infringements on rights, improper execution of the legal system, and standing up for the rights of others. I take some comfort and inspirations from his words and I share them with you.

    “The profound crisis of human identity brought on by living within a lie, a crisis which in turn makes such a life possible, certainly possesses a moral dimension as well; it appears, among other things, as a deep moral crisis in society. A person who has been seduced by the consumer value system, whose identity is dissolved in an amalgam of the accouterments of mass civilization, and who has no roots in the order of being, no sense of responsibility for anything higher than his own personal survival, is a demoralized person. The system depends on this demoralization, deepens it, is in fact a projection of it into society.

    Living within the truth, as humanity’s revolt against an enforced position, is, on the contrary, an attempt to regain control over one’s own sense of responsibility. In other words, it is clearly a moral act, not only because one must pay so dearly for it, but principally because it is not self-serving: the risk may bring rewards in the form of a general amelioration in the situation, or it may not.”

  • Tim Hundley

    I love you two. I am so, so sorry for what has happened.

  • Guy

    I sympathise. I am terrified, not least because the global outcomes for human rights and our shared environment are going to be even more tragic, and in the latter case irreversible, than the more local outcomes of Brexit (I’m in the UK). Of even more alarm is the near-term possibility of armed conflict in Eastern Europe.

    Good luck to all of us, and don’t forget to look away from the unfolding shitshow sometimes and remember what and who you love and why life is worth living.

    And I love this comic: it’s the only time I’ve ever found anything on a par with Paul Chadwick’s Concrete for thoughtfulness. Keep up the good work Molly and Brennan.

  • jandesf

    Sympathies from Brazil. Hate speech won our elections this year as well. We’ll have a homophobic, myscoginist, corrupt priest as the mayor of Rio de Janeiro for the next 4 years.

    <3

    • Guilherme Carvalho

      Not to mention an illegitimate government altogether that attained power through a coup.

      • jandesf

        And there’s that. 2016 elections sucked and 2014 elections were thrown out the window. =(

  • Spectacles

    Thank you so much, Molly and Brennan. What you do here is amazing, powerful, and though-provoking in a way I think I rarely get to see in media. I haven’t got much to give besides my verbal support, and I rarely comment on anything due to anxiety, but I want you to know that I’m right beside you guys. Please take care of yourselves, and I look forward to the day of your return to this absolutely relevant story, whenever that may be.

  • Ordinary Tree

    While I can’t comment on the other points you mentioned, I can say that I don’t believe he is going to attack the LGBTQ community:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gK8XzRKOem8

    But, I’m not a clairvoyant. Good luck.

    • Mechwarrior

      He personally isn’t likely to attack it. But he’s also equally unlikely to bother sticking up for LGTBQA rights when the very, very anti-LGTBQA members of Congress start trying to reinstate DOMA, ban LGTBQs from the military, mandate conversion therapy…

      • Izo

        Um… again – not a Trump supporter but… he already has stuck up for LGBTQ rights in the past, in his own businesses.

        • Mechwarrior

          Trump’s pick for VP wants to institute conversion therapy for LGTBQ people. His staff picks are full of people for similar beliefs. Excuse me if, as someone who identifies as transgender, I’m not remotely comforted by the fact that Trump once was pro-LGTBQ at some point in the past.

          • Izo

            No one votes for a President based on the VP pick. And Trump doesn’t listen to Pence. He hasnt even listened to him in the campaign.

            And he’s not someone who ‘once’ was pro-LGBTQ. He’s said he was even in the campaign. Repeatedly. You don’t have to be comforted, but I don’t think you have to worry about him bringing forward laws to curtail your rights either. He hasnt made any staff picks yet btw, so I’m not sure what you’re talking about there.

          • Mechwarrior

            Trump also said he wasn’t a racist repeatedly during the campaign, and I don’t believe him on that subject either. The president doesn’t bring forward laws. Congress does. And I don’t think that he’s going to bother threatening to veto any new laws that legalize LGTBQ discrimination, outlaw gay marriage, or otherwise trample the rights of LGTBQ Americans, especially since they’ll probably also include bylines that restrict the rights of people based on gender, religion, and race while they’re at it.

          • Izo

            “The president doesn’t bring forward laws. Congress does.”

            That’s how it’s supposed to be, but that isn’t how it has been for at least the last decade or so. Not to mention the President can veto laws. And if the Repubs want to ride the President’s coattails, they need to pay heed to what he’s saying at least in part. Those who don’t risk not getting re-elected.

            “And I don’t think that he’s going to bother threatening to veto any new laws that legalize LGTBQ discrimination,”

            I doubt there’s going to be laws that legalize LGBTQ discrimination. The Repubs are sort of under the microscope right now to prove that they’re actually going to be better than the Dems were when they were in power. They are going to get rid of Obamacare, although I suspect they’re going to put another plan in place involving removing the blocks between buying insurance outside of your own state in order to create competition and reduce prices that way. Pretty sure they’ll be putting in laws to increase the vetting process for legal immigration. Other than that, I’m not sure what they’ll do. But I think people are getting a bit into panic mode.

            “outlaw gay marriage,”
            They won’t do this either, mainly because of how many states have gay marriage on the books already. The Bill of Rights alone (specifically the 10th amendment – the one that Republicans like to point to when talking about state rights) guarantees that the Federal Government cannot make laws that override state laws if the federal laws offer LESS freedom to the citizens – they can only override state laws if it offers MORE freedom to the citizens. That’s why the Federal Minimum Wage overrides only states that offer LESS than the federal minimum wage – it doesn’t stop states from offering higher minimum wages, for example.

            ” they’ll probably also include bylines that restrict the rights of people based on gender, religion, and race while they’re at it.”

            Actually they can’t do that either. It’s one of the few things that even the most conservative and strict constitutionalist of justices have said are not allowed as discrimination when it comes to government action.

    • Walter

      I kind of was impressed with Trump on LBGT stuff. *ducks*. Let me explain.

      Like, his idea guy is Peter Thiel, right? And he went up to Trump’s convention, literally the Republican National Convention, and dude got a standing ovation. It was such a weird feeling, Team Red giving it up for Peter Thiel. I think that matters. I think minds changed, in the place where they needed to change most.

      I’ve kind of lived my life understanding that the Reps would always be vs. not het folks. Trump is his own deal though, and maybe he doesn’t share the beliefs of past rep leaders? Maybe Trump Reps don’t have to be homophobic? Would be nice if that were the case.

      • SJ

        I’ve kind of lived my life understanding that the Reps would always be vs. not het folks. Trump is his own deal though, and maybe he doesn’t share the beliefs of past rep leaders? Maybe Trump Reps don’t have to be homophobic? Would be nice if that were the case.

        … Except that it matters relatively little whether he believes it.

        Hillary Clinton is, allegedly (according to @jeremycliffarmstrong:disqus ), anti-SSM, but she would never in a million years have appointed any justices that would have been a threat to overturn DOMA. Whereas Trump may be pro-SSM, but is a very high risk of appointing justices who would do exactly that. We may very well see Trump get on camera and proclaim himself to be pro-LGBTQ. You know what I’m willing to bet that we won’t see? Trump sign a bill into law that improves the quality of life for LGBTQ people.

        Just like I’m sure that we’ll never see Trump address the nation and publicly state that he hates black people, but I’m equally sure that he’ll never outlaw voter suppression, will support bills that increase criminal penalties for non-violent offenses that disproportionally affect POC, and will likely (at Ryan and Giuliani’s insistence) reinstate stop-and-frisk.

        • Izo

          I might have missed this in the thread, but what is SSM?

          • palmvos

            Same Sex Marriage.

          • Izo

            I might have missed where Trump said he was against that? Seriously… when did he say he (Trump) was against that?

          • palmvos

            I was answering what SSM is. I have noticed more than one person all but begging for specific examples of what trump has said against LGBT and seen a lack of links provided.

          • SJ

            I didn’t call Trump anti-LGBTQ; I called him racist and sexist, and I stand behind that, one hundred percent. What I said was that it doesn’t matter whether Trump is privately anti-SSM any more than it matters if Clinton is, because Clinton would not have appointed any justices that would have threatened equality for LGBTQ people, and nobody can say for sure that Trump won’t. Clinton’s SCOTUS appointees would have been progressive-to-moderate, whereas Trump’s appointees will be moderate-to-conservative. And all we can do is hope that they’re closer to moderate.

          • palmvos

            there are other comments that DO make the LGBT claim here. I was not accusing anyone specifically of making that claim.

          • Izo

            I appreciate you answering what it is. I just don’t see where Trump’s going to end SSM though. I don’t even see where he’s ever spoken out against SSM (although Hillary Clinton had). I’m not even saying Trump hasn’t, but I don’t see any evidence of him ever doing so. In fact, I’ve seen evidence of him being rather open to the LGBTQ community on several issues, and he has people like Thiel and Jenner on his side as well. I just don’t see them siding with him because they think he’s going to crush their rights. Maybe I’m wrong, but I sure hope I’m not. I’m just not going to assume I’m wrong in the absence of evidence to the contrary.

          • SJ

            I appreciate you answering what it is. I just don’t see where Trump’s going to end SSM though. I don’t even see where he’s ever spoken out against SSM (although Hillary Clinton had)…

            In 2016?

          • Izo

            No, not in 2016. Clinton did not ever say anything anti-SSM in 2016 because she’s a political opportunist. But I don’t believe her when she says she changed her opinion. She went left only to beat Bernie, who is one of the last people you can ever attribute to being a ‘political opportunist.’ Not because her beliefs changed. Bernie had genuine support because he had genuine beliefs on the things he spoke of. At least until he was pretty much forced to support Clinton (and did so rather mutely). Trump, on the other hand, as onerous as he might be on certain things, hasn’t ever said anything against SSM or LGBTQ rights – ever- as far as I can see.

          • SJ

            No, not in 2016. Clinton did not ever say anything anti-SSM in 2016 because she’s a political opportunist. But I don’t believe her when she says she changed her opinion.

            Well, that’s convenient; that way, you don’t have to let your mind be changed by new information.

            Reminds me of back in the primaries, how Bernie Bros were quick to bring up “Super Predators” when talking about Clinton, while conveniently ignoring how Sanders had actually voted for the bill. Somehow, that was a mistake that two people were involved in, but it only stuck to one of them.

          • Izo

            “Well, that’s convenient; that way, you don’t have to let your mind be changed by new information.”

            Um… no, it just means I don’t believe Hillary any more than I believe Trump. I don’t see any ‘new information’ about Hillary except that she’s a not-very-skilled liar who nevertheless lies constantly. The main difference between the two of them in this respect is one of them had an anti-SSM belief, on the record, then claims to have changed it to garner more votes, while the other never said anything anti-SSM in the first place. I believe both of them are opportunists, but if one never said anything, I’m not going to assume they’re against SSM when his actual history shows the opposite.

            I’m also not a Bernie supporter. I’m just saying that he is not the opportunist that the others are. His economic ideas are just nuts though. It’s a moot point though, now.

            All I’m saying is I don’t think the worries that some people are having about Trump, at least on THIS particular issue, are going to actually happen. I don’t like seeing people panic. People do really bad things when they panic. I’m not even sure where the panic on this is actually coming from since he’s never said anything against LGBTQ. If he has, please, I’d really like to see the link to what he actually said, and I might change my mind then.

          • Izo

            I don’t see how Same Sex Marriage will be under fire. Once every state allows it, no federal law can override that. It would be unconstitutional. You can’t have a federal law that allows LESS freedom than the state law. Only more freedom. That’s actually long-standing precedent from more cases than I should have to tell you. It’s rather concreete law. Among both liberal and conservative justices for the last 70 years.

            Once states started allowing same sex marriage and the Supreme Court started affirming the rulings, there’s no real standing to overturn it.

          • SJ

            Every state doesn’t have it; Trump wants to leave it in the states’ hands, and many states don’t want it. Somebody in one of those states is going to appeal a discrimination case, and it’s going to eventually get to the Supreme Court. Where a conservative-leaning court could make a ruling that would supersede a previous ruling.

          • Izo

            Every state doesn’t, but a majority of states do, and the tide of opinion among people, even Republican voting people, seems to be swaying in the direction of allowing Same Sex marriage. Eventually every state will have it, and even right now, if you get married in one state that does allow it, then move to another state, that state has to recognize your marriage by law. Even the most conservative-leaning court won’t be willing to change THAT aspect of the Constitution (reciprocity between states), nor will they repeal the 10th amendment.

            So no, same sex marriage isn’t going away. No need to panic about that.

          • palmvos

            Izo… SSM was decided by supreme court fiat, after only a few states allowed it, DOMA was concocted to deal with the fact that once one state recognized it.. all of them had to. I forget what clause in the constitution that is. but marriages are recognized in every state once performed in a single. (this is one of the things about Nevada and Las Vegas- it is extremely easy to get married there- Elvis will do it in a drive through!) unlike say.. PE licences. its not as hard to get it transferred once you have one.. but its not automatic..

          • Izo

            It doesn’t matter whether SSM was decided by supreme court fiat or not. There’s now a majority of states that DO allow it, and again – even the most conservative court ever would not get rid of reciprocity or of the 10th amendment in order to get rid of same sex marriage. You’re panicking about a worst case scenario that won’t happen. Every year, more and more citizens are supportive of Same sex marriages, and that’s translating into votes in their respective states. Once the state passes a law to allow it, the federal government is literally incapable of disallowing it, because you can’t make a federal law that offers less freedom to its citizens than the state law allows. And this has been the way the 10th amendment has been interpreted for quite some time, through several different SCOTUSes.

  • John

    Molly, Brennan – in some odd way, you both have become very important in my life. You bring a wisdom and a space for self-reflection that changes and challenges me. I love your care in creating art that brings joy, yet is also (Brecht) “not a mirror held up to reality, but a hammer with which to shape it.” Our reality needs shaping… my reality constantly needs shaping.
    With much love and care from afar – John

  • The Vinyl Princess

    Thank you. I needed to hear this and I’m sure many of us need to keep hearing this from time to time over the next four years.

  • Pol Subanajouy

    I totally understand where you guys are coming for. I may start teaching the minority women in my life self defense because of the rising stories of harassment. Including my mother. Let that sink in.

    I am one of those people that rely on healthcare to survive due to my chronic condition.

    This isn’t meant to be just me wailing. This is to let you know that yes, at least this reader suffers the same fear as you.

    • Lysiuj

      Wishing the best for you and those near you.

      • Pol Subanajouy

        As I you. Thank you.

        • Lysiuj

          Well I don’t live in the US so I won’t be directly affected by this, but thanks.

    • Lostman

      Thinking of going Weatherman?

      • Pol Subanajouy

        What? No. I don’t want to go out and beat people up. That is not the same as teaching people who are targets for harassment some self defense. Remember, real fighting is, and will always be nothing like in the movies. It will always be ugly and dumb and awful. It’s never satisfying and always the beginning of more problems, not the end of it.

        • Lostman

          Sorry.

          • Pol Subanajouy

            Sorry, I hope I didn’t mean to come off as harsh. I’ve just seen too many young guys picking up martial arts, treating it like a super power instead of being realistic what it will be used for. I really didn’t mean to scold you or anything.

  • Walter

    Hope y’all feel better! Thanks for making this free comic, week in and week out. You can take time off any time you want. We’ll be here when you get back.

  • Justin

    Hi there, love the comic, love the writing. Keep up the good work.

    Reading your thoughts made me want to share my own. You can obviously disregard them, but that would seem anathema to the themes of the comic so I’m hopeful they might actually find some traction and be heard.

    Donald Trump seems, on a personal level, to be a bad man. I didn’t vote for him, and I feel sorry for the folks that are scared because he was elected. That said, Hillary Clinton was not a bulletproof candidate either. A lot of people disagreed with her handling of foreign policy situations over the last eight years, and she did not present America with an economic plan of action they could get excited for. President Obama has not had great approval ratings for a while, and it was unwise of her to try to sell her administration as a continuation of the last.

    My point in saying this is that the takeaway should not be that Americans don’t want an inclusive future, it’s that Americans want change. They’re unhappy with the state of the world in many ways, and uncertain about the future. Mrs. Clinton seemed satisfied with the gains we made under President Obama, and Mr. Trump spoke to a population that was not. He was disrespectful and sexist throughout his campaign, but people are desperate for an economy they can feel confident in and a global stage they can feel powerful on. Not everyone voted with social justice for the downtrodden as their number one concern. You weren’t the only one scared of the other candidate and what they meant for the future of this country.

    Just wanted to share my thoughts. Personally, I think the checks and balances are still too great to allow any given President the power to truly destroy the country, and in this case the Republican establishment can’t stand Trump either. He’ll step backwards in some arenas, and hopefully forwards in others, and we’ll all go on having opinions and voicing them until the next election where we can try to vote someone a little more respectful into power. Don’t let it get you down; I can say from personal experience, conservatives all thought the world was going to end when President Obama took power too.

    • Lysiuj

      It depends of course; some voted for the reasons you said, others just want more oppression and hatred.

      • Justin

        Perhaps, but looking at it that way is no different than the other side saying folks voting Hillary just want a handout. I don’t think the majority of liberals are on welfare, nor do I think the majority of conservatives burn crosses on the lawn. I think the majority of both sides either vote along party lines (because we’re refusing to break down THAT holdover of a time gone by) or vote for the candidate focusing on what they’re concerned most with. In this case, I guess the majority weren’t worried about social reform this year.

  • AL Tei

    Well.

    I took the time to type this because i believe in the bills of rights and equal rights for all.
    Health care for all.
    My wife and i got married at the courthouse, to have a legal marriage and we choose to pursue God in our own way.

    We never liked Mr. Obama.
    Or many of his policies either.
    BUT…we always decided to give him a chance and listen.
    We were seriously looking at Hillary…but we wanted Bernie Sanders.
    SHE CHEATED AGAINST HIM.
    It is a fact, and we would not vote for her after that.

    She created this, and allowed him to win.

    Bernie could have won. I really believe it.

    Now….I believe we have to give him a chance to …adjust to us.

    I and people like me gave Mr. Obama a real chance, even though we didnt trust him.

    But you all? Many people who wanted Hillary just will not accept that she lost.

    So? Riot unlawfully. Show how violent people can be when they don’t get there way.

    Or though the links that have been posted, PROTEST legally!

    Stop destroying Portland! My gosh, get involved in the politics of your/our own government!

    Visit and write your senate and congress! Start a non-slanted you-tube channel and get local government on it!

    NO ONE CARES ABOUT ADULT BABIES.

    I am not happy. We are not happy. There are checks and balances to our government, so let’s use them!

  • Bill

    I honestly think that one of the unwritten rules for women in the ****** (sorry, hate writing his name) White House will be ‘Never let yourself be alone with him”.

  • yeah I’m not feeling great either. it’s like I’m not sure what the world is anymore

  • CalvinCopyright

    Honestly, it’s Hillary’s and the DNC’s fault that Trump got elected. She turned out to be a hilariously weak candidate (I mean seriously, how weak do you have to be to lose to Trump?) but guess what? The DNC submarined Sanders a dozen different ways in the primary and kept him from winning the Democratic nomination.

    And Sanders still won a lot of the primaries in states that Clinton lost in the general. I am pretty damn sure that, if the DNC had actually been neutral like it was supposed to be, we would have had a different president now.

    They can’t even say that third parties spoiled the vote – even if every single Stein voter (of which I will admit I am one) voted for Hillary instead, she STILL wouldn’t have won. And Gary Johnson took votes AWAY from Trump.

    Trump is going to be very painful for the country, I completely agree – but he’s also going to shine some very harsh spotlights on some very important truths that the Democrats just really, really, REALLY need to hear.

    So congratulations, DNC – you played yourself. Read the writing on Trump’s wall. Hillary can go check her “it’s her turn” privilege, and you can go check your reality – because coronations are never the way to go.

    • The Improbable Man

      This is going to be hurtful, but it needs to be said if the Democrats want to make any gains in 2018 and then defeat Trump in 2020: not only did she lose the Rust Belt states that Sanders would have been more competitive in, the Hillary Victory Fund siphoned money meant for local candidates into spending for her presidential campaign, which likely helped prevent the Democrats from taking over the senate (the other thing that prevented this was suppressed turnout due to lack of enthusiasm for her as a candidate).

      The DNC needs to be reformed, and should be looking to Bernie Sanders’ (and other progressives like Elizabeth Warren) ideas on how to reform it, not the same people that got us where we are today.

      Thanks to Molly and Brennan again for this wonderful comic, and for providing a place for us to… mourn, I guess, as a community.

  • BGB

    I’m appalled at much of what our new president-elect has said. However, I, personally, am likely to be hurt more by Paul Ryan’s ideas than Trump’s. I’m ace, so I could be a target of Mike Pence’s “conversion therapy.” But I’m also cis white and upper-middle class, so I’m mostly safe from Trump.

    However, I have some serious medical conditions. The only reason I can get health care is because of the provision in the PPACA prohibiting insurance companies from discriminating based on pre-existing conditions. If this provision is repealed, I will probably not live to see the next election.

    Even if by some miracle Speaker Ryan decides that provision should stay, things still don’t look great for me. My job is primarily funded by grants from the National Science Foundation. My parents both work for the federal government (Department of Justice). When Ryan and other “conventional” Republicans talk about cutting spending, what they actually want to cut are salaries, jobs, and benefits of people like my family. You know why the DC metropolitan area overwhelmingly votes for democrats? It’s because they hear the Republican party’s message as “cut jobs, cut wages, cut benefits!” Paul Ryan is smart enough that he would never phrase it like that, but that’s really what “cut spending” means.

    For all the talk about Trump “hijacking” the Republican party, they are actually a great fit in some sense. Cutting government spending, to a large extent, is about firing people. Republicans are the party of cutting spending (except for the military). Who better to lead the Republican party than the man famous for saying “you’re fired?”

    • Mechwarrior

      The only “hijacking” Trump committed was to start saying outright the things that Republicans had only dared to say via dog whistle.

  • Superfrick

    Hey, said something similar in the commission e-mail, but I’ll say it here publicly too. Thanks for Everything.

  • RobNiner

    . . .

    We can get through this, somehow.

  • palmvos

    In this stunning result there are some rays of hope. When Obama won- he brought a Democrat majority into the senate, and for a few months it was filibuster proof, the Republicans had less voice then than Democrats will.(unless the filibuster gets destroyed) Trump, for all his swagger for winning… lost seats in both houses for the Republicans. (senate is 52 to 48 with sanders in the 48). This does not bode well for the Republicans. As the Democrats learned to their cost- midterms can change things. And the margin for republicans is much narrower this time.

    There are 2 things that I would point to as causes for the results. This is not a complete list.
    1. The democrats have ceded local elections for years. This must end. 2020 is a big year. If the Democratic Party and the left do not start making this a priority the Republican bias in electoral results will not change. This hits the democrats coming and going- a. It makes the gerrymanders favor the republicans and b.it narrows the bench. Leave the positions out of it. The democrats want to talk about inclusiveness? The republicans had a black man, a woman, and a Hispanic among others running for president at one point. The democrats? Two old white men (point- one was a Jew) and a woman.
    2. I have encountered a theory of human behavior that I do not like. It is that people make decisions first, then build justifications for it later. This means that emotional responses mean more than logic for decision making. I have seen articles where neuroscience has validated this. About a year ago Scott Adams began predicting a Trump victory because he accepted this theory and claims to have applied it to his own life. As I said before I cannot imagine a more public and spectacular proof of this theory. To those who would point out all the misogynistic, ect things said, I point out that Trumps % of votes from those same minorities increased vs Mitt Rommey’s 2012 run.

    I have faith in our people. Trump does not have the power over the US that Erdoğan has over Turkey. The presidency is nowhere near as powerful a post as it is often treated. Is there real power in it? Yes, but there are official and unofficial checks on it. For a sense of perspective, talk to people old enough to remember the election of 1980. It will not be as bad as it is now feared. I will of course have ketchup handy in case I have to eat these words.

    If some good is to come of this I’d like to request that the voting system that Maine just voted in be adopted throughout the US. If it had been in place in the primaries, Trump would not be president. If it had been place in the general, it is likely that we would be facing President Hillary. Since I work in the aerospace/defense sector now, this wouldn’t be all bad- she is a hawk.

    Now, for the despair, the sun rose today. The tools are just where they were left. There is work to be done. I have found that in the work, I can paper over my own despair. It isn’t much but I don’t have a lot of positivity about life (and I just found a job!) and Tuesday didn’t really enter into it that much.

    • crazy j

      I wouldn’t be too happy about the Senate. Democrats will have to defend 10 seats in what are now red states, all with the odious stench of Obamacare around their necks. It is highly likely that the Republicans could pick up a 60 seat majority come 2018.

      • palmvos

        that requires the Republicans to do what the Democrats did after taking back the house during GWB. do very little. because if Obamacare is changed significantly or even repealed in the next year or so. those senators will be running with the edited edition which can cut both ways. the US system of healthcare before Obamacare was near collapse, and a sudden reversion to that f-ed up system might strengthen the Democrats. in short- 2 years is a long time. a lot can change. two years ago we were looking at another Bush vs. Clinton in 2016.

      • Izo

        The whole 60 seat majority thing is no longer much of an issue though. It no longer really matters if one party gets 60 seats or not, unless the party in power decides to reinstate the supermajority requirement. Which seems counterintuitive to any party in power, and unlikely to happen.

        • palmvos

          see reply above- quoting Wikipedia quoting The New York Times.

          • Izo

            I know. I’m just saying a 60 seat majority is no longer necessary for pretty much anything because the Democrats used the nuclear option to change the rules when they were the slight majority.

          • palmvos

            that would require another rule change. given that the democrats were unwilling to do it at the time… I’m credulous that the republicans will play that game of chicken.

          • Izo

            Um…. the rule was already changed. That’s my point. The nuclear option wasnt a temporary change. It was permanent. It would need to be changed BACK, which I see no reason why any party currently in party would do once one party changes it away from a supermajority.

          • palmvos

            ok, so you believe that the Republicans will play that game of chicken. its not that the rule has been changed twice- its only been changed once so far.

          • Izo

            By the Democrats. What exactly is to stop the Republicans from doing the same thing then saying ‘Well you did the same exact thing and we warned you not to, since if you did it, we’d do it also when we were in power’?

          • palmvos

            the same reason they advised against it when the Democrats did it- they are 2 years away form a potential shift.

          • Izo

            Except now it wouldnt matter as much. Trump can already have at least one – possibly 2 or 3 – justices to fill on the Supreme Court, and that’s a lifetime appointment. So yeah – the Republicans have no reason to not do it, since they would see at this point that if they don’t do it, the Democrats will just do it anyway when they’re in power again. If the Democrats had NOT done it when they were in power, the Republicans wouldnt play chicken. But since they did, the Republicans might feel that ‘if we don’t do it while we’re in power, they’ll just do it once they get in power and we will have lost our chance to get ANYTHING passed.’

            I’m just saying, that’s a rather strong possibility.

          • Danygalw

            Only for sub-Supreme Court judicial nominations. Not for anything else.

          • Izo

            Just wondering what exactly is to stop the Republicans now from doing the same exact thing the Democrats did?

          • Danygalw

            🙂
            Yeah.
            🙂
            Nothing.
            🙂 🙂 🙂 🙂

          • Izo

            No, seriously. What is to stop Republicans from doing the same thing that Democrats did? I’m confused about that. The only solution I see is trying to engage in genuine compromise in certain areas so that the Democrats look like the ones who are being conciliatory and reaching across the aisle, removing the need for Republican to pulling the ‘nuclear option’ response. Then, if they can do that for 2 years and get enough support in the population to get more people in Congress in either house to remove a majority in one of them, they’d have some measure of power to compromise from a position of more strength.

          • Danygalw

            Oh, those are repetitive 🙂 smilies of despair. It hasn’t been done *yet*, but nothing’s stopping them.

          • Izo

            Ahhhh okay. Text as a medium. Thanks for explaining what you were saying. I didn’t understand with all the smiley faces.

      • Danygalw

        If they repeal Obamacare and healthcare costs *spike*, it will suddenly smell so much sweeter.

        • Izo

          Um… healthcare costs have already spiked, and were scheduled to spike more next year.

          Also not sure if hoping for disaster is making things ‘smell so much sweeter.’ To paraphrase Obama, we should want him to be successful in replacing Obamacare with something better. Hoping for things to get worse ‘to show them’ seems to be cutting off ones nose to spite one’s face. Personally I hope that when he repeals Obamacare and removes the blockades between health care choices from state to state, healthcare costs will plummet then stabilize at an affordable rate from the free market system. Because that would be GOOD for us, even if it makes Trump look good as well. I don’t care if it makes Trump look good. If it’s good for the country and for the people, then I’m fine with it being good for Trump’s legacy as well.

          • palmvos

            ok. lets get into the weeds here. Health insurance costs are spiking and have been going up for a long time. part of the reason is the minimum standard coverage rules on Obamacare.
            the cross state line proposal means there are no federal standards for what constitutes health insurance, the likely result is that one of the less populous state legislatures will get bought out and we will have most if not all the plans available coming from that state. (with very low standards) that’s what the open market will do. it will do nothing to contain the cost of health care. not to be pedantic but health care and health insurance are not even close to the same thing. One of my complaints about the ACA is that the insurers, providers, and the other players who were doing quite well in the old system thank you. had major seats at the table. so we didn’t get any reform on how care is priced. right now you can’t get a price for a medical procedure. my son managed to fall off an adult tricycle and got sent to the emergency room. that was over a week ago (hes fine now thanks for asking) we still don’t know what his bill will be. not even the emergency room at the time knew! when for any other service the price is known before it begins? that they can’t figure it out within minutes and are using computers to co-ordinate care? reforming insurance law will do little. its well past time that the medical community was held to the standards other professionals are in terms of billing.

          • Izo

            “ok. lets get into the weeds here. Health insurance costs are spiking and have been going up for a long time. part of the reason is the minimum standard coverage rules on Obamacare. ”

            Yes, lets get into the weeds on this – although I honestly don’t want to argue too much considering how a lot of people are NOT doing well with the results of this election, and I don’t think an argument over the many flaws in Obamacare will make anyone feel better about it.

            Obamacare’s reason for the premiums spiking are because of how Obamacare was designed – having the healthy pay for the sick. It’s also the inherent flaw in social security, but magnified in the ACA. This doesn’t work on a national level, because there is a growing aging population which is driving up health care costs. The ACA was built on a flawed model that required as many people as possible to be forced into the system, defraying those costs for only a few years, and that cost is now becoming due. The ACA had SOME good points, like removing the pre-existing health conditions ban (which I totally agree needed to go) but other than that, it’s broken, and some people saw that within the first year – especially if you were in a family with at least one person with significant existing health problems. People without health problems would experience this increase in premiums last, but they’d still inevitably experience it.

            But don’t take my word for it. Even MSNBC, hardly a defender of Republicans, have reported on this as well – http://www.cnbc.com/2016/11/10/aetnas-mark-bertolini-on-the-future-of-health-care-at-nyts-dealbook-conference.html

            “my son managed to fall off an adult tricycle and got sent to the emergency room. that was over a week ago (hes fine now thanks for asking) we still don’t know what his bill will be.”

            Actually hospital emergency rooms HAVE to accept a patient, even if they can’t pay. They just don’t have to KEEP the patient after they’ve stabilized. Hospitals receive government funding in exchange for compliance with government regulations enforcing this.

          • palmvos

            I feel like we are arguing about why we agree- I say that the essential minimum coverage provisions make it expensive, and you point out that the insurance model of having the healthy pay for the sick make it expensive because of demographics. can we both be right here?
            I am not complaining about the emergency room policies regarding admissions, but that the bill is unknown. only in the medical field do we tolerate this. I can’t think of another place where professionals are allowed to simply start working and bill later. (no, as a defense contractor we don’t get to work that way either!) and on top of that when asked what is the bill shrug and say i don’t know (and that’s to the billing person!). but boy you have to pay when they come due….

          • Izo

            “I can’t think of another place where professionals are allowed to simply start working and bill later.”

            The mechanic. That happens when I go to the mechanic sometimes 🙂

          • palmvos

            I’ve had my share of cars in the shop. only once did i ever get close to a ‘tell you the bill after I’m done’- and i was warned in advance. and if it had happened the bill total would have been available before i came and got the car. what happened was i had both a bad starter and bad ignition coils- the mechanic thought he was going to have to take the valve cover off because no matter what he did the car would not start.
            I’ll be honest- I feel safer taking a malfunctioning car to a random mechanic than going to the doctor. I’ve been lied to by car dealers and mechanics… but the mysteries of medical billing? The only thing everybody else agrees on is that I have to pay the bill. does not matter what anything else says.
            I don’t know what state you live in but I’ve had car repairs done in three of them. written estimates and prices up front we mandated. in at least one- I had to be notified before the bill exceeds 5% of the estimate. I’ve said that doctors and hospitals need to be held to the standard mechanics are as far as billing goes.

          • Izo

            Heh, I’ve had it happen to me a few times. Oh… same when I signed up with Verizon. The actual bill was way different than what I signed up for 🙂

          • palmvos

            true- the taxes and fees. I use T mobile and they are able, if you ask firmly, to give you what the bill actually is.

          • Izo

            I swear, when I sign up for Verizon FIOS it takes forever to get a straight answer on what my bill will be. Usually after I’ve had it for a month thinking it was going to be the amount that I agreed to, but it winds up being like… $50 more in taxes and weird fees and other bundles they secretly force me to have which I never asked for and never agreed to.

          • palmvos

            competition in broadband is one of the items on my agenda that won’t go forward. I had doubts with HRC as well.

          • Izo

            Half the time I wonder if it would just pay to have ONLY internet. Between Netflix, Plex, and Hulu, and my cell phone service, I’m not sure how necessary a full cable package is anymore.

          • palmvos

            I’ve been inet only for many years. I don’t miss cable all that much. I’d probably pay for prime eventually. There’s a lot of star trek to catch up on.

          • Izo

            Yeah. Definitely going to look into doing that.

            Heh, this thread went to a much calmer place, huh?

          • palmvos

            we are way way way down in the thread here. I think the crickets left. up thread some left-wing bullies have appeared and started bashing trump supporters. that means most people will never read these but you and i.
            now why do i have an image of weatherheight lining up for a kick on me?

          • Izo

            Probably because of the comedic value.:)

          • palmvos

            “Maine and Nebraska are the only two states to not use the “all-or-nothing” approach to awarding electoral votes. The winner of the popular vote gets two electoral votes, while one is assigned to the winner of each of Maine’s two congressional districts. This approach was established beginning with the 1972 election, although it has never yet resulted in a split electoral vote.”
            that’s not ranked choice voting. that’s splitting their electoral college votes- go back and read the Boston article i linked to.

          • Izo

            Again, you do realize that Maine’s electoral system gave Trump an additional vote that he would otherwise not have had, right? People seem to be getting unhinged about the results of this election, trying to find excuses for why it’s not fair, even though they did not seem to have this problem when they thought their candidate would win. All these ‘If only’s’ and ‘If we change it, then…’ – the reasoning isnt because they want fairness – it’s because they want a different result, just like when people try to use statistics to change perception by changing the metrics by which stats are taken. THIS election was split electoral vote in Maine, just like it’s been since 1972.

            Not to mention that you’d need to convince each state to change their electoral college voting system – you can’t change it through a federal mandate or something.

            Also not to mention the article makes a mistake which it then corrects:

            This article originally misstated that a candidate with no first-place votes could win a ranked-choice election. If you have no first-place votes, you cannot win a ranked-choice election.

          • palmvos

            yes i do realize that. but I think the never trumps on the right and the various faction unhappy with HRC on the left could agree that ranked voting at least in the primaries would be better. The fact that Maine managed to do it gives me hope that it is possible. is it easy? oh heck no. but we have an entire industry built on a transient effect of moving air. don’t tell me humans don’t do difficult things.

          • Izo

            Oh I do understand and emphasize with what you’re saying here. I just feel there’s a lot of hypocrisy on the part of many of the protesters who would not have said anything if the situation was reversed, and who were in fact warning Trump supporters that if THEY protested and rioted if they lost, they’d be breaking the law, they’d be un-American, etc. But they lose and they do the exact thing they were accusing the other side of doing. I think the people in Maine voted, legally, on a referendum to change how their electoral college vote works – and in a way which supports third parties, which I think can ONLY be good for the nation. What I don’t like is the idea of people wanting to change things ONLY because their choice lost. It sort of reminds me of the Abner Doubleday Baseball scene in The Ridiculous Six, where Abner starts changing the rules repeatedly to keep trying to guarantee that he wins.

            For your viewing pleasure:
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yY4b_KnY8RY

          • palmvos

            american politics is about power first. the actual players may have entered it for the best of reasons… but power is the point. especially this time around.

          • Izo

            I don’t know what that means. ‘American politics is about power first.’ I think that’s a cynical view. Some people enter politics to serve, not to have power. Power is just the byproduct of that service. In the end, they’re still culpable to the voters every four years (or if they get impeached, less time). And they still are constrained by the Constitution. At least if you believe in enforcing libertarian values of small, limited government 🙂

            I’m not going to assume the sky is falling until I see actually chunks dropping.

          • palmvos

            I’m very cynical. I feel that at the leadership level of national politics, it has become about power. Service, cause, etc. May be part of the story they tell themselves… but it’s more about power.

          • Izo

            Well there are two ways to look at things then.

            Either you can be cynical and figure that EVERYONE is out for power, and therefore it really didn’t matter who you were voting for anyway since they both would be doing something for their own self interest and they don’t give a crap about you anyway….

            or…

            You can be hopeful that maybe not everyone is out for JUST power, and maybe things won’t be so bad. And if they do turn out to be bad, that’s when you can try to take action. Not beforehand, worrying yourself about things that you can’t change.

            Let me give you an example of something that happened to me a few months ago. I was in front of a judge and the other attorney was trying to get the case moved to another court. It was a stall tactic because they’d been stalling out a judge making a decision for over 8 months now. There was NO reason to move the case to another court, except to stall the ruling for a little longer just to screw over my client and be a jerk. I had pages upon pages of arguments about WHY the case should not be moved to another court. The judge calls us both up, and the FIRST words out of his mouth are ‘why is this not in another court?’ And he’s looking at me like I’m an idiot who is wasting HIS time (just before he’s about to waste another 4 weeks of my and my client’s time, when the case could have been decided there within a few minutes at most). So I try to get out at least a sentence to explain and before I can even say more than three words, he moved the case to a different court. So now it’ll take another 4 weeks and the client was pissed off. The other side barely had to say anything – the judge had already made his decision before I even opened my mouth.

            Moral of the story – sometimes stuff happens that you don’t want to happen. You can either be cynical and say all judges are a-hole biased creeps, or you can just assume this particular judge was, deal with it, and wait for your next chance to argue your point. Because I’ve also met a lot of GOOD judges who were very patient and fair with me.

            Moral of the moral – Some people let power get to their head. Others don’t.

          • palmvos

            sigh… HRC is definitely about power- she may tell herself its a cause, or see what she does as a service but the reality is its about power. the average judge, Representative, and senator? they are more likely to be trying to do the best job they can. as a person approaches the upper levels- majority/minority leaders, president, etc. the necessities of rising to that level, corrupt is about the best word i have for it. i’m very cynical about institutions (government and business)but i try to be optimistic about people.

          • Izo

            Yes, I’ll agree that HRC was in it entirely for the power. she does not care about you or I or anyone else. I’m also saying that not every politician is like that. For example, even though I would never vote for him because he’s a socialist and his economic theories are crackpot, I genuinely do not think that Sanders is in politics for the power. I think the same thing on the other side about someone like Carley Fiorina or Rand Paul, or on third party sides like MOST Libertarian candidates (mainly because if you’re a staunch libertarian you are, by definition, wanting to limit the power of government, which means your own power).

            Frankly, I’m pretty sure Trump got into the race because someone told him he couldn’t. He seems to have that sort of mentality of:

            Everyone imaginable: “You can’t become President, you’re some businessman who was a reality star. You were on WWF! That’s ridiculous.”

            Trump: *hands over his beer* : “Hold my beer…. watch this.”

          • palmvos

            one would hope that the held beer has been thrown out. soda doesn’t keep a week- I imagine 12 months is a long time to hold a beer.
            way back I posted why i think trump did this- to prove he could and also prove something about people. not much different from your theory. I wonder if hes going to be like that legendary dog… who now that he’s caught the car… whats he going to do now? hopefully we won’t see another Clinton run.. unless Chelsea makes a go at it. (i googled her name spelling.. no. no. no. no. make it stop.)

          • Izo

            I would hope Chelsea doesn’t either. For the same reason I don’t want to see Jeb run again and why I would never have supported Jeb. Mainly because I think political dynasties are, by definition, a bad thing, especially in the US. The Kennedys, the Bushes, the Clintons. People have a natural tendency to lean towards dynasties, but it’s TERRIBLE for the notion of a free and democratic society. It makes it seem like being President is something you are owed by divine providence of royal birth, not something you earn by convincing people to vote for you.

            I’m sure someone will bring up Roosevelt now. And for all the good FDR did (and he did a lot of good, I admit), he was also the closest thing the US ever had to a president-for-life or dictator. He tried to stack the Supreme Court. He was President for 4 terms until he died. I might grudgingly call him the exception to the rule when talking about political dynasties being bad things, but he was also the reason we finally realized that we needed term limits for the presidency.

          • palmvos

            i hope your sitting down then.. Fox is reporting that Chelsea is beeing groomed for a congressional run.
            http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/11/12/chelsea-clinton-reportedly-being-groomed-for-congressional-run.html
            first result when her name is googled….
            at least its not completely confirmed yet….
            and as far as dynasties… Ill let this guy talk about them.
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ig_qpNfXHIU

          • Izo

            Yes, um… this doesn’t surprise me. I said I think political dynasties are bad and I hope she wouldnt run for office. I was never under the illusion that people won’t keep trying to create them. I mean… think of the language of it even. ‘Groomed’ for a congressional run. As if she is owed it by dint of her birth. It’s not like Chelsea has actually done anything in her life aside from marrying a rich person and having a father who was a president and a mother who ran a failed campaign. Twice. None of these three things are actual accomplishments of anything she did herself. The problem is the Democrats right now have NO ONE in a position of leadership of ‘rock star’ status or who is a leader now (except maybe Chuck Schumer, who I actually think would be a good choice). They put all their eggs in the Clinton basket.

            PS – interesting video – thanks! Although part of the great thing about this nation is supposed to be that there’s a calm and peaceful transfer of power 🙂 I think I’ve actually seen the first video “Rules for Rulers”

          • palmvos

            I think i linked to rules for rulers erlier- or i linked to the book rules for rules is sourced from.

          • Izo

            Hehe, then maybe that’s how I saw the first video.

          • Danygalw

            The rate of increase in healthcare costs has been slower since Obamacare was passed. Costs will not plummet. Costs will not stabilise. Costs will skyrocket.

          • Izo

            No it hasnt. I’m not sure how to argue this more than saying that’s not true when you’re saying something which simply isn’t based on facts. The very nature of how it was set up was flawed and started to run out of money right away.

        • crazy j

          You go to somebody in, I don’t know, Michigan that’s paying $400 a month for a $3000 deductible Obamacare Bronze Plan and say that. I am pretty sure he already gave you his answer last Tuesday.

    • Weatherheight

      “I can paper over my own despair.”
      Eloquent is this phrasing. May you find joy in your new job. 😀

    • Izo

      “lost seats in both houses for the Republicans. (senate is 52 to 48 with sanders in the 48). This does not bode well for the Republicans.”

      Not meaning to give any troubling information in light of recent events, but 52 seats in the Senate is enough to push through legislation, and to prevent filibusters – mainly because the Democrats used the nuclear option to remove the supermajority requirement back when they had a majority. They… really shouldn’t have used the nuclear option. Even conservatives told them not to because of what would happen if the majority was turned the other way.

      • palmvos

        yes the democrats performed the nuclear option. it is VERY limited. it does not affect legislative efforts nor does it affect supreme court nominees..
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_option
        “On November 21, 2013, the Senate voted 52-48, with all Republicans and 3 Democrats voting against, to eliminate the use of the filibuster against all executive branch nominees and judicial nominees other than to the Supreme Court. At the time of the vote there were 59 executive branch nominees and 17 judicial nominees awaiting confirmation.”
        so the lower courts can be filled. this limitation is why we have 8 on the supreme court right now.

        • Izo

          Actually it DOES affect supreme court nominees, and does affect legislative efforts. Look, I’m sorry (really, I am sorry, I thought the nuclear option was a HORRIBLE idea and didn’t want the Democrats to do it for this very reason) but I do know the law. And the reason we have 8 on the Supreme Court is because the Republicans had a majority in the Senate already.

          • palmvos

            as far as i know the rules are still the way i quoted them- do you have a source for that?

          • Izo

            Uh… yes. Please read the rule change. They did not make an exception. They also did not think they were going to be able to choose a new Supreme Court Justice at the time.

          • palmvos
          • Izo

            I’d say the NY Times gets a lot of stuff wrong as a matter of reality, and views things rather subjectively, ignoring the types of strategy that actually goes on in politics. The NY Times also thought, like a lot of the press, that Hillary was going to win in a massive landslide.

          • palmvos

            given that the times is left wing and the democrats passed this.. i’d say the times is more than likely to have it right. I tried to get the actual rule but i didn’t see it in the google results. also if your interpenetration is right- I think the right wing websites would be gloating a lot more.

          • Izo

            Not really. Trump isnt a right wing candidate. Part of the reason there’s a ‘Never Trump’ movement among the Republicans at all is because the most conservative among them don’t think Trump actually represents conservative values at all. They’re not gloating mostly because they’re sort of of a mixed opinion on this election. Heck, there was a National Review letter in their publication with a bunch of conservatives who explained why they were not voting for Trump, including people like George Will.

            The NY Times does have a pretty poor history of lying based on a political bias (not to mention plagiarism and no sources in their reporting).

            In any case, lets for the moment say that YOUR interpretation was correct (it’s not, but I will let you be playing devil’s advocate here for a moment). In that case, there’s NO reason for the Republicans to not do the same exact thing for a Supreme Court pick that the Democrats did for a lower court pick, if the Democrats tried to use the filibuster too much. The Democrats wouldnt be able to justifiably say ‘you can’t do that – what happens when we’re in power’ because the Republicans will say ‘We already know what happens when you’re in power, you do the same thing anyway so we might as well do it while we’re in power.’

          • palmvos

            ok, can you get a link to the actual text of the rule. even the about.com article mentions that the filibuster does not apply to legislation or supreme court justices. I’ve even been into the rules of the senate itself and can’t find it. the wiki pages (and there’s more than one!) that talk about this all agree. Please post your source for your understanding of the rule because i can’t- everything i see says it the way i do
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster_in_the_United_States_Senate
            it is interesting to note- that if you are correct then why does the senate itself still have discussion of filibusters?
            http://www.senate.gov/CRSpubs/3d51be23-64f8-448e-aa14-10ef0f94b77e.pdf
            and finally the hill a more right wing site- lamenting the rule change.
            http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/191042-dems-reid-may-go-nuclear-thursday
            even they say its about appointments only- and excludes supreme court justices.

          • Izo

            Tell you what. I’ll start looking that up (it’s a bit of a pain in the neck to look it up and sort through all the ‘opinions’ and ‘wikipedia’ stuff on the internet, which are able to be edited by anyone) but I first need you to please answer the question I’ve asked a few times now.

            Here’s the question, again:

            Assuming you’re right, what is to actually prevent the Republicans from extending the rule change to cover the Supreme Court, using the same exact reasoning that the Democrats used, and the addition reasoning that ‘if they don’t do it, the Democrats will do it anyway once they’re in charge, since they’ve shown they will do it for other appointments already despite our warning them not to.’?

          • palmvos

            why won’t they? well one of the premises you make in your question is a little leading IMO. Given that in my view the democrats didn’t gut the filibuster when they clearly wanted to. it is far from certain the at the democrats will gut the filibuster when they are in the majority again.
            the key is that right now despite the pundits we don’t seem to have a steady majority for either party in the senate. so, one reason is that its far from certain the democrats will do that in their turn. it is certain however that they will leave it that way if it is changed.
            two. why change the filibuster rule in the first place? to advance the presidents agenda…
            Trump is frankly the most unpopular president ever elected. his approval ratings look like GWB’s 2nd term. on his first election instead of adding to the majority- he lost in both houses. Trump as you point out isn’t really a conservative. all this means is he has less clout in moving the senate around. so why risk the future ability to affect things when the senate changes hands (again- remember Mitch was minority leader once already) for a president who does not have a lot of internal clout and will have a hard time moving his agenda anyway. far easier to let the democrats win victories against Trumps agenda by leaving things as they are.
            Also- the Republicans MUST appear to something with Obamacare. I doubt that at this point they can get away without trying. leaving the filibuster as is for legislation. gives the senate some wiggle room and cover. if the senate democrats want to run against Obamacare as is in 2018 all they have to do is filibuster any attempt to change it.
            and before you say that’s crazy… that’s almost exactly what Pelosi did in the house- they won a house majority in part on the promise to do something about Iraq… and they did almost nothing.the voters then punished the republicans in the next election even further (and voted in Obama)
            three- we live in an age where almost any comment made on camera is available for immediate recall. the irony of Mitch who actually made the argument against doing this in 2013 would be obvious. so why tarnish his own brand for the most unpopular president ever elected? its much easier to say ‘we wont do it’ or ‘I can’t get the votes to do that’.
            I hope that answers your question.

          • Izo

            “why won’t they? well one of the premises you make in your question is a little leading IMO. Given that in my view the democrats didn’t gut the filibuster when they clearly wanted to. it is far from certain the at the democrats will gut the filibuster when they are in the majority again.”

            Except they DID gut the filibuster already. Even if, according to you (which I don’t agree with the accuracy of, but I’m going to give you the benefit of hte doubt on this), they left exceptions to keep the supermajority requirement in place in CERTAIN situations, the Democrats had already shown that they were willing to gut the supermajority requirement when they wanted to. Again… there is no reason why the republicans would have a reason to not do so now they they are in power, since Democrats already showed a lack of good faith or respect for the senate minority when THEY were the ones in power.

            “Trump is frankly the most unpopular president ever elected.”

            Considering he isnt even President yet, I have to disagree with your claim.

            “his approval ratings look like GWB’s 2nd term.”

            Approval ratings on WHAT? He hasnt even been sworn in yet. He hasnt had a single day as President yet. What are they actually approving or disapproving of which he DID that you can compare it to a sitting president’s second term? You’re not making sense here.

            “on his first election instead of adding to the majority- he lost in both houses.”

            Actually, the Republicans had thought they were going to lose the majority in both houses. Instead, they held onto their majority, largely because of Trump’s coattails, according to exit polls. Trump didn’t lose anything. Funny enough, the Republicans that lost their elections in the houses were the ones that did NOT support Trump.

            “Trump as you point out isn’t really a conservative.”

            Correct. He’s not a conservative. That’s the entire point of the Never Trumpers.

            “all this means is he has less clout in moving the senate around.”

            Not really. Even the Never Trumpers are acknowledging that he’s the President, and that he has clout among the Never Trumpers constituents. If they want to be re-elected, they’re going to play ball with Trump. At least that’s what I’m guessing will happen.

            “so why risk the future ability to affect things when the senate changes hands (again- remember Mitch was minority leader once already)”

            Generally, mid-term elections are good for Republicans, no matter which party is in power. The voters in mid-term elections are often overwhelmingly Republican. If Democrats want to change that, that’s cool. But it’s not been the case historically. Then again, Trump sort of has changed a LOT of common expectations.

            “far easier to let the democrats win victories against Trumps agenda by leaving things as they are. ”

            Look, I’m not saying this to support or defend Trump, but if you don’t acknowledge the new situation, you won’t be able to plan a strategy to get your way through the system. Assuming you’ll get easy victories and assuming Trump will be some totalitarian nightmare before he’s actually done anything is a quick road to failure and to mobilizing the people who got Trump into power voting just to show you up. When a person acts arrogant, it’s natural human inclination to want to show them that they’re wrong. The best way to diminish this inclination? Don’t be arrogant. Base your actions and strategy on the actual situation and facts at hand, not just opinions.

            “Also- the Republicans MUST appear to something with Obamacare. I doubt that at this point they can get away without trying.”

            Trump has already said he’s keeping in place the only two aspects of Obamacare that have widespread appeal among both parties – the removal of a pre-existing conditions ban, and the raising of the amount of time people can have their adult children under their health care (26 years old instead of 21). But he’s going to get rid of the rest, because the rest is horribly broken. And he said he already had an idea in place to replace it, which involves removing blocks between insurance from different states, to allow for more competition, which will lower insurance prices. This has mass appeal among Republicans, and Paul Ryan had been trying to get this passed for years now but it kept getting stuck in the Senate thanks to Reid, and never would come up for a vote because of Reid.

            “if the senate democrats want to run against Obamacare as is in 2018 all they have to do is filibuster any attempt to change it.”

            I’m just letting you know, you’re wrong. As much as you might wish you aren’t, the Democrats aren’t going to be able to filibuster to prevent the repeal of Obamacare, and they’re DEFINITELY not going to run on Obamacare in 2018 unless they want to lose the small amount of seats that they won in 2016. It’s too unpopular among most voters – it’s an election loser, and this has now been proven in 3 elections so far – especially in congressional elections. If you (and more importantly, if the Democrats) are not willing to accept that, they will not formulate a good strategy to take back at least one house of Congress.

            “and they did almost nothing.the voters then punished the republicans in the next election even further (and voted in Obama)”

            To be honest, Obama was insanely popular, but his policies were not. People voted for him. They did not vote for his policies though, and they did not vote for his legacy. There literally seemed to be a disconnect with most of his supporters when it came to him. In that respect, Obama is similar to Trump – they both seem to generate this aura of ‘rock star’ personality around them so that scandals and gaffes don’t seem to hurt them.

            “three- we live in an age where almost any comment made on camera is available for immediate recall. the irony of Mitch who actually made the argument against doing this in 2013 would be obvious. so why tarnish his own brand for the most unpopular president ever elected?”

            Because so far, every time they told Trump he can’t do something or something was going to destroy him, it’s been proven wrong. It’s almost become a regular cycle of proving a lesson of ‘If you doubt me, I’m going to make you look stupid and wrong.’ And now they have actual proof that Trump had coattails, and that the polls couldnt be trusted. They’re going to want to keep those supporters happy so they can be re-elected.

            “I hope that answers your question.”

            Not really, but at least a little. By which I mean I don’t think your answer is particularly realistic, and you’re basing it on presidential approval ratings that don’t even exist yet unless you have a time machine that i’m unaware of, but you did at least answer it technically.

          • palmvos

            “”why won’t they? well one of the premises you make in your question is a little leading IMO. Given that in my view the democrats didn’t gut the filibuster when they clearly wanted to. it is far from certain the at the democrats will gut the filibuster when they are in the majority again.”
            Except they DID gut the filibuster already. Even if, according to you (which I don’t agree with the accuracy of, but I’m going to give you the benefit of hte doubt on this), they left exceptions to keep the supermajority requirement in place in CERTAIN situations, the Democrats had already shown that they were willing to gut the supermajority requirement when they wanted to. Again… there is no reason why the republicans would have a reason to not do so now they they are in power, since Democrats already showed a lack of good faith or respect for the senate minority when THEY were the ones in power.”

            at this point i should stop and say again. prove your point. we both are attacking each other premises so this is really useless.

            “”Trump is frankly the most unpopular president ever elected.”
            Considering he isnt even President yet, I have to disagree with your claim.”
            later on you even acknowledge he is president- so make up your mind.
            but we did have ratings! prior to the election real clear gave favorability ratings for both trump and HRC as part of its matrix of poll results. my bad i was equating them with approval ratings. i can’t link to it easy. so oh well.

            look we have different opinions on what will happen. but until we can agree on the filibuster thing its pointless.

            2nd you have made an assumption that I supported Hillary. I mean seriously- our choices this time were- a hypocritical corrupt politician, a clever con man, a stoned out idealist, and an idealist who is probably also stoned. I mean seriously… can I vote for Sir not-appearing-in-this-film? I’m trying to be helpful here rather than just spewing more vitriol around. Is it wrong for me to want both parties to actually function? many of these people have not yet been crushed by life- it is not hard for them to see a better future. I admire that- i’ve never been able to sustain that belief for very long. Down in my core some part of me is absolutely convinced there is no hope and some idiot nailed shut the door out. I know.. I tried..

            I guess what i need to say is its time to leave this topic until you can produce some evidence of your base assumption. if you can i will admit i wrong and that should end the debate.

          • Izo

            “2nd you have made an assumption that I supported Hillary. I mean seriously- our choices this time were- a hypocritical corrupt politician, a clever con man, a stoned out idealist, and an idealist who is probably also stoned.”

            I don’t think I was making an assumption that you supported Hillary, although if I did I apologize.

            “I mean seriously… can I vote for Sir not-appearing-in-this-film”

            Yes you can. That’s a totally valid choice to make here. 🙂

            “I guess what i need to say is its time to leave this topic until you can produce some evidence of your base assumption. if you can i will admit i wrong and that should end the debate.”

            We’ll see what happens if this actually comes up to a point where the Democrats try to filibuster, I suppose.

          • Izo

            Btw. I just checked. The nuclear option, as the rules currently exist thanks to the Democrats, CAN be used for stopping the filibuster for legislative action. It’s quiet on if it can be used for the Supreme Court nominations, if it’s argued they can’t, then the Republicans can still easily change the rules for that as well, based on the precedent set by the Democrats.

      • palmvos

        the change I ask for has been proposed before- its in use in a few cities. its called ranked choice voting. Maine just voted to make it the standard system for its elections. it prevents the crowded field effect that got trump the nomination in the first place. are there problems? yes. is it better than first past the post which is what we use? yes. this is far far from the first time its been proposed.

        • Izo

          You mean in a few states, right? The change in the electoral college vote is different in Nebraska and Maine. And it actually helped Trump in Maine. He got one of the four electoral college votes there, while if it was not different, he would have gotten none.

          • palmvos

            Maine just enacted it this election so it hasn’t been used there yet.
            here’s an article about it. (I saw the story on Slate- I’ve skimmed this one)
            https://www.boston.com/news/politics/2016/11/10/maine-became-the-first-state-in-the-country-to-pass-ranked-choice-voting

          • Izo

            Um… no. They did not just enact it this election. Check the past elections as well. Maine has had this method of the electoral college since 1972. So Maine and Nebraska have had this method of the electoral college for a while. But this was the first time in Maine’s history that it resulted in a split vote in Maine.

            It’s not the first time there was a split electoral college vote though. It also happened in 2008 in Nebraska, for Barack Obama. No one seemed to complain about that though, when it was in the Democrats’ favor.

          • palmvos

            What is your source for the idea that Maine has had ranked choice voting since 1972?
            they have allowed their votes to split since then. but it seems odd to me that there is even a website for the 2016 campaign to add ranked choice if they’ve had it since 1972?

          • Izo

            http://www.270towin.com/states/Maine

            There are other sources as well, but I figured this is easier to show you than finding the actual laws on the books in Maine that show when they changed their electoral system.

          • I think you’re actually talking about two different things, now; palmvos was talking about how candidates would be selected, while you’re talking about how the president is selected from the candidates.

            Personally, I think that if there is an electoral college (which there is), there should be nothing to prevent them from voting their conscience. Otherwise, there should be no electoral college and the president ought to be selected by popular vote.

            Please note: I am not advocating just throwing out the electoral college; I am advocating getting rid of an electoral college that does not have the power to actually function. Give the electors back their right to choose, require them to meet and debate, and maybe the system could function properly again.

          • Izo

            I’m pretty sure that both palm and I are talking about the concept of a split electoral vote per state, which is probably a decent way to fix an electoral college system, since using a pure popular vote through the entire country basically screws over most of the nation in favor of what New York and California (who have a combined population of around 60 million people) wants, disproportinally representing those two states annd ignoring that we’re a collection of states, not a collection of cities.

  • Alex

    I am Swedish, and would just say that over here most are shocked and appalled and supportive. The Swedish racists, on the other hand, took Trumps’s presidency as some kind of international thumbs-up: “Just keep working on it and it will all be yours!”. The first day, the morning commute was really, really weird – everyone just looked like they had woken in the wrong reality and were trying to make sense of it.

    Thank you for fighting the good fight!

  • Karen Smith

    Just a quick note – as a transwoman, don’t tell me the HRC supports me. They’re notoriously bad at supporting trans rights.

    Here’s a bit of history:
    http://transgriot.blogspot.com/2007/10/why-transgender-community-hates-hrc.html?m=1

    http://www.advocate.com/human-rights-campaign-hrc/2015/06/04/5-most-disappointing-things-we-learned-about-hrcs-white-mens-cl

    I haven’t heard they’ve gotten better.

  • Mike Adams

    The moment I saw there was no comic today, and only text, I started crying.

    I’m still crying.

    I hadn’t even read the words yet, but I cried because I knew what they would say. They are every bit as beautiful and hurt and hopeful and sad as I imagined they might be, and more so.

    “I’m so worried about you, Ali. This world is so bad, and you’re really good, and I don’t think you get it.”

    I think we’re all starting to get it now.

  • Jordan Hiller

    I felt sick to my stomach when I saw that he was going to win. I’d woken up that morning thinking all was right with the world and that we’d move past Trump by the end of the day. I went to bed late that night distraught that the America that I thought I knew had lost its collective goddamn mind. All the progress we’d managed under Obama is going to disappear. The danger of climate change is going to ignored and by the time we’re able to get a Democrat in office to fix it, it’ll be far too late. This was our last chance. God help us all.

    • Lysiuj

      This too shall pass. It’s not over yet.

      • Jordan Hiller

        Short of him and Pence getting impeached, it’s going to take a minimum of 2-4 years to get replacements in place. That’s a LOT of time to cause a lot of damage, especially with Supreme Court appointees.

        • Lysiuj

          No doubt, and also congress majorities. They will cause damage.
          But we’ll get through this and keep fighting.

  • DawnCandace

    Thanks for this comic and the donations to good groups that you plan to do. My friends and I (well, my POC friends) were not surprised by the results but still disheartened. We were under no illusions about what America was and were already in the trenches dealing with both low key racists and the ones who were already loud and bold in their hatred. But, we are still upset and fear for our families. But, we are invigorated to buckle down and organize and work harder for change and to uplift POC and LGBTQ+ folks to protect and shield them from the coming policy changes and the uptick in hate attacks happening already. I am fearful for children and young people who are being bullied and spiritually and emotionally attacked. I’ve already heard stories of trans kids committing and attempting suicide and brown kids coming home in tears because their white schoolmates have turned on them.

  • someladyontheinternet

    I’m a writer and I’m having a similar creative crisis. I totally understand being unable to create. I haven’t written a word since the election. I don’t know what words to use to help you right now, but I know you’re both awesome. We need you two, and characters like Allison, more than ever. We will be here when you start creating again. <3

  • Ian Osmond

    I’m Jewish. They haven’t started to come for the Jews yet, and, until they do, I’m going to use the privilege I’ve got as a white, cis, het male to help out where I can.

    I’ve got your back as long as I can.

    Look. I’m completely confident that things aren’t going to be as bad as we fear.

    I was completely confident that Trump couldn’t be elected.

    In completely unrelated news, I finished my one-day firearms training certificate last night, and have filled out the license to carry application, and will send it in later today.

  • The Handsome Hound

    I already got beat up by a Trump supporter in September for being bi. Of course the coward waited until I was too drunk to fight back.

    • Lysiuj

      I hope you’re alright.

    • Dwight Williams

      Glad you’re with us to share the tale, however ugly it is…

  • Weatherheight

    I’ll be praying for you – May the Eternal grant you peace so you may see, and, having seen, take hope.
    Despair is the enemy here – be not deceived, we can lose all things but still no one can take our hopes and dreams unless we surrender them.
    Believe in yourself, believe in those dreams and hopes, and work for them.
    We are better than we were once, and, through our faith in a higher truer goal and a better reality, we can become better yet.
    You will draw again, you will write again, and all of us will love what you do.
    It’s not that we aren’t disappointed, but because we love we are willing to wait.

    I (and we) love you as well.

  • Thank you for the links to charities. I’m too cynical, lazy and selfish to spend my precious time trying to build a better world, but I do have money to fund the people trying to make a better world. I’m also going to research the laws surrounding interstate political contributions — I live in a very blue state, and I’d rather spend my political “speech” in places where it might make a difference.

  • Lostman

    Things I learned from this American election:

    Never trust the media, and always prepare for the worst no matter what. The thing you can count on is the sun rising everyday.

  • DaktariD

    I have no words. <3

  • Arkone Axon

    I’d like to point out a few things, speaking as someone who voted for Johnson because I couldn’t vote for Stein (they refused to put her on the ballot in Nevada, and you can’t do write-ins here). And as a Jew whose maternal grandfather was the sole survivor of his family during the Holocaust.

    First of all, I spent a few unpleasant years living in New Jersey. I’ve seen what Trump does as a “businessman.” He’s all talk. He’s a big, fat, stupid blowhard who embodies what I came to call the East Coast Attitude – the idea that you can compensate for physical deficiencies, or mental, or even legal… that the laws of physics themselves will conform to your desires if you’re just enough of a BADASS! And you scream and make nasty threats, and if someone points out that you’re bluffing, then you double down and you make even nastier threats, because you… are… a… BAD… ASS!!!

    (and yeah, it never worked out for ANY of the people who tried that with me)

    So… it’s important to look at someone’s actions, not their words. Trump says a lot of stupid and nasty things about minorities and women. He also EMPLOYS a lot of them – he had more women working for him in his campaign at the highest levels than Clinton did. He failed at pretty much every single business venture he tried – he couldn’t even make money running a casino! – but he finally started making a profit by licensing his own name. He won’t do violent oppression because that’s just too much WORK for him; he’d rather get paid to party and fool around while other people get stuff done. He’s like Tony Stark with half the IQ, twice the gut, and someone else’s hair – notice how none of the women he employed back in the first Iron Man movie were unhappy about working for him?

    Whereas Clinton? She talked about racism – but she’s the one who sponsored the “Superpredator” bill that caused an explosion in the prison population. And collaborated with corporations creating the for-profit prisons that now make a nice income using inmates for cheap labor. Trump might use racist words, but Clinton REINTRODUCED SLAVERY. She talks about women – but look at how she treated her husband’s accusers. Ask Monica Lewinski how she felt about having her life destroyed. Nor are those singular incidents; Clinton didn’t hesitate to attack Trump’s wife for posing for naughty photos. Can you say “Slut shaming?”

    I could go on and on and ON about the difference between their words and their actions… but instead I want to move on to other points. The second, the big one: Trump supporters are NOT hateful people. Yes, there are hateful people who supported Trump (and also hateful people who supported Clinton; just ask the people who have been beaten and hospitalized for being Trump supporters. Including the homeless guy who was assaulted by a mob screaming about how he deserved it for… supporting Trump). But most of the people who voted for Trump did so because… they just loathed Clinton that much. Which is NOT being sexist. If you hate someone whom you perceive to be a greedy, sociopathic, hypocritical parasite who starts a charity foundation and then treats it as their own personal slush fund, then gender’s got nothing to do with it. Just like hating Trump doesn’t make you a misandrist; you don’t hate men, you just don’t like Trump.

    Half the country did not suddenly put on jackboots and leather uniforms overnight (…kinda wishing they had, but that’s more about sexual fetishes than politics :p ). They simply voted their consciences, supporting the candidates they genuinely believed would be best for this country. Notice how NONE of the pro-Trump supporters to comment on this forum have made any racist or sexist comments; the only things they’ve said to defend their choice have been about why they felt Trump was the better choice for President.

    Lastly, speaking as a Jew… who is also a very large, very muscular male who started training in martial arts back when his mother threw him into a class (as part of her plan to have three loyal black belt bodyguard/enforcers… and yeah, it worked; Mom’s pretty awesome like that) and is a firm believer in the second amendment… I will NEVER stand by while my neighbors’ rights are threatened. If someone comes for my neighbors, I will defend them. If someone thinks that it’s time to break out the hoods and burning crosses, I will disabuse them of that notion. If someone wants to repeal Roe Vs Wade, I’ll stand against them. And rest assured, those Trump supporters generally feel the exact same way. We are ALL in the same boat here; we simply had a big argument over which way to steer the boat for the next few years.

  • papino134

    you dont have to wory about civil rights.the government is well made enough that there is no chance of repealing any without a revolution style uproar. the president himself cant overturn a supreme court jugment. it may stagnate but it will not regress. you have been cought in the fear mongering and i dont blame you for it. he flipfloped on almost everything during the election. he is the loosest cannon possible but there is a chance that he will be aimed in the right direction.
    the only thing to do for now is give him a chance

    • Psile

      For me, yeah. Everything will be fine. I’m white, straight, cis and middle class. Trump would have to bring on nearly apocalyptic levels of problems to shake my comfy privileged life. I’m more worried about the minorities who are going to be assaulted and killed because the president told them it is okay to hate. Trump could literally be the best president and he still is going to push our society back a few years. It has nothing to do with him enacting laws.

    • SJ

      Yeah… no. I’m sorry, but whenever I see someone talking that yang about “Give Trump a chance,” I can only interpret it as code for, “You know, I’m pretty sure that I have enough privilege to ride this thing out.”

  • Stephanie Gertsch

    Weirdly, leading up to the election I began to think that Allison from SFP resembled Hilary Clinton. Sure, both are blonde. Al would look awesome in a pantsuit. Her self explained axiom pretty much is Clinton’s slogan “Stronger Together.” And because of Allison’s desire to make a better world for all, she becomes a tyrant. (Albeit a very self-doubting and altruistic one.)

    So in a way, I can see this election as American people looking at tyranny (as expressed by a privileged, strong person trying to take power for good) and saying “NO.” I don’t agree with them, but maybe reading the comments here helped me understand them a bit better, what they think their dilemma is.

    • Rumble in the Tumble

      >Alison resebled Hilary Clinton
      So… what you’re saying is, Hilary is literally Hitler? :v

      • Stephanie Gertsch

        Well, as I don’t think Allison is literally Hitler (not mustachey enough), I don’t think Hilary is Hitler either. However, I’m open to fan theories.

  • Weatherheight

    So I went to Genocide Man today ( http://www.genocideman.com ), and the Random Quote generator gave me this (click on the logo to get a different quote if you don’t like the one you got):

    It’s just going to get weirder and weirder forever, isn’t it?
    — Nutbastard, io9.com

  • MedinaSidonia

    I had to find something positive to do in order not to throw up, cry and break a face. So I’m working on a system for connecting people who feel unsafe (Muslims, LGBT, dark-skinned people, whatever) with people willing to escort them. I’m not sure if it’s appropriate for me to post about it here, but if it’s OK, I will provide details.

  • VariableNature

    I found this post on Tumblr that sort of provides some relief.

    Essentially, Trump is going to go through his personal version of Hell for about four years.

    He’ll be stuck in so many meetings about so many boring, minute topics, have to read through so much policy, have to deal with so many choices where either option will make him look bad, all as a part of the most stressful job in the history of the United States, if not the world.

    And he has to do ALL of that, with no one watching him. No weekly calls to Fox News, no Twitter, no connection AT ALL to ANY of his business ventures. He will be, essentially, cut off from the Trump brand.

    He actually has to pony up. He has to step up and do what he promised. He can’t actually whine and complain, and retreat back to his high-rise apartment for the next four years saying how he could have done it better. The ball is in his court now. He has to fulfill his promises.

    Put it this way: As of 11/7/2016, the website RealClearPolitics shows that Trump has, based on an average of several polls across multiple political spectrums, a “favorable” rating of about 37-38%. And I think it will be safe to say it will only go down from there once he’s actually in office.

    And in 2020, he’s not going to run against Clinton again. It’ll be someone new. Maybe Elizabeth Warren, maybe Joe Biden, hell maybe it’ll be Bernie Sanders all over again.

    I will not say not to panic. I understand that a lot of people are scared and upset and worried. What I am saying is that we can still fight back. Give Trump all the attention you can, call him out, protest, make your voice heard, work with local politicians, state politicians, your federal politicians, donate your money or time or whatever you feel comfortable or able to give.

    Make them realize that this is truly their last gasp of breath before a death rattle.

    • Bob

      Or maybe he actually cares about America and will do his best to make our lives better, including you.

      • Lysiuj

        While it’s possible, if not probable, that he’ll make life in the US better, you can’t possibly make me believe he cares about anything but himself. Or will make enough of an effort to do his best at anything, ever.

      • VariableNature

        I can think of one way Trump won’t make a lot of peoples’ lives better: Net Neutrality.

        Trump has gone on record as saying he opposes Net Neutrality laws on the grounds that they aren’t “fair”. Net Neutrality means that Internet Service Providers (ISPs) have to treat all data equally, no matter what web site or source they are from, baring legal orders and other such details.

        If ISPs can regulate what data is or isn’t allowed to go as fast as possible, they can theoretically pick and choose companies like Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, YouTube, Crunchyroll, and other video streaming services and basically force them to pay extra money in order to have a “speedy” (i.e. what it was before, and not one bit faster) connection to its users.

        That seems kind of terrifying to me. And it certainly wouldn’t make my life better. In fact, it would make my life worse!

        • palmvos

          no matter who won Tuesday- I would loose. this is one of the ways I lost.

    • palmvos

      as i said elsewhere get involved in local elections as a democrat. 2020 is a big year. if the democrats don’t make an effort. then it may be another 10 years of electoral bias for republicans.

      • VariableNature

        Plan on doing that! 2018 and 2020 are going to be…well, they will be.

        • Dwight Williams

          Not an American, but 2018 looks like it could be really good for ground-game building. 33 Senate seats, the entire House of Representatives, 36 governors’ chairs, and I’ve no clue what else is on the down-ticket end of the ballots.

    • Micah Matheson

      My wife and I were discussing this very thing last night – he’s going to be miserable. He can’t grab-ass anymore, he can’t walk around Manhattan whenever he wants to anymore. He never wanted to win, he just wanted to be adored. You can see it in his face after his meeting with Obama.

      Obama sat him down and told him about all the shit he has to deal with. Every word was like a heavy weight in Trump’s guts. This was real. This wasn’t something he could foist off like a CEO position. And it weighed on him – the man looks like he aged a year between photos before and after his meeting with Obama.

      And Obama, grim, is still smiling. Because he looked into the man’s eyes and found he completely lacked the ability to fortify. Obama is going to be one of the most beloved presidents in all of history, and the man who takes over after him is going to be even more of a punchline than he already is.

  • guesty

    Out and about in the morning, walking to school, I saw in the paper that Trump had won.

    I felt like the multiverse theory must be true, and we were living in one the bizarre worlds where something that never should have happened, did; that the world I was supposed to have lived in existed in some other reality, where normality was the rule, not the exception.
    I spent almost my whole walk just thinking up the various reasons not to vote for him. I felt, in short, awful. Betrayed.
    I’m not American, but a great deal of southern politics reverberates north of the border, and that fills me with dread; but what aches is the people that will be hurt by this man, by his followers, and his party.

    As a misanthropic, apathy-riddled pessimist I was quite surprised by my compassion (it’s rather difficult to make myself feel that way, but I do try sometimes).

    And I realized that I hear about tragedies all over the world; that people are bombed, and killed, and raped and murdered. There are famines and sickness and terrible things everywhere, to the point where it paralyzes the part of you that is human and denial becomes one of the only ways to continue to survive.
    And many of these are direct results of governments, like that of Syria, or in Egypt, or all over the middle east; or Africa, or Asia. Europe and North America have some blissful pockets where peace prevails, mostly but we certainly aren’t immune to laws discriminating against women, or LGBT, or straight up racism or otherwise.

    And why do I feel so awful about this election then? Why does Trump so rankle me? Because this is a country that came so close; because instead of watching somewhere where progress and human rights have never been that important, this is a place that has at times led the world, and one where so many important milestones have been reached just recently. And I’m just sitting here, watching it slide back. Watching people say “my money is more important than your humanity;” and we’ve seen how that argument has gone before in the states, but given the deification of the confederacy going on in some places, clearly they never learned their lesson. That’s the world where the economy is the number one priority, and I challenge you to tell me otherwise.

    I think right now a lot of us are probably feeling a bit like many did when, after watching a nation tear itself apart over slavery, and finally abolish it, they, instead of uniting, forced jim crow laws and their ilk down society’s throat. Obviously it’s not the same feeling, quite; afterall, no matter what you can say about conditions today, you cannot argue that they’re as bad as they’ve been, even if they’ve been better at other times.

    The thing that terrifies me most, probably, is how much work is done to disenfranchise people – requiring IDs that people don’t have, closing down polling locations early, etc, to prevent those who would likely vote against you from doing so. And I know that’s only going to increase, given how much hubbub Trump made about “rigging” (never mind that the rigging was in many cases in his favour).

    But to all those who ache right now, and for whom the following years might hurt more than the past ones have: take solace in the fact that the struggle isn’t over. It’s not much, but when you look at how far we’ve come from the days of slavery, and ritualistic police brutality in gay bars – well, just consider how those people would have felt about the hard fought victories that have been won. They’d be amazed, they’d be ecstatic! It’s not a reason to give up, or to stop fighting: it’s a reason to congratulate ourselves as people on what we’ve done in the face of adversity, and to continue to push for more.
    Trump and his kind are not inevitable, nor are they a forever. I said that if Trump won I would eat my underwear; well, if he wins in 4 years, I’ll eat everyone else’s underwear, too.
    Looking back in time, things like these have happened before, if perhaps not necessarily in our lives, to this degree. People have lost rights sometimes more easily than they gained, often so. Yet still we progressed to the modern age. And for all its flaws, things will go on, and for many of us they will be much the same. Look down to the other post below this about the “death rattle”, and if that can’t at least make you smile a little, well, then nothing can make this better.

    And I guess I’d really like to just add that in this moment, I care about everyone too; I’m trying very hard to have that compassion, and I don’t think I could have phrased it better.

    • Bob

      There are feminists who want “special courts” for prosecuting accusations of rape where the burden of proof is on the accused. Hillary accepted their support without so much as a blink of the eye. However, You are accusing Trump of being the one who wants to take your rights away?

      I hope you like a high fiber diet, because Trump is going to win in four years. Not because he’s racist and America is full of EVIL BIGOTS, but because once you finally get over your paranoia and judge him for his actions, you’ll want to come to American so YOU can vote for him in 4 years. Did you even listen to his acceptance speech? That is exactly how we who follow Trump think. That’s what we want. That’s what we expect.

      • Mechwarrior

        There are feminists who want “special courts” for prosecuting accusations of rape where the burden of proof is on the accused.

        Citation needed

        • Sendaz

          I think he may be thinking of the UN recommendation for specialized courts/tribunals for violence against women.

          http://www.endvawnow.org/en/articles/144-specialized-courts-tribunals-for-violence-against-women.html

          However as to where burden of proof lies, that will vary by country doing so according to their own laws.

        • palmvos

          look at what the universities do when they try to deal with rape internally. switching burden of proof, denying counsel are parts of the process.
          https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/08/29/toxic-environment-for-sons-accused-of-campus-sex-offenses-turns-mothers-to-militants/

          • Mechwarrior

            First of all, that’s college campuses, not criminal courts. There’s absolutely nothing about it being some sort of agenda for Hillary and her nasty women to somehow flip the burden of proof in criminal courts.

            Second of all, from the article itself:

            In 2010, the Center for Public Integrity and NPR, put out a powerful joint investigation called “Sexual Assault on Campus, A Frustrating Search for Justice.”

            [College Sexual Assault: 1 in 5 college women say they were violated]

            Their survey and interviews with sexual assault victims revealed that “students who have been the victim of sexual assaults on campus face a depressing litany of barriers that often assure their silence and leave their alleged assailants largely unpunished. … By silencing victims and turning judicial hearings into something like kangaroo courts, colleges prioritize their own reputations over victims’ safety and support and turn their campuses into hostile environments of victims of sexual assault.”

          • palmvos

            that was the first article about this i could find. if you read more- these systems stem from an Obama Administration interpretation of title IX that mandates that universities attempt to deal with it.
            http://endrapeoncampus.org/title-ix/
            note- that the standard here is preponderance of the evidence. that is a lower standard than criminal use. now there is a lot of push back against this.

            https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/04/14/several-students-win-recent-lawsuits-against-colleges-punished-them-sexual-assault
            in short there is truth to the idea that in the US there is a push to lower the standards for rape on campus- this is only place that it can be done currently in the US

          • Mechwarrior

            But that wasn’t the original claim. The original claim was that Hillary wanted to reverse, not lower, the standards for rape in criminal court.

          • palmvos

            you are correct. I would not bet that the OP could not find a group advocating for exactly that in the US. I refuse to take the UN seriously anymore. if i had the power… id move the lot of them to a building within 50 feet of the Dome of the Rock. that will keep them busy..

          • Mechwarrior

            Thank you Lewis, that was short, yet pointless.

          • palmvos

            but the idea of relocating the UN was fun for a moment wasn’t it?

      • guesty

        No, I didn’t listen to his speech – I didn’t have to. There is this strange idea that seems to be most prevalent among Trump supporters that some of what he says overrides other things.
        I’m not considering the things he says out of context. I’m not talking about decade old quotes.
        These are a few of those reasons I came up with on my walk: his financials are in a wreck; if America were voting for a businessman for his business acumen, they picked the wrong one. They picked one who relies on brand power over quality, on legal threats over reliability or responsibility, and one who pays very little in tax. That is not smart. That is a shirking of a citizen’s duty. Look at his legal proceedings, at the complaints over the services his businesses provide. These are only the problems with his so-called “strengths”.
        He has also: actively made fun of the disabled as a way to sidestep their criticisms of him, blatantly lied about abortion procedures in a fear-mongering way (sadly not a trait isolated to him), encouraged violence in his supporters (particularly towards protesters that were black, although in fairness that may have more to do with the demographics of those who protested him vs those who were supporting him), joked about his supporters killing his opponent, threatened to jail journalists, threatened to jail his opponent, openly supports torture (despite the fact it is against SO many laws and isn’t even reliable – I am unaware of anything suggesting it is more reliable than traditional techniques which are, mind you, already pretty damn awful), has mocked the weight and appearance of women instead of referring to their abilities or actions.
        His foreign policy ideas are laughable and impractical when he offers them at all – for the most part, his platform is one of vagueness and promises over concrete ideas. Not to mention what he has said about Muslims. And also his practices when in charge of his beauty pageants was, I would suggest, borderline pedophilic. And his comments about climate change are deeply concerning.

        And all of that are just the recent things I can think of, off the top of my head.

        Not to mention that I did not refer to Hillary at all; she is completely and utterly irrelevant to any of what I said or am saying.

        And in truth, if Trump did every single thing he said he would, and the economy entered some sort of golden age? I would despise him still. The economy is a non-issue to me, completely, politically speaking. If I were in charge and I could say, stop climate change, by plunging the world into a second depression – I’d do it in less than a heartbeat. And of course it’s a rather sheltered thing of me to say, isn’t it? But, it is the truth. There are simply vastly more important things to me, and there is nothing wrong with that: we all have our priorities.

        The fundamental issue with your argument is that I share the same values as you, and that I just don’t think Trump does, or is capable of doing so, or that I just don’t realize it and will come to some sort of epiphany if it happens – but that’s not true at all. The issue is that I want so very little of what he can offer, even if we assume the best position outcome. I don’t care about what he says about safety, and I don’t care about what he says about the economy – so what does that leave? His social positions and his foreign policy, which are detestable.

        And lastly, this came out sort of vile; but i don’t think I can change that without having to change my position or arguments, so I will instead just end with: I don’t mean any offense to you here, personally, nor do I take any from you. It is the nature of politics to be polarizing in many ways; it is the duty of people not to let that turn them into hateful people, regardless of the shape or distance of the differences.

  • Chris

    Thank you for this update, and the wonderful suggestion. I donated $25 to each of those charities ($30 for CAIR), and I admit, it does make one feel a little bit better; just a bit less powerless and frustrated.

    Somewhat unrelated, but maybe maybe maybe without congress blocking -everything-, we’ll actually put a dent in that $3.7 trillion infrastructure shortfall? I’m not holding my breath, but it’d be nice if -something- good came out of the next 4 years.

  • Bob

    Reading stuff like this just makes me sad.

    It’s so horrible that you have fallen for the DNC’s propaganda. You take a sound bite from 11 years ago from an entertainer (who was a democrat at the time, lets not forget that) and you claim it dictates who the person is now.

    Being gay as a Mexican hatband, I totally voted for Trump.

    Because when a gay bar was shot up by a muslim, Hillary told us that “there are two sides to every story”. No. There are not two sides to a story when a gay bar is shot up and 50 people murdered.

    Trump, on the other hand, was appalled.

    Trump was advocating for gay rights decades ago. He was boycotted for openly hiring gays. He lost millions hiring gays. At the same time, Hillary was voting against legalizing gay marriage. Trump stood for what he believed in. Hillary will say whatever she needs to keep getting more and more power.

    The DNC and everyone on the left demonized him, taking his quotes out of context and calling him a Racist, Bigot, Homophobe, Islamaphobe… whatever. And I believed that bullshit too. Until I tried to track down the original source. I tried to find the exact quotes and video clips that “proved” he was all they said.

    Funny thing. I never could quite find the originals.

    I could find people CALLING him all this stuff, but, well, Lets take for example “Mexicans are Rapists”

    Actually what he said was, Mexico is SENDING rapists.

    And 80% of all women, regardless of age, are raped when they try to sneak across the border from Mexico. They are raped before they even get here.

    So, if they are raped on the Mexican side of the border, who’s doing the raping?

    Furthermore, they call him racist for speaking ill of Mexicans… Except that Mexicans aren’t a race. They are a nationality. And Mexico’s Government IS putting out pamphlets on how to sneak across the American Border. The actual GOVERNMENT of Mexico is doing this. So, the Mexican Government IS sending rapists here. That’s an actual factual statement. You might not like the statement, but it’s TRUE.

    Or are you saying that the Women’s shelters all along the southern border is lying and making up all those statistics about the number of raped immigrants? I believe those shelters. I believe those illegals immigrants are being raped. I think it’s horrible. I think Mexico is trying to off load it’s worst element on someone else. The pamphlet has been published since 2012. Sorry. But these are FACTS. I don’t care how they make you feel. You need to face REALITY if we are ever going to help these people.

    Time and time again, I hear quotes from Trump out of context and out of order, but when I go to the original unedited footage, I get a totally different story.

    However, back to that 11 year old clip. It was terrible. And what happened when it became public? The Republican side went after him. The republicans went after their own nomination for screwing up.

    Now, if it had been Hillary, would the Democrats have attacked their own side?

    Trump stands for an ideal. He is a Conservative Liberal. We are a Liberal Country and We Want It To STAY that way. That’s the Conservative part. Let’s keep things the way they are. LIBERAL.

    Hillary was a Progressive Authoritarian. She wanted to change things and make things LESS Liberal. She wanted to restrict free speech. She wanted to take away your rights, because she knew best.

    Trump wants smaller government = Less Control Over You.
    Hillary wanted Bigger Givernment = MORE control over you.

    So tell me, which one is the future Hitler? Which one was the one who wanted to take away my rights?

    She wanted to bring millions of people into this country from cultures that would KILL ME just for being gay. Hillary said what she said over the Orlando Shooting because she valued the Muslim vote over Gay LIVES.

    Trump doesn’t care.

    And that’s your problem. You want him to care about your special snowflake group you are a member of, and he doesn’t. He doesn’t care about blacks. He doesn’t care about gays. He doesn’t care about women…

    And he doesn’t care about MEN. And he doesn’t care about WHITES. And he doesn’t care about STRAIGHTS. HE DOES NOT CARE.

    You care. You care about one group over another. YOU show favoritism. If you favor about one group over another, YOU are the racist, sexist, bigot. Don’t give me that “The oppressed can’t be racist” crap. That’s exactly the sort of thing a racist would say to justify being racist.

    Only by not caring about what race, color, creed, religion, or social orientation someone is, can you stop being a bigot. I want people to care about ME, not about what label you PUT ON ME. Hate me or love me, but let it be because I am a horrible or wonderful PERSON, and not a “Fill in the blank” that you have stereotyped me as.

    Nothing is going to happen. We are not YOU. YOU would round up conservatives and lock us up in “reeducation centers” until we started “thinking the right way” For all your claims of diversity, you silence anyone who speaks out against you with alarming regularity.

    Listen to Trumps Acceptance Speech. He believes what he said. We believe what he said. The only reason racists and bigots follow Trump is because the Media did such a good job convincing everyone he was one, that the REAL racist bigots started to follow him.

    And the media keeps lying. On election night, they said “Trump never denounced the support of the KKK” and yet, Trump denounced it the very next day. And many times after that. Yet, CNN, “news you can trust” keeps repeating the same LIE. Trump never accepted the KKK’s support. The KKK doesn’t think like Trump. There is no place in Trump America for the KKK.

    And if you think we who follow Trump will ALLOW him to strip away our liberties, well, you got another thing coming. We expect him to give us BACK our lost liberties. The One’s Obama TOOK FROM US. Back to ALL of us. INCLUDING YOU. And if he doesn’t, we will crucify him on the side of Trump Tower.

    Unlike YOU liberals who blindly follow your leaders, we will cut our leaders down in a heartbeat if they fail us. That tape from 11 years ago is all the proof you need. We were willing to lose the election, rather than give up our principals.

    Sorry you are scared. You don’t need to be. Yes, there are idiots out there doing stupid things in Trump’s name. They are going to be surprised when the rest of us get rid of them. They aren’t “real” Trump supporters. Trump wants to help ALL Americans. Not just one group over another. That’s what YOU do. We don’t. We are fair. We give everyone the same chance. We cut each other down just as much as we cut down those who oppose us. That’s both our strength and weakness.

    We don’t work well as a group, but all our infighting makes us stronger. We are willing to question ourselves and live with doubt, because we care about results, not about being “right”.

    That’s why Trump said he welcomes your protests. He wants to hear what you have to say. He doesn’t want you to be quiet. Speak loud and proud. Just don’t stop anyone else from saying what THEY want. Even if you don’t like it. Even if you hate what you are hearing. They have as much right to speak as you do.

    As for non-Americans. There will be no secret police rounding up illegals. Here is what is going to happen:

    1. We will deport any illegal who is a criminal.

    2. No free ride.

    That’s about it. No more Food stamps, no more welfare checks, No more free money, No more free housing. The government won’t hand out free stuff to Non-Americans any more. That’s all he has to do. Without free money, most illegals will self-deport. Note, I said “MOST”.

    If you can survive without the free money, we welcome you to stay as long as you want. Please. We want hard working immigrants like you. You are a winner. If you can’t make it on your own or without government handouts, maybe it’s time you were on your way. Try as long as you want, but we only want the best here.

    This is how America used to be. We used to have open borders, and no free lunch. 2/3rds of all immigrants went back home. The winners stayed, the losers left. That’s why America is great. We are a nation of winners.

    Hillary wanted to bring over millions of losers. Hillary thinks you are losers. She thinks you, and every special snowflake group she can slap a label on, is a victim. We are not a nation of victims. We are a nation of Winners. Our best days are ahead of us. Hillary wanted to stick a fork in the country, because she thought we were done.

    That’s the bottom line. That’s it. That’s all that’s going to happen. Nobody is going to come for you. Nobody is going to arrest you and put you in jail. That’s what Liberals do. You arrest people you don’t like. You have people put in jail for thinking wrong. We don’t. You are they one who want secret courts for trying American Citizens for “special crimes”. We think that’s a bad idea. Just saying. Yes, that means sometimes we have to put up with morons shouting stupid things.

    A small price to pay for knowing that I can shout any stupid thing I want to say as well.

    So, stop being afraid. Watch what he does as president and judge him on his ACTIONS, not on what people are TELLING YOU he’s going to do. THEY want to control you through FEAR. Trump wants you to be brave. Trump wants you to be the best you can be. Trump wants AMERICA great again, and if you are an American, That INCLUDES YOU. He doesn’t care what sort of special snowflake you are. He wants you to be awesome.

    And if he does get out of line, if he does try to take away the liberty of the Citizens of America, We will go after him. We were willing to throw away the election on a sound bite 11 years old. What do you imagine we will do to him if it turns out he lied to us TODAY? If he doesn’t get results, in two years, we can yank congress from him with the pull of a lever.

    You see, that’s what you people never got. Those of us who elected Trump are many the same people who voted for Obama. We voted for him, because it looked like he could get things done. And he did. Obama got a lot done. He just happened to get the wrong thing done. He just happened to flush the country down the toilet. But he still was a man who got RESULTS. And we can respect Obama for that. We may not respect WHAT he accomplished, but we can respect that he accomplished much.

    This isn’t a “white-lash”. This isn’t sexism. We just voted for the candidate we thought was most likely to get results.

    Trump is a doer. We voted for him because he has a proven track record of success. If he fails, we will tear him apart, sip of his blood, and feast on his flesh. He commands no blind loyalty. We will give him a chance. He’d better deliver. All we ask, if you give him a chance as well.

    Or are you so intolerant, so close minded, so bigoted, that you can’t trust a Straight White Man?

    • Dawn Smashington

      It really is great that maybe he’ll turn into a more traditional Republican figure. It really is. It means less harmful policies might go into effect and bodes better for international affairs.

      But we’re still fucked here at home. Women are getting sexually assaulted by Trump supporters, POC and LGBTQ are getting harassed and assaulted, and the people doing these things aren’t going to go away. Emboldened by a president endorsed by the KKK, awful people are coming together, bro-fiving each other, and reigning hell down upon any and all who are not white males. They are going to organize, and they will meet the barest of official resistance. Trump doesn’t need a Gestapo if his own citizen supporters are doing the dirty work for him.

      So yeah. We can put those assaulting us in jail, but we can’t put them all in jail. We have to change the culture, somefuckinghow, so that people don’t grow into adults who genuinely think it’s their right to grab women’s bodies, or have no qualms attacking Muslims for the crime of being Muslim. If anyone has any other ideas to fight this than to vote, be vigilant, and protect each other, I’d really like to hear it.

    • Danygalw

      “If he fails, we will tear him apart, sip of his blood, and feast on his flesh. He commands no blind loyalty. We will give him a chance. He’d better deliver.”

      As long as you take the rest of the Republican party with him, I look forward to it.

    • Here’s a Name

      I have not gotten all the way through your post but first of all when Donald Trump talked about mexico sending rapists that does say that mexicans in America are rapists which is rapist. And your logic is wrong about them sending rapists, because the rapists are not the immigrants: it’s the “coyotes” (the term used to describe people who guide immigrants across the border and thus have a lot of power over the people they shuttle). So lots of women can be raped by people on the way to the U.S. without having the people entering the United States be rapists.

      Also I just read that last line even though I have not gotten through the rest. Trump is not just a “straight white man” he’s someone who spent his entire campaign being hateful, and making hateful campaign promises. It’s kind of not fair to try to imply that people don’t trust Trump just because he’s a straight white man.

  • Bob

    Oh. Yeah. Bernie totally would have won. I fear Bernie. He would have taken this country straight down to Hell with his insane plans, but I respect him as a person. He is a good man and and I believe he loves America. That would have been all he needed to win over enough votes to kick Trump’s Ass.

    Just because I voted for Trump, doesn’t mean I can’t face the reality that he would never have had a chance against Bernie.

    • Izo

      I’m not so sure about if he would have won (it’s hard to get past him being a socialist in an election where a poor economy is a big factor), but he at least genuinely believed in his promises, whether they are insane promises or not.

  • Grant

    I’m afraid for a number of my friends and family. If they’re not LGBT, they’re of minorities that are either hated by Toupee’s followers, or will be mistaken for those minorities by the ignorant and uncaring. I may not have a target on my back, but I too many who do to be okay with Lord Rump.

    Remember the poem, folks:

    First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out because I was not a communist.
    Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.
    Next they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
    And then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak for me.

    • Izo

      I really want to avoid talking much right now because I’m very out of being in any mood to talk, but since I have to buck the trend as an inherenet character flaw I have, I’ll just say….

      I’m pretty sure LGBTQ don’t have that much to worry about with a Trump presidency based on his past speeches and actions. I’m not defending Trump, but from what I’ve read of both his policies in his businesses and at Trump Tower and when building country clubs or whatever, he’s actually pretty supportive of LGBTQ rights. He even mentioned stuff to that effect in his victory speech. Although I guess if he was removed from power and his VP was put in charge instead, THAT would not be ideal for them, since I’ve read some stuff about Mike Pence which is troubling. But I think he mainly put him as his VP in order to shore up the conservative base.

      We’ll see what happens in the next four years, and I’m going to try keeping some of my friends from panicking too much (and I have more than a few friends that are panicking) until anything actually happens. I’m not going to make assumptions based on theoretical worst-case scenarios.

      • Danygalw

        haha so apparently when he asked John Kasich to be his VP he said he could have control of domestic and foreign policy. And. he picked Pence. he doesn’t care enough to not pick the most famously transphobic Republican politician there is.

        • Izo

          He picked Pence mainly to shore up the conservative base, which he needed. I’m pretty sure Trump’s not exactly going to take his marching orders from Mike Pence at all, or follow what Pence wants, since it’s Trump that won, not Pence. Trump doesn’t even listen to the Republicans establishment. No one cared about Mike Pence or Tim Kaine when they were voting. This isnt a Bush/Cheney relationship.

          • palmvos

            the official duty of the vice president is to break ties in the senate, and to inquire daily about the health of the president. in order to keep the peace many VP’s are given jobs to do- Cheney and Biden took the secure location concept to new heights!

          • Izo

            “the official duty of the vice president is to break ties in the senate, and to inquire daily about the health of the president”

            The Senate has a clear majority, meaning the VP has nothing to do there. And Trump’s in really good health. So unless someone was to try to assassinate Trump (which would be a STUPID idea in general, not to mention antithetical to our country, and especially dumb if you don’t like Mike Pence’s stances), then Pence is pretty much meaningless.

          • Akiva

            Sorry, you mean that Trump’s “lab tests are astonishingly excellent,” right? There isn’t a a 70 year old healthier than him, he could bench press a yak and shits gold bars. Win! http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-health-doctor-490836

            Trump has no interest in foreign or domestic policy or anything that doesn’t personally enrich him or have enormous breasts, and I’m 50-50 on whether he’s going to get impeached in the next couple years for massive conflicts of interest and/or the chain of fraud and sexual assault convictions coming down the line. In either case, it’ll be more or less Mike Pence’s government, or whoever figures out how to keep him in line.

          • Izo

            “Sorry, you mean that Trump’s “lab tests are astonishingly excellent,” right? There isn’t a a 70 year old healthier than him, he could bench press a yak and shits gold bars.”

            As hilarious as that is, I’m just saying Trump seems to be in excellent health.
            Tell you what… show me where Trump’s been shown to be in bad health and I may agree with you. It’s not like he was doing things like having coughing fits or collapsing in public so that his aides had to drag him into his car.

            “Trump has no interest in foreign or domestic policy or anything that doesn’t personally enrich him or have enormous breasts, and I’m 50-50 on whether he’s going to get impeached in the next couple years for massive conflicts of interest and/or the chain of fraud and sexual assault convictions coming down the line. ”

            Then maybe you should hope he does a great job and does not get impeached. Not to mention the sexual assault claims turned out to be lies, and they were from Clinton campaign supporters…. who mysteriously withdrew the claim after the election. The Clintons have done this before, with Herman Cain. Same exact scenario, in fact.

            “In either case, it’ll be more or less Mike Pence’s government, or whoever figures out how to keep him in line.”

            Again, I seriously doubt that Trump will be impeached or drop dead, and I think one of the reasons for picking Mike Pence, in addition to getting support among some conservatives, is so people WANT him to stay in power. I’m considering it the ‘Dan Quayle Pick’ move.

          • The Distinguished Anarchist

            “As hilarious as that is, I’m just saying Trump seems to be in excellent health.
            Tell you what… show me where Trump’s been shown to be in bad health and I may agree with you.”

            Donald Trump is currently 70 years old, is 6 feet, 3 inches tall, and weighs 236 pounds.(https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&rlz=1C1CHBD_enUS709US709&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=trump%20height%20and%20weight)

            According to the J.D. Robinson formula, the ideal weight for a man of his age is 177 pounds. (http://www.calculator.net/ideal-weight-calculator.html?ctype=standard&cage=70&csex=m&cheightfeet=6&cheightinch=3&cheightmeter=180&printit=0&x=68&y=20).

            According to the Rush University Medical Center Ideal Height and Weight chart, he is overweight, and four pounds shy of being considered obese (https://www.rush.edu/health-wellness/quick-guides/what-is-a-healthy-weight).

            So… let’s go with, say, high blood pressure, increased chance of stroke, all manner of heart disease issues, plus the remote possibility of an increased risk in colon or rectal cancer (http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/dietandphysicalactivity/bodyweightandcancerrisk/body-weight-and-cancer-risk-effects).

            But yeah, I guess he seems fine…

            There’s another issue with the entire concept of the Trump presidency. By electing him president, we, the American population have legitimized him. He will be immortalized in our nation’s history. There will one day be a presidential library about him (https://www.archives.gov/presidential-libraries/about). By voting that man into office, we have taught future generations that the end justifies the means. A Trump presidency shows kids that it nothing matters; you just have to say the wrong things to the right people, threaten the acceptable targets, or make whatever promises are vaguely necessary. All that matters is winning. And if there is any justice left in the world, then the entirety of his tenure in office will be overshadowed by these facts.

            Mind you, I’m not saying any of this in defense of Clinton. That statement is an indictment of them both, and anyone person who campaigns the same way.

          • Izo

            “Donald Trump is currently 70 years old, is 6 feet, 3 inches tall, and weighs 236 pounds.(https://www.google.com/webhp?s

            According to the J.D. Robinson formula, the ideal weight for a man of his age is 177 pounds. (http://www.calculator.net/idea….”

            Arnold Swartzenegger is 69 1/2, 6 foot 2 inches, and weighs 249 lbs. What does it say about his health? I mean he was only Mr. Universe and can probably bench press a truck or something. Seriously, if you’re going to be basing your assessment of Trump’s health on ideal weight, then most of the country is dying.

            “According to the Rush University Medical Center Ideal Height and Weight chart, he is overweight, and four pounds shy of being considered obese ”

            My god. Swartzenegger is shorter AND almost the same age by 4 months. And weighs almost 20 pounds more! He’s massively obese!

            Btw, why are we fat shaming people? I mean… I know it’s bad fat shaming people who are fat, apparently, but are we now fat shaming people who aren’t fat also?

            Equality? yay?

            “So… let’s go with, say, high blood pressure, increased chance of stroke, all manner of heart disease issues, plus the remote possibility of an increased risk in colon or rectal cancer”

            Except he doesn’t have high blood pressure, has no evidence of heart disease, no evidence of cancer of any kind, and his family history doesn’t show any history of stroke. And again…. are you pretty much saying no one can be president if they’re old? You do know that Hillary Clinton is 69, and Bill Clinton is 70? If we’re going based on age, Gary Johnson should have been elected president since he’s only 63. The youngest of the four candidates (Trump = 70, HRC = 69, Jill stein=66, Gary Johnson=63). Gary Johnson is also the thinnest of them. I mean sure, he’s basically a pothead but still…

            Thing is… he’s 70 but has a clean bill of health. Arguing he’s not healthy enough is being ridiculous.

            “But yeah, I guess he seems fine…”
            I’m going to assume this isnt sarcasm, since at least physical-health-wise, he does seem fine. So I think you probably shouldnt plan for his funeral and worry about a Pence presidency.

            “There’s another issue with the entire concept of the Trump presidency. By electing him president, we, the American population have legitimized him. He will be immortalized in our nation’s history. There will one day be a presidential library about him”

            Yes? So basically the same as every other President in our nation’s history.

            “By voting that man into office, we have taught future generations that the end justifies the means.”

            Uh.. For one thing… what means? Legal means of voting and playing by the rules of how American elections work? For another thing, no. By voting him (or HRC) into office, we were teaching future generations that we can have a peaceful transition of power. It’s what the protesters are doing that is setting a bad example for the future. The idea that ‘if we can’t get the result we want peacefully, we should use force and violence to try to achieve it instead.’ THATS ‘trying to say that the ends justify the means.’ You have it backwards, Distinguished Anarchist.

            “A Trump presidency shows kids that it nothing matters; you just have to say the wrong things to the right people, threaten the acceptable targets, or make whatever promises are vaguely necessary. All that matters is winning.”

            Uh… no. Ignoring the election by protesting the fact that the Trump presidency is a fact is what shows kids that nothing matters, that you just have to scare people and use physical violence to get what you want, threaten the acceptable targets, and make whatever threats are necessary. All that matters is winning.’

            Lets go to the video tape of one such lovely mother who traumatized her children because her 8 year old had the audacity to vote for Trump in a mock election held by the school. This is not a joke btw. She really did this. Then posted it on Facebook, thinking that what she did was a good thing. The swearing at him. The throwing him out. The merciless taunting. The emotional abuse. The threats to not only her 8 year old, but to her 5 year old who was also crying at what was she was doing to his older brother. Trigger warning btw. Seriously. Trigger warning. This is brutal.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbTEf6m4tms

            Here’s the story btw.

            http://abc13.com/news/mom-kicks-out-trump-supporting-son-in-viral-video/1603459/

            “And if there is any justice left in the world, then the entirety of his tenure in office will be overshadowed by these facts.”

            Actually, if there’s any justice in the world, he’ll be a fantastic president who will respect the rights of minorities, LGBT, bring back jobs, fix our broken health care system which is going bankrupt and costing families a lot of money that they can’t afford, fix a flawed immigration system to allow skilled individuals to more easily enter LEGALLY, and protect us from foreign threats while still holding true to American principles.

            Because we should WANT him to do a good job. We should not be hoping he will fail, or hoping he will be the monster some people are presenting as a worst case scenario. We shouldnt be hoping for the worst out of spite.

            If he does a good job, that’s good for EVERYONE

            “Mind you, I’m not saying any of this in defense of Clinton. That statement is an indictment of them both, and anyone person who campaigns the same way.”

            Oh I’m pretty sure I’d be making the same exact arguments if HRC had won and Trump supporters were rioting and acting like spoiled, dangerously threatening brats as well.

          • The Distinguished Anarchist

            This is really a minor tangent but I probably would hesitate to bring up Arnold Schwarzenegger as a positive example in any sort of health-related context. For one thing, not only do bodybuilders routinely weigh more than normal people to begin with, the enormous amounts of steroids he did have had a massive detrimental effect on his overall health.

            So if Donald Trump is secretly a physical adonis underneath his cheap-looking suits, more power to him. If not, then the oldest, and third heaviest president (behind Grover Cleveland and Howard Taft) we have ever he is at greater risk for all of those things than most other people his age.

            And the entire rest of your comment suggests a couple of things: 1) that you missed my point entirely, and 2) that you really don’t understand why people are protesting Mr. Trump.

            The reason why people are protesting Trump (aside from the ones that just like to break and steal things) is that they are scared. They are scared and angry. He has held almost every position on every issue, and said so many things during his campaign that it is impossible to know what positions he will ultimately hold when he gets into office. THAT’S why they are scared. And scared people panic and do dumb things.

            The rest of your post reminds me of Obama apologists. You want to overlook all of the rotten things he has done because you want (or need) to hope for the best. I liked Obama as a person. He seems like a chill guy who wants to do right by other people. But a lot of things he did while president were not okay. Expanding the scope and powers of the NSA was not okay. Authorizing all of those drone strikes (and those are just the ones we know about!) was not okay. Not fighting harder to close Guantanamo Bay was not okay. These are all things he should be called out onto the carpet over.

            And you are doing the same thing with Trump. “Meh, so what if he legitimizes homophobia and racial rhetoric. As long as he doesn’t actually legislate in that direction and instead fixes the real problems, he’s fine.”

            No he’s not. He is not fine. He is not okay. By not reminding him and everyone who supported him every minute of every day of the terrible things he said and did to get where he is, you are contributing to the institutionalization of those things.

            Bullying of any kind is a big hot button to me. And I happily cross parties to call people out on it. It is not okay to discriminate against the LGBT community simply because of who they are. It is not okay to refer to anyone from rural southern United States as an uneducated, ignorant, hick because of where they are from (so many of my friends in the city have no idea what those people lost during the recession). And it is not okay to excuse this kind of behavior, no matter what kind of net positive effect he might have on the country overall.

          • Izo

            “For one thing, not only do bodybuilders routinely weigh more than normal people to begin with, the enormous amounts of steroids he did have had a massive detrimental effect on his overall health.”

            That’s actually my point. Saying ‘he’s so and so a weight, and therefore unhealthy’ despite having a clean bill of health, no sign of heart problems, no sign of ANY health problems whatsoever’ is reallllly stretching to try to say he’s unwell. It’s bad wishful thinking on your behalf, and if you’re unwilling to face facts, you’re unable to figure out ways to deal with the reality that you’re in and change it in the future.

            “So if Donald Trump is secretly a physical adonis underneath his cheap-looking suits, more power to him. If not, then the oldest, and third heaviest president (behind Grover Cleveland and Howard Taft) we have ever he is at greater risk for all of those things than most other people his age.”

            Um…. he’s not that third heaviest President. Like I think I’ve mentioned, Bill Clinton was 236 lbs with a BMI of 29.1kg (overweight, but not quite obese – just like Trump). SAME EXACT WEIGHT, in fact! He did lose 20 pounds during his Presidency though. I am betting you’ve never described Bill that way, though. PS – Trump apparently has lost 16 lbs since his weight was last taken, meaning he is now 220 lbs.

            Other medical facts about Trump:
            Cholesterol – 169
            HDL cholesterol – 63
            LDL Cholesterol – 94
            Triglycerides – 61
            Blood Pressure – 116/70
            Blood sugar – 99
            Testosterone – 441.6
            Colonoscopy – No polyps
            EKG and Chest Xrays – Normal
            No family history of premature cardiac or neoplastic disease. Does not drink. Does not smoke.

            So.. yeah, the guy is healthy, especially for his age.

            How about Hllary though.

            Hillary is approximately 180 lbs. She’s 5’6″. That’s… not good. If you’re wondering about Trump, you should REALLY be concerned about Hillary, being clinically overweight – and possibly clinically obese. But we don’t talk about that because … I don’t know, I guess because she’s a woman and he’s a man. Or because it’s fat shaming for her, but not for him?

            Why can’t we give more specific info about Hillary? Because she refused to give that info. Not to mention she’s suffered from multiple blood clots, a recent bout of pneumonia that had her collapsing and fainting, odd spasms, uncontrollable coughing fits, hypothyroidism, blurred vision, and must take prescription blood thinners to live. She also smokes and drinks. From the stories, she drinks heavily. She supposedly was able to outdrink John McCain.

            Lets look at weights of other Presidents! LBJ came into office at 240 lbs, and left office at 200 lbs. Bush Jr came in at 210 and left at 196.. John Adams never had his weight even taken, but he was described as ‘corpulent.’

            My point though is that Trump’s BMI clearly isnt indicative of his health, and it seems like it’s only being pointed out by people who dislike him, not because it’s an actual concern. Just wishful thinking of people who think ‘I hope you die, I hope you get cancer/etc and die!’

            It’s not going to happen. I’d bet even money on that. He’s not a physical adonis. He’s 70. He’s not Jack La Lane. But he’s not in poor health, or even risky health.

            “And the entire rest of your comment suggests a couple of things: 1) that you missed my point entirely, and 2) that you really don’t understand why people are protesting Mr. Trump.”

            I don’t think I missed your point at all. I think you’re clutching at straws though to get into a world where Trump will die. Which honestly you probably shouldn’t want if you’re more scared of a Pence presidency.

            And I do understand why people are protesting Trump. Because they don’t like him, they’re scared of him because they’re conjured up the worst case scenario, since he’s been portrayed by the media as a literal monster. Think of it like this – Trump speaks largely in hyperbole. He also said that black people will vote for him 95 percent 2020. He also said he’s going to ban all muslims. Do you think he realistically thinks either of those things?
            I don’t. He speaks in hyperbole. It means ‘I’m going to increase the vetting process on immigrants from certain countries which have a history of terrorism against the United States, in the same way that Jimmy Carter did under the same law and justification. And he means ‘I’m going to reduce unemployment for minorities so much that they’ll feel economic prosperity and I will get a larger percentage of the minority vote in 2020. But instead he uses this extreme, often stupid-sounding language. Because then people remember it.

            I’m not defending Trump, but i’m explaining his mentality.

            “He has held almost every position on every issue, and said so many things during his campaign that it is impossible to know what positions he will ultimately hold when he gets into office.”

            Exactly. He’s held almost every position. Why believe the worst positions then? Why not instead look at his actual history? His actual history suggests that he’s not racist, definitely not antisemitic, not a homophobe by ANY stretch of the imagination, IS sometimes sexist (and think of himself as a lady’s man, mainly because he’s rich and has an alpha-mentality), but also doesnt seem to let that prevent him from hiring women into positions of authority, and engages in trash talk when attacked, or when on the Howard Stern show, or in informal interviews, or when on WWF. He is, however, extremely politically incorrect. Which happened to help him in this election, mostly as a backlash against PC culture by a significant portion of his voter base (at least 30 percent) that thinks that PC culture has become too arrogant and authoritarian. So ironically they helped to elect a person who is arrogant and traditionally authoritarian, but not PC.

            “And scared people panic and do dumb things.”

            Then maybe instead of encouraging them to be scared, you should try to calm those fears so they do NOT do dumb things.

            “The rest of your post reminds me of Obama apologists.”

            Sorry, I almost choked when you said that 🙂 Telling the truth is not the same as being an apologist. He’s NOT in poor health. That’s not being an apologist for Trump. That’s just being FACTUAL.

            “You want to overlook all of the rotten things he has done because you want (or need) to hope for the best.”

            No I didn’t say that either. And acknowledging his health is good does not overlook anything he’s done. However, you SHOULD want him to do well. If he does well, the country does well. If you hope he fails and is a terrible president, and does all the worst possible things, you are hoping for the worst for the country.

            “I liked Obama as a person. He seems like a chill guy who wants to do right by other people.”

            I was ambivalent about Obama. I considered him inexperienced but a good speaker. Then I considered him arrogant and willing to ignore the law, but only once he actually STARTED IGNORING THE LAW.

            “But a lot of things he did while president were not okay. Expanding the scope and powers of the NSA was not okay.”

            We agree on this.

            “Authorizing all of those drone strikes (and those are just the ones we know about!) was not okay.”

            We agree on this.

            “Not fighting harder to close Guantanamo Bay was not okay.”

            Not sure how he could have fought harder to close it considering funding things is Congress’s job, not the President’s.

            “And you are doing the same thing with Trump.”

            No I’m not. I’m just pointing out facts and saying that a lot of the fears are overblown from imagination and negative press bias rather than anything substantive.

            “”Meh, so what if he legitimizes homophobia and racial rhetoric.”

            Except he won’t legitimize homophobia or racial tensions. Nothing at all in his entire history shows that he’s ever been a racist or a homophobe. In fact, his history seems to go in the exact opposite direction. He’s fought to get minorities and jews into country clubs he built, and wouldnt build them if they werent allowed in. He has employed, in high positions in his company, a number of LGBs, jews, women, and racial minorities in his companies for DECADES. He was one of the first companies which were okay with the whole thing with transexuals using the bathroom of their choice in any of his buildings. He donates to all sorts of charities.

            “As long as he doesn’t actually legislate in that direction and instead fixes the real problems, he’s fine.”

            Not too put too fine a point on it, if he doesn’t legislate in that direction, he’s not legitimizing any of the things you think he’s legitimizing. And if he fixes the ‘real’ problems? Well hell…. that’s great. I want him to fix real problems. I HOPE he fixes the economy. I hope he fixes health care so everyone’s happy. I HOPE he revitalizes the inner cities to make life better for minorities. I HOPE he secures the border while still allowing immigrants in legally, so we don’t get what’s happening in Germany or Belgium. He even said in his speech that one of his main concerns is to protect the LGBT community in the US. And he was cheered for it.

            So yeah, I’m being hopeful. Sue me.

            “By not reminding him and everyone who supported him every minute of every day of the terrible things he said and did to get where he is, you are contributing to the institutionalization of those things.”

            Bull. If he actually DOES any of these negative things, I’d hold his feet to the fire. But I’m going to base it on his actual actions, like an adult. Not on my imagination. Why? Because I don’t have a choice in the matter. He was elected, legally. And so since I believe in the process, I’m going to give him a chance to prove he’s not the monster that some are trying to paint him as. Just like I tried to give Obama the chance to show that he wasn’t woefully inexperienced to run a corner deli, let alone the USA.

            “Bullying of any kind is a big hot button to me.”
            Me too. It’s why I did not vote for either Trump or Clinton. They both have bullying attitudes.

            “And I happily cross parties to call people out on it.”
            Good. I happily do that as well.

            “It is not okay to discriminate against the LGBT community simply because of who they are.”

            I agree.

            “It is not okay to refer to anyone from rural southern United States as an uneducated, ignorant, hick because of where they are from (so many of my friends in the city have no idea what those people lost during the recession).”

            I agree.

            “And it is not okay to excuse this kind of behavior, no matter what kind of net positive effect he might have on the country overall.”

            Except he hasn’t actually DONE this behavior. When he actually does, talk to me. We might agree on more. I’m hoping that he does a good job until then.

          • The Distinguished Anarchist

            I don’t recall him losing any weight. I remember him saying he “wanted to” during his Dr. Oz interview where he stated that he has, for a long time, had a lot of concern over his weight. Then I listed a few specific problems that overweight people are at a greater risk of. None of that was accusatory, and reading it as fat shaming is grasping a few bundles of straw yourself. His level of physical fitness doesn’t concern me that much. I was simply responding to your request for a specific example of where he is in any way unhealthy. I don’t want Trump to die, and not just because I think Pence is nearly as bad, just for different reasons. (Honestly, I think that if the Democrats won the House, and followed through with the rumor of naming Sanders as speaker, there’s no way either Trump or Pence would survive until inauguration. Call it a conspiracy all you want, but I genuinely believe the Republican majority is the only thing keeping the two of them alive.)

            Let me give you a little bit of secondhand experience regarding the man that is Trump:

            One of my co-workers has a brother-in-law who is a private contractor that used to work for a big company that installed HVAC systems in large buildings. He was picked to go meet with Trump to negotiate the installation in one of his various projects (I don’t recall any more specific details than that). After meeting with Trump one time, the brother-in-law outright refused to do business with him. So much so that the company fired him over it. They eventually got the contract after bringing in someone else and went to work. Once they were finished, Trump brought in a team of inspectors from another company and apparently put together an enormously pedantic list of every thing they did wrong, and used that as an excuse to refuse payment for their services. They took him to court, naturally, where he dragged out the litigation to such an extent that the company eventually went bankrupt.

            Now were there mitigating circumstances there? Possibly. It’s possible the company did do such a shitty job that Trump’s complaints were warranted. Do I believe that? Not really. I’m much more curious about whether the money Trump owed for the installation was more or less than how much he actually spent on litigation.

            I also know that him flat-out not paying for services rendered is a pretty common complaint from companies that have done business with Trump in the past.

            The point of this is to provide context for why I think he is scum. Context aside from his claim that Judge Curiel was unfit to oversee the class action suit against Trump University because his parents were from Mexico Because it was apparently the judge’s fault that he might have found Trump’s comments about all Mexican immigrants to be offensive, or something. That would be like me getting arrested for murder, punching the lead prosecutor in the face during the bail hearing and then claiming he’s unfit to preside over the trial because he’s now biased against me.

            Context aside from his claim that he can do anything he wants to women, and that they will allow him to do it because he is rich. As though the mere presence of his wealth simply IMPLIES consent.

            …I’m sorry, I just threw up a little on my keyboard as I wrote that.

            “Not too put too fine a point on it, if he doesn’t legislate in that direction, he’s not legitimizing any of the things you think he’s legitimizing.”

            He already has legitimized it. Haven’t you been paying attention? I’m sure you are aware of the spike in hate crimes that occurred in the days following his election. By not refusing the endorsement of groups like the KKK, he is exactly as guilty of inciting them as Jill Stein is for not shutting down a 9/11 truther during one of her Fox News Green Party interviews. By not telling them, to their face, in plain English, that what they are doing is unacceptable, those people think you agree with them.

            You realize that during his post-election interview, where he firmly, and concisely told his supports to “stop it” with all the hate crimes was the first, and thus far, ONLY time he has said anything like that, right? You know what that looks like to his detractors, right? “Well I needed their votes to get elected, but now that I am elected I can put them in their place.” And to the people gleefully committing such acts it looks like, “Ha, he’s only saying that to appease those pussy libtards. He doesn’t really mean it.”

            That’s why consistency matters. That’s why taking a moral stance early, loudly, and frequently is so important.

            And finally, that’s why I have no good reasons to just “hope for the best”. Because even if you’re right, and he doesn’t care one whit about the LGBT community or any sort of social reform; PENCE DOES. And I, like a lot of other people, are worried that Donald will be far to busy pushing his own agenda to tell his VP not to infringe on the rights and freedoms of a group that he doesn’t give two shits about because they don’t benefit him in any tangible way.

          • Izo

            “I don’t recall him losing any weight. I remember him saying he “wanted to” during his Dr. Oz interview where he stated that he has, for a long time, had a lot of concern over his weight.”

            I’m not going to act surprised that you havent heard anything positive about Trump’s health, given the penchant to wish for the worst. I didn’t pull 16 pounds out of the ether, btw.

            But lets, for a moment, assume he hasn’t, but he wants to. That again puts him on par with Bill Clinton.

            “Then I listed a few specific problems that overweight people are at a greater risk of. None of that was accusatory, and reading it as fat shaming is grasping a few bundles of straw yourself.”

            Except he isn’t at risk of any of the health risks you’ve mentioned, based on his physicals. Also I’m not reading it as fat shaming. That was me being sarcastic. I do that sometimes, given what other people were saying in other posts about talking about other people having problems because of being overweight (which Trump still doesn’t seem to be, even based on your own numbers).

            ” His level of physical fitness doesn’t concern me that much.”

            Then why were you arguing about it in the first place? You responded to the thread by bringing up his level of physical fitness by calling doubt to it, in the hopes that he’ll die. Even though that would put Mike Pence in charge, which I’d imagine would be a lot more troubling for people who dislike Trump.

            “I was simply responding to your request for a specific example of where he is in any way unhealthy.”

            Exactly. I asked for an example of how he’s unhealthy. You were unable to show an example. So instead you showed an example of how some other people at his weight should statistically be possibly at risk of being unhealthy, despite the fact that he is not. By your reasoning, most of the country can’t be President. Viva equality.

            “I don’t want Trump to die, and not just because I think Pence is nearly as bad, just for different reasons.”

            I’d argue Pence is far worse, and good that you don’t want someone to die just because you don’t like them.

            “(Honestly, I think that if the Democrats won the House, and followed through with the rumor of naming Sanders as speaker, there’s no way either Trump or Pence would survive until inauguration. Call it a conspiracy all you want, but I genuinely believe the Republican majority is the only thing keeping the two of them alive.)”

            That does sound like a conspiracy theory but I’m not going to judge you there. I never doubt the possibility of the Democrats, (or Republicans for that matter, although right now it’s been the Democrats who have been behaving in an embarrassingly hypocritical way) to be massive hypocrites and psychotic because of their innate emotional immaturity and inability to deal with being in a civilized society.

            Btw, I’m neither a Democrat or a Republican. I feel fine with criticizing both of them without being considered a hypocrite.

            “One of my co-workers has a brother-in-law who is a private contractor that used to work for a big company that installed HVAC systems in large buildings. He was picked to go meet with Trump to negotiate the installation in one of his various projects (I don’t recall any more specific details than that). After meeting with Trump one time, the brother-in-law outright refused to do business with him. So much so that the company fired him over it. They eventually got the contract after bringing in someone else and went to work. Once they were finished, Trump brought in a team of inspectors from another company and apparently put together an enormously pedantic list of every thing they did wrong, and used that as an excuse to refuse payment for their services. They took him to court, naturally, where he dragged out the litigation to such an extent that the company eventually went bankrupt.”

            So Trump handled it through the courts. Legally. With actual facts in that ‘pedantic list of everything they did wrong.’ Although speaking as a lawyer, I’m confused why your co-worker’s brother-in-law did not get at least partial payment, since the UCC and most state laws would say that he would get at least partial payment (or even full payment if it was substantially done). Seems more like your co-worker’s brother-in-law (I dont know – sounds like you’re saying the friend of a friend of a friend of a friend and treating that as evidence btw) had a crappy lawyer.

            Btw, I don’t doubt that Trump probably does use the law to screw over other businesspeople. He’s a successful businessman (and yes I know about the bankruptcies – he even used the bankruptcy laws successfully, and legally). Part of business tends to be realizing the other person is planning on screwing you over, and making sure to screw them over even more so you come out ahead. I’d rather have that person on my side than against me, at least in trade negotiations and economic standoffs. To quote Babylon 5:

            “Only one human captain has ever survived battle with a Minbari fleet. He is behind me. You are in front of me. If you value your lives, be somewhere else.”
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFvkgfBXHPA

            “Context aside from his claim that Judge Curiel was unfit to oversee the class action suit against Trump University because his parents were from Mexico Because it was apparently the judge’s fault that he might have found Trump’s comments about all Mexican immigrants to be offensive, or something.”

            Well technically speaking, he can bring up the appearance of impropriety. The judge is free to dismiss his objection. I’ll admit that he brought up a stupid objection if it was based entirely on the Judge being of mexican immigrants, but if the judge had said stuff in past speeches or judgments that would create the appearance of bias, or belonged to certain groups which create a bias, then he’d be justified to make the objection. Which actually was the case. It just got dumbed down as a sound bite to “Trump wants the judge to recuse himself for being the son of Mexican immigrants.” Or even more dumbed down to “Trump wants the judge to recuse himself for being Mexican.” Which is more racist and idiotic than what actually happened.

            “That would be like me getting arrested for murder, punching the lead prosecutor in the face during the bail hearing and then claiming he’s unfit to preside over the trial because he’s now biased against me.”

            That would actually not be anything like what you just described. Here’s what would be a good comparison though.

            You’re being arrested for murder of someone who is a police officer.

            You find out that the judge comes from a long line of police officers, and everyone in his or her family is a police officer, and he or she speaks at pro-police officer rallies regularly, and he or she typically gives extremely hard sentence against anyone accused of violence against police, above what other judges sentence.

            You then ask the judge to recuse himself or herself. The judge is likely not going to, but you’d be justified to ask the judge to recuse himself or herself.

            THAT is an accurate comparison, not what you stated.

            “Context aside from his claim that he can do anything he wants to women, and that they will allow him to do it because he is rich. As though the mere presence of his wealth simply IMPLIES consent.”

            As a woman, much as I hate excusing him for saying this, he was again speaking in hyperbole, basically saying that when you’re rich, women will go along with anything you want. Not that his mere wealth implies consent. He’s saying his mere wealth has always had women consenting as a result. Which is jerkish to say, but he’s not actually going around grabbing women by their genitals and more than he actually thinks he’s going to get 95 percent of the black vote next election.

            Honestly, him saying that is a partial reason that, of all the insults hurled at Trump, the sexism thing is the one thing that I feel sometimes sticks. The fact that he keeps cheating on his wives, then divorcing them to marry the person who he cheated on the former wife with? That’s evidence of him being sexist. And at the same time he hires women in high positions in his company, which makes me think the guy compartmentalizes this contemptible aspect of his own behavior to his personal life, and keeps it out of his business life (and I’m going to guess also out of his political life as well). I’ve had to stomach politicians actually DOING much worse, like Bill Clinton, or even Hillary Clinton who was complicit in Bill’s cover-ups and in her history as an attorney, that I can’t be a one-issue voter like that.

            Not to mention I didn’t vote for either of them anyway. I’m just calling for calm after the results of this election.

            “..I’m sorry, I just threw up a little on my keyboard as I wrote that.”

            Here’s a napkin.

            “He already has legitimized it. Haven’t you been paying attention? I’m sure you are aware of the spike in hate crimes that occurred in the days following his election.”

            No, I’m aware of people on both sides engaging in violence, and I’m aware of unknown parties engaging in hateful actions without anyone mysteriously knowing who did things like wrote ‘vote trump’ on the side of a church then burning the church. Seems pretty stupid to write that – seems more like someone wanting to create a false narrative. I do see video evidence, however, of anti-Trump protesters calling for violent overthrow of the government, assassinations, and boycotting or literally beating up men and women who supported Trump, or even just defended the outcome of the election. I’ve seen actual evidence of children who, in mock elections, are subjected to child abuse by their crappy mothers, or beaten up by their fellow students while a-hole teachers stand by and WATCH and smile.

            So no, I don’t just see one side – I see that people on both sides are acting like a-holes who should be in prison.

            “By not refusing the endorsement of groups like the KKK, he is exactly as guilty of inciting them as Jill Stein is for not shutting down a 9/11 truther during one of her Fox News Green Party interviews.”

            How about is he the same as Hillary Clinton calling Robert Byrd her mentor? You know… the guy who was a grand dragon of the KKK? Look, I agree with you that Trump should have refused the endorsement, but what was going to happen if he did? Nothing. Those people are going to vote for whoever those people are going to vote one way or another. He was just making sure the news cycle didnt dwell on it. Trump’s particularly good at playing a biased media.

            “By not telling them, to their face, in plain English, that what they are doing is unacceptable, those people think you agree with them.”

            I agree. He should have done exactly that. But Hillary’s guilty of the same exact thing. Just as Jill Stein is, btw.

            Guess who I wound up voting for btw 🙂 None of those three.

            “Well I needed their votes to get elected, but now that I am elected I can put them in their place.”

            So basically he’s using the racism of racist jerkoffs against their racist interests? That doesn’t sound bad to me.

            “And to the people gleefully committing such acts it looks like, “Ha, he’s only saying that to appease those pussy libtards. He doesn’t really mean it.””

            Well …. they’re idiots. That’s pretty much all I can say about KKK’ers. They’re idiots. And they’re going to be disappointed idiots too, given Trump has historically been against discriminatory practices in his businesses. Then again no one ever said the KKK was full of geniuses, right? If they were, they wouldn’t be in the KKK.

            Btw, I’m a member of two (technically three I guess) different minorities. Visibly so. The average KKK member would probably shoot me.

            “That’s why consistency matters. That’s why taking a moral stance early, loudly, and frequently is so important.”

            I’m more concerned of consistency of action than consistency of words. Because when talking about consistency of words, Hillary… hell…. most politicians…. are just as bad as Trump or worse.

            Consistency of action, on the other hand… well there, I don’t see where Trump has done much to get most of the labels he’s being given, except for the sexism label, and even that seems to be contained to his personal life. Which makes him a crappy person to be married to, but then again, so is Bill Clinton. And I voted for Bill. And I was right to vote for Bill since his economic policies worked, at least in part, until he helped to cause the housing bubble.

            “And finally, that’s why I have no good reasons to just “hope for the best”. Because even if you’re right, and he doesn’t care one whit about the LGBT community or any sort of social reform; PENCE DOES.”

            Actually, based on Trump’s own actions, he does seem to care about the LGBT community. Pence, on the other hand, doesn’t (at least from my limited knowledge of the man), and is the bigger danger. I’d rather have Trump as President than Pence if my primary concern was LGBT rights.

            “And I, like a lot of other people, are worried that Donald will be far to busy pushing his own agenda to tell his VP not to infringe on the rights and freedoms of a group that he doesn’t give two shits about because they don’t benefit him in any tangible way.”

            Um… just so you realize, the VP doesn’t really have much power. You know that right? The only real power the VP tends to have, aside from when the President is incapacitated (which isn’t happening with Trump because as I’ve stated, the guy is in excellent health according to the doctors) is when the Senate is tied and the VP makes the deciding tie-breaking vote.

            And the Senate is not likely to be tied ever, since the Republicans have a majority. Even if/when the Democrats take the Senate, there won’t be a tie, because hopefully then the Democrats will have the slight majority instead – again making Pence pretty meaningless.

            Pence is going to effectively be like Dan Quayle. Or any other VP who most people forgot the name of because they were totally unimportant to history.

          • The Distinguished Anarchist

            I’m still processing everything you wrote, but I wanted to mention this little bit now while it’s fresh in my mind:

            I was reading what you wrote about Trump compartmentalizing his predatory proclivities (yes, successful alliteration makes me proud 😉 now shush) and it made me wonder about something, so I did some quick searches.

            Just with regards to his campaign staff:
            -Kellyane Conway is a former teen model who won the New Jersey Blueberry Princess pageant when she was 16.
            -Hope Hicks, his press secretary is also a former teen model.
            -Katrina Pierson, a well-known surrogate and the only other female member of his staff… well, she never actually did modeling, but just looking at photos of her (and trying not to sound like too much of a pig), I’d be confident in calling her conventionally attractive.

            I’m sure I don’t have the time or wherewithal to dig any further into the personal lives of the other women in his direct employ, but what do you think about the possibility that he hires these women, not because he thinks they are in any way qualified for the job, but because he likes to surround himself with “pretty things” to look at?

          • Izo

            While I think that Trump generally hires people based on merit, not on how they look, it IS a pretty standard behavior of most human beings that attractive people tend to have advantages in the workplace that unattractive people do not have. This advantage does not only happen when a man is in charge, but also when a woman is in charge. There are actual scientific studies on this. Trump is no worse than any other person in this respect, and may be better than some in this respect, since there was no ‘casting couch’ requirement involved, like some of the more disreputable people who let a person’s attractiveness consciously or subconsciously affect their decisions.

            I think an attractive woman who is nevertheless an idiot is not going to go far in Trump’s organization (unless, I suppose, she’s one of his daughters, although Ivanka seems very intelligent and driven, plus she happens to also be very attractive). I also think a good looking man who is a moron is not going to go far in his organization. However, I’d be willing to believe that if he has to choose between two people of equal qualifications, and one is attractive while the other is not, there could be a subconscious element which would lead to hiring the attractive person. I just find it less likely to happen with someone who bases things on merit and not on appearance.

            I do NOT think, however, that he hires people solely because he ‘likes surrounding himself with pretty things to look at.’ Except maybe when it comes to beauty pageants. Which sort of makes sense there, since it’s called a BEAUTY pageant. Regardless of what anyone thinks of how outdated a beauty pageant is, it’s not called a personality pageant for a reason.

          • Izo

            Also I’m not so sure of the second paragraph either. I mean you’re probably right about the enormous breasts thing, but I’m pretty sure he might have intrest in foreign and domestic policy that doesnt personally enrich him, since he could do that in much easier ways than running for President. Especially considering he’s an egomaniac and this has NOT been particularly good for his public image among about half the country.

          • Danygalw

            Donald Trump famously swings about based on whoever he last talked to.

          • Izo

            And yet he still wound up doing what he wanted to do, not what someone else wanted. I severely doubt Mike Pence will have any influence on Donald Trump.

          • Mechwarrior

            Back in July, one of John Kasich’s political team members leaked to the press that Trump had offered to make Kasich the “most powerful vice-president in American history” by leaving foreign and domestic policy basically up to him. Trump does what he wants, but only when it’s something he actually cares about.

          • Izo

            I strongly doubt that Kasich is getting ANYTHING from Trump now, so that’s a moot worry.

          • Mechwarrior

            The point is that Trump out and out said to Kasich that his VP was going to be the one calling the shots. That’s now Pence.

          • Izo

            Can you let me know who actually said this offer was even made in the first place? Especially the idea that Trump would give his VP full discretion over anything when he constantly goes on about how HE is the master negotiator. Because if it’s Kasich who says so, I have to take that with a huge grain of salt, because I doubt he was offering to make Kasich his VP in the first place. Kasich carried almost NOTHING in the primaries.

  • motorfirebox

    Voter turnout among those age 29 and under was around 50%. The national voter turnout was around 57%. So, even as a Clinton voter and a Bernie supporter, I really don’t have any sympathy for the kids out protesting today. If they wanted to keep Trump out of office, more of them should have voted. This #notmypresident crap is childish and contributes nothing to the issue.

    • I don’t disagree that more people should have voted… on the other hand, Trump actually did not win the popular vote, so I’m not sure how this rhetoric is helpful in any way. I will say that I think that people who manage to survive the next two years have an absolute imperative to vote in the midterms…

      Also, this comes up just about every election cycle, but, as this is the second time in the last 20 years where the popular vote was reversed by the damn-fool winner-takes-all policy that has been crippling the electoral college since 1872, I think it’s worth bringing up again: the electoral college is not legally bound to vote according to the majority vote of their state; they can, in fact, vote according to the popular vote, or even according to their conscience. There is a petition active on Change.Org right now that endorses this and is already at nearly 3 million signatures: https://www.change.org/p/electoral-college-electors-electoral-college-make-hillary-clinton-president-on-december-19?source_location=discover_feed

      • motorfirebox

        Trump didn’t win the popular vote among the votes that were counted prior to him crossing the line to 270 electoral college votes. Once all the votes are counted, he’ll probably end up having won the popular vote by a thin margin.

          • palmvos

            this does not give vote totals just %’s but take a look at the big map after selecting an individual state. Hillary won the vote in the big cites.
            http://www.realclearpolitics.com/elections/live_results/2016_general/president/

          • Yeah, I’m aware of that. It doesn’t change the fact that the popular vote swung to Hillary; it just means that the popular vote was too concentrated.

          • palmvos

            that is actually one of the arguments for the electoral college. its not a very good argument IMO. I remember reading lots of neat ideas in a contest Slate did some years ago for how to reform American government. though truly you want to see america get UGLY? just get a constitutional convention seriously going.

          • Weatherheight

            I remember the ERA…
            Boy, did they crazies come out of the woodwork on that, both for and against, and if you want media coverage, go nuts.

          • I actually would kind of like to see that, but only because I’m cranky and cantankerous. And I’d probably be sick of it long before anything worthwhile could be accomplished, so…

          • palmvos

            in my version its a small group. But, they wouldn’t be let out of the room until they were done. cubicles to sleep in and attached semi private bathrooms. food brought in at intervals. and all of them pay a substantial penalty if they deadlock.

    • Danygalw

      50% of under-30’s *did* vote, and I expect the kids protesting are among those.

    • Mechwarrior

      Most of the protests are happening in big cities where voters overwhelmingly went Blue.

      • crazy j

        HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • weedgoku

      See, while I agree that they shouldn’t really get upset if they didn’t vote, I really don’t like it when people get mad and blame non-voters. Especially the rhetoric of “WELL THOSE DARN MILLENNIALS SHOULD VOTE MORE BECAUSE I SAY SO” that gets thrown around a lot. See, the thing is neither candidate really felt right. A lot of younger voters had a candidate, they had someone they felt cared about their issues and they wholly supported. And they felt cheated when he was dropped in favor of someone they felt they couldn’t trust and went against a lot of their interests. It’s really messed up when people try to force you to vote for someone you don’t like, don’t trust and don’t agree with just to spite someone you like less. If someone tells me to either eat hot iron or some shards of glass I’m just going to go hungry, I’m fine with starving if the alternative is hurting myself.

      • motorfirebox

        If someone’s ambivalent enough not to vote, I don’t see why anyone should put up with them rioting when they don’t like the results of the election.

  • Sam Paquette

    <3

  • Dr_Otter

    Before he started plumbing the waters regarding elected office, Trump was reliably liberal in most of his public statements–abortion rights, LGBTQ, etc.. The only hope I have left (and it’s pretty darn flimsy) is that he was playing the Right like a fish, and that his earlier position statements still hold. After all, we know he is not at all adverse to lying. I don’t really believe this is the case, but I’m clinging to it for the moment.

    To all my LGBTQ, Muslim, Obamacare-dependent, and immigrant friends and to my dear, disabled wife, good luck!

    • It is a sad state of affairs, is it not, when the hope for the future is that the president-elect was lying on the campaign trail…

      • palmvos

        given how often that happens normally. its probably a safe bet.

    • Danygalw

      I’m honestly hoping that his incompetence gums up the works enough despite the full Republican control that not a lot happens.

    • weedgoku

      Reminder that in the past Abraham Lincoln and other “liberal” presidents ran as republicans while democrats were the more conservative option and the two parties shifted over time. It would be incredibly ironic if Trump still held those more liberal stances in a more old fashioned republican way. Only time will tell, however.

  • weedgoku

    If this is how upset people are getting just because trump won, how are they going to function when he actually gets in office.

    • Danygalw

      Depends on whether or not they die. Because that is an option.

      • Izo

        Seriously, people need to calm down. I’m not being insensitive – I have family members who are freaking out as well and I’ve told them the same thing. They need to not do anything drastic. If you really want to fight back, do so through the system by grass roots to take back at least one House of Congress. You know, like the Republicans did (not to mention that Trump might not even get full Republican support anyway – it’s not like he got it during the election either). Not by rioting in the streets or by threatening mass suicide or killing people. That is REALLY not the principles of this country.

        • palmvos

          I agree- our government was created to prevent rule by the power of the gun (or sword, or Alison). peaceful protest has its place. riots do not, besides usually rioters burn out their own neighborhoods. *facepalm*

          • Izo

            It’s really NEVER made sense to me when people riot and call it protests. They’re basically just destroying their own neighborhoods. They don’t even have a goal in mind other than ‘they’re angry.’ Anger alone isn’t a goal.

          • SJ

            “Rioting is the language of the unheard.”

          • Izo

            And what, per se, is the point of the rioting? What are they wanting to get FROM it? It can’t possibly be to undo anything Trump’s done yet. He’s President Elect. He hasnt even taken power yet.

            The only thing they can be rioting about is that they’re angry and having a tantrum, or wanting to overthrow the government in a violent revolution. Neither of these choices are particularly good ‘language.’ And I’m pretty sure the people living in those neighborhoods arent thrilled about mobs of people walking around, burning their cars and homes and stores. If you were living in an area with a mob outside, would you think ‘wow, they really swayed me.’

          • Lostman

            It’s like the great panic from world war Z; the man is not in office yet, and there already talk of resistance.

          • Izo

            They should remember what happened to squash that resistance in World War Z then, so they don’t make the same mistakes to force the ending of it by the government.

            It was a good book. I liked the Zombie Survival Guide also. Big fan of Max Brooks. The movie really sucked though.

          • Here’s a Name

            According to someone I know who’s been involved with said protests: they want to make a symbolic statement saying that the kind of rhetoric Trump has made about minorities and women is unacceptable, and remains so despite his election. They also don’t really respect that he’s been elected because he lost the popular vote, and they’re hoping that the electoral college can be convinced in time to vote in favor of the popular vote. They’re actually quite intent on this. My understanding though is that they’re protesting not rioting.

          • Izo

            The symbolic thing, I can respect. Even if they’re protesting something that was legally done. But basically, for the second part of the reasoning, you’re describing that they want to overthrow a legally elected government. That’s just not acceptable in a civilized society that believes in the rule of law. I believe in the rule of law. I believe in using legal means if you think the law is wrong to change that law. I don’t believe in changing law to get your way by physical violence, as I’ve alluded to quite a bit in the thing that Alison had done to Max. It’s like saying that you agree to play a game of baseball, then after the third strike, you say ‘NO! NEW RULE – YOU GET FOUR STRIKES AND YOU’RE OUT, NOT THREE!’ And if the other side does not agree to that, you protest and try to beat the other side up.

            Also…. there is rioting.

            http://ktla.com/2016/11/11/anti-trump-rally-in-portland-turns-into-riot-during-3rd-night-of-protests/

            In some places, like Oregon, people are getting dragged out of their cars and beaten up on even the suspicion that they voted for Trump. That’s just scary.

            Think of it like this. If the roles were reversed, what would you think if Hillary won, and all the Trump voters started violently protesting via burning cars and beating people up and threatening that ‘people were going to have to die’ to change the results of the election? You’d be scared, and you’d think what they were doing was anti-American, right?

            Calm heads NEED to prevail here. There needs to be a peaceful change of power, and then hold Trump and his administration to the fire IF he does something unconstitutional.

          • Lysiuj

            Actually, if I’ve understood correctly it is technically legal, in that electors can choose to vote how they want, even against their states’ popular vote results. Meaning the protesters could, theoretically, convince electors from Trump-majority states to vote for Clinton instead.
            But this seems to be both unlikely, undemocratic, and dangerous:
            http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/11/13588048/electoral-college-petition-clinton-trump

          • Izo

            The electors CAN choose to vote how they want. Which is the main problem with the electoral college vote. However, that did not happen this election. The electors followed the majority popular vote of each state this election. So it was democratic.

            But no, the protesters can’t convince the electors to change their votes. They already made their votes. It can’t be changed. The protesters are being very UN-democratic if that’s why they’re doing what they’re doing. So it is unlikely, undemocratic, dangerous AND illegal. Also hypocritical.

            Again, really hope calmer heads start to prevail here and people start listening to what Obama said here about the need to have a calm, non-violent transfer of power. That’s the basic principle of this country that makes it rather extraordinary.

          • Tim Hundley

            The electors will cast their votes on December 19.

          • Here’s a Name

            Oh. I think I misrepresented them (specific person with gender neutral pronouns) a little bit. Those two ideas should be separated more… They’re protesting symbolically, but separately also they’re focused on getting the electoral college to follow the popular vote before the official electoral college vote and they want to do that using signatures/popular support. The protesting is separate for them.
            anyway. I don’t really like what they’re trying to do because I think it’s short sighted and disregards the will of the democratic-republic but they’re never going to get their way (every state in the union is not suddenly going to change the rules of the electoral college to make it functionally useless because that would defy the will of those same people) so it does not really matter.
            I’m not really intent on sharing my opinion with them because I don’t want to be labeled a moderate, or an apologist, or whatever.

          • Rumble in the Tumble

            “Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.” – Isaac Asimov

            “A witty saying proves nothing.” – Voltaire

          • SJ

            “Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.” – Isaac Asimov

            That puts police brutality into an interesting context.

          • It’s also worth noting that Heinlein did not share this view; as he explained in Starship Troopers:

            “… I was not making fun of you personally; I was heaping scorn on an inexcusably silly idea — a practice I shall always follow. Anyone who clings to the historically untrue and thoroughly immoral doctrine that violence never settles anything I would advise to conjure up the ghosts of Napoleon Bonaparte and the Duke of Wellington and let them debate it. The ghost of Hitler could referee and the jury might well be the Dodo, the Great Auk, and the Passenger Pigeon. Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. Breeds that forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and their freedoms.”

            You’ll note that I do not hold this forth as a particularly hopeful commentary on humanity…

          • SJ

            What? You mean that the American colonies didn’t gain their independence from Britain by non-violent protest? But, like, the Civil War, for sure…

          • *snort* that’d be what we call the Revolutionary War, but, other than that, yeah…

          • palmvos

            ok, lets put some context on Asimov’s quote. the actual character saying it was a man holding a gun. he was a politician orchestrating a bloodless coup. the idea isn’t that violence never solves anything… its that it is something people who don’t know what they are doing resort to to accomplish their ends. there is, if one is clever enough, a better way to accomplish the goal.

          • SJ

            If I didn’t know better, I’d say that you were trying to steer the conversation back to the webcomic…

          • palmvos

            there’s no comic to comment on, but in this case since Asimov’s foundation series and later Heinlein are among my teenage favorites and I’m working my way chronologically through much of the foundation books… (means I started at caves of steel) I thought id correct a misunderstanding on the Asimov quote- it is one of my favorites.

          • Weatherheight

            I read Asimov as a teenager from the public library and have only very recently gotten around to buying the books and re-reading the Foundation books.

            Dear God in Heaven did I miss a lot in those books as a teenager. 😀

          • palmvos

            I do not know your age so i cannot guess at what stage you found it. but the foundation series now extends from I robot all the way to Foundations Edge if i recall the last book title correctly. thought the books between Robots and Empire and Foundation were not all that good as I recall.
            I read the novels I had more than once. and as I said- ‘Violence is the Last refuge of the incompetent’ is one of my favorite sayings. that comes from the original 3 books. though I forget which one. I keep hoping I’m not the only one to recall the incident… as there is one detail I left out that is sort of amusing.

          • Rumble in the Tumble

            Touché.

          • Izo

            Um actually that’s not an unknown author. That’s Martin Luther King Jr. Although he also advocated for PEACEFUL protest over rioting, because if you riot, no one will listen to your words. They’ll only see the damage done.

          • SJ

            I didn’t leave off the attribution because it was unknown.

          • Izo

            Originally you did. You originally wrote – (Unknown – at least by me).

          • SJ

            I remember what I wrote. I also know why I wrote it. I thought that I could avoid this very discussion by feigning ignorance. Clearly, I was mistaken.

        • weedgoku

          And here’s a thing that gets me. Trump hasn’t done anything. Yet. You’re right about having to fight the system in the system. But there is a chance that Trump might not be the literal megasuperhitler people seem to think he is. I don’t think he’s going to round up everyone who isn’t straight and start executing every last minority. He’s contradicted his own platform enough just to get elected, why would you think now of all times he’s going to hold up on his inane promises?

          Being too afraid of the idea of trump to function is giving up. Like I said in my initial post, what are these people going to do when he actually takes office? What are they going to do if he does try to enact some awful laws to screw everyone over? Being paralyzed by fear isn’t going to vote against them, isn’t going to protest the injustice. If ever there was a time a community needed people to be strong despite their fears it was a time like now, when people genuinely feel like they might be in danger and need to be there to support one another.

          Lastly, I’ve seen several people wishing trump would get assassinated. And that’s fucked up. It’s wrong to want people dead, even if you don’t like them. Unless an investigation proves otherwise, he was elected fairly and saying shit like that makes you no better than the same people who said that shit when Obama got in. That and frankly, I’d rather Trump in office than Pence. We don’t know exactly what Trump will do. We know exactly what Pence wants.

        • Santiago Tórtora

          The outrage is also counter productive. By insisting that the lives of women, Muslims and LGBTQ people are at great risk, they are placing a *very* low bar for Trump’s performance. 2 years later when the Apocalypse fails to happen, people might wonder what all the fuss was about and vote for a Republican legislature.

          • Izo

            That’s actually an excellent point that I did not even consider.

  • kwerboom

    Well the two things this election did show was, one, America’s true character and, two, the full measure of the white race’s willful ignorance and bigotry. It’s why this country can’t have nice things and never will have nice things.

    • I think this is a bit dismissive of what can really be learned from these results, even if I do agree with the rage that fuels this response.

      • kwerboom

        I’m too burned out from dealing with Walker and his Republican legislature in Wisconsin to feel rage. This is just a statement of fact. Too many whites voted out of the ignorant belief that Trump could restore manufacturing jobs that are long lost or the fear that Hillary was gun grabber like the NRA said she was. Too many other whites voted for Trump to get rid of the N-word in the White House that Hillary and Russ Feingold were treated as an extension of.

        There isn’t even anyone to get mad at as the people are just too stupid. The local news does stories about the legislature cutting funding to public schools and roads. The local news then does stories about communities trying to save their public schools with tax referendums and counties not able to do road maintenance. The people never connect their votes for Walker and Republicans to the loss of government services.

        • palmvos

          “Thinking is the hardest work there is, which is probably the reason why so few engage in it.” Henry Ford
          that surprised me- last i heard that quote it was credited to Einstein.
          to simply dismiss these people as stupid is counterproductive in my view. I know someone in this thread has already posed a quote saying that appeasement is the wrong idea. Instead of calling people names use functional persuasion skills to change the rhetoric. II don’t know how to do that. but i can see from the posts here that logic and facts are far from the answer. I’m amazed that we are all so calm so far. I wonder how many hours before i end up on a bunch of blocked lists….

          • kwerboom

            I prefer to call people what they are. But if you don’t like “stupid”, then what do you call people who don’t connect the dots between the politicians they put into power, the policies that get voted on, and the end results that affect their communities?

          • palmvos

            the sheep. all you need to do is learn to herd them. Trump showed its more possible than anybody thought.

          • kwerboom

            Fair enough. I can agree with that. In that regard the Democrats failed this time around with picking Hillary and backing her too early before the primaries began. Obama, Warren, and Sanders at least had enough charisma to lead people.

        • Weatherheight

          I live in Kansas.I’ve got fifteen years of experience with what you’re describing.

          And don’t get me started on the curriculum arguments in the state – it’s no wonder actual teachers are leaving the state in record numbers.

        • crazy j

          Those same deplorable s who voted for Trump in the Swing States also voted for Obama back in 2008 and in 2012.

    • crazy j

      You tell some poor out of work coal miner or steel worker that he is a privileged white oppressor and he will pull the lever next to the REP until the day he dies.

      • I Am Helpy

        OK thanks for constructing that strawman justification for why it’s OK that the Republicans are nakedly racist.

        • crazy j

          How so?

      • kwerboom

        1st, no one needs to tell said coal miner or steel worker that they are a privileged white oppressor to get them to vote Republican. They do that anyway. Walker got in to office in Wisconsin in part because roughly 1/3 of union workers voted against their own economic interests without being accused of anything.

        2nd, said coal miner or steel worker had a better option and his name was Ted Cruz (aka Donald Trump without the Trumpness problem and with governing experience).

        3rd, said coal miner or steel worker is losing their job because of far more powerful forces (CGP Grey, “Humans Need Not Apply”, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Pq-S557XQU&t=2s)). Both parties have fallen short and failed these poor people and everyone else is next. It’s why I backed Sanders in the primaries as he had the best chance of solving this problem.

        • crazy j

          Arkansas and West Virginia were once one of the bluest states in the union. A republican couldn’t get elected street sweeper there. Now look what happened.

          As for the unions in Wisconsin, that one third? Those guys do not work for the state as grade school teachers.

          • kwerboom

            Arkansas and West Virginia voted Democratic because that was how the coalitions aligned back then. The Democratic Party was the ‘white party’ at one time.

            A union member is a union member. It doesn’t matter which union.

          • crazy j

            Some SEIU jerk making 90,000 a year is a hell of a lot different than a bricklayer being paid 12 an hour.

  • SN

    Sending love and support from Canada. Best of luck to all of you Americans. Stay strong, stay unstoppable in your fight for freedom and equality. I’m trying to figure out a way to help from the North. Any suggestions are welcome. Thanks for the list of charities, that’ll be a good jumping off point for me to start advocating and donating. This comic is so important. Take our time to heal and gather your strength, but please don’t give up!! The world needs you and your message now more than ever.

    • Psile

      A way you can help…

      Have a spare room?

      I joke. Running to another country will only make things worse.

      • Weatherheight

        “Running to another country will only make things worse.”

        In total agreement – who will be the voice of dissent if all the dissenters pack up and leave?

  • Anna

    I don’t know if this will bring sadness, hope, or both-but Hillary Clinton won the popular vote. She is the president the people of this country want. It’s true that the numbers were close-too close to be acceptable-but were there no Electoral College, the people would have voted Clinton into the White House

  • Ellie K

    something to keep in mind, please read this entire thread:
    https://twitter.com/toastasaurus/status/797181227492982785

  • Brandon Quina

    I hope I don’t get jumped on this, but– this is bad, I detest Trump and everything he stands for and it disgusts me that was elected into office,– but please don’t let this turn you off of the American People as a whole or think that the vast majority of us don’t want to live in the same world as you.

    Yes, bigotry and such played a part in this election, and a larger part than anyone would like.

    I don’t think it was the only thing that played a part, however, for all that there are politicans that will take this as a mandate to oppress and hurt our minorities.

    Most Republicans are perfectly good people,– many of them have a general fear of Immigrants, but they don’t want to see everyone rounded up and deported, they often are somewhat squicked out by alternative lifestyles but its not a major defining issue for them, and so on.

    In terms of a lot of the social justice stuff,–

    –like, My Gramma believes… vehemently.. that its Liberals that aren’t compassionate and don’t want to help people because voting in Democrats just prolongs the suffering of people by hurting business, keeping the poor people poor, and ensuring that families across the country go to bed at night hungry for lack of enough food. She believes, GENUINELY, that voting for Republicans is the only genuinely compassionate choice and that the decisions that they make will make everything completely better for everyone.

    She, and many many like her, believe that Democrats prey on the weak and the poor. That they keep them that way, so that they can be secured in their votes, and that only Republicans TRULY manage to care for the poor. By, again, helping everyone through economic security. If you tell her some horrible social injustice that’s going on, she’ll denounce it and say that its wrong, and note that its not something that the Republican Party stands for and that its not why she votes Republican.

    Is she wrong? Yes, of course she’s wrong, without reservation.

    Are many Liberals wrong about their beliefs about Republicans? Yes.

    The largest and most intractable problem in this country is the growing divide between the parties and the inability of either of them to view the other as human beings. Until we learn to stop demonizing the opposition, to accept that rational people can disagree and neither side in the discussion are wholly wrong or wholly correct, we’re creating a political and social atmosphere that allows people like Donald Trump to step in and become the most powerful man in the world.

    Is that scary? Absolutely.

    Is it the end of the world? I doubt it.

    We’ll get through this; historically, I doubt he’ll even be the worst we’ve ever had.

    (I’d give that to Andrew Jackson.)

    • palmvos

      I was always told Grant was the worst.

      other than that- i agree with you. I live here in libertarian central (Texas) oh excuse me constitutionalists. too many of use weirdos have pointed out the double standards modern Libertarians use. I hear mountains of these BS stories, and most people are having way too much fun to listen when someone challenges them.

      • Mechwarrior

        Grant never committed genocide, Jackson was responsible for the Trail of Tears.

    • Mechwarrior

      Most Republicans are perfectly good people,– many of them have a general fear of Immigrants, but they don’t want to see everyone rounded up and deported, they often are somewhat squicked out by alternative lifestyles but its not a major defining issue for them, and so on.

      The distinction between antagonism and indifference means little to those people who just got thrown under the bus. Even if someone doesn’t actually want Muslims rounded up and deported or incarcerated or for LGTBQAs to be subjected to conversion therapy until they claim to be “cured,” supporting the people who actually do want to do so and voting them into office still means that you’re tacitly supporting said agendas. I mean, it’s obviously not so big a problem for them that it’s a deal-breaker.

      • Brandon Quina

        That assumes that those people think they’re supporting those people. The vast majority of people have no idea what the people they support are actually about, and honestly, most of the people who oppose those people don’t really know all of the details and what those people are actually like either.

        Yes, Trump said some horrible things,– plenty of people say horrible things,–
        It’s like I told my Mom when she was going on and on about how Hillary called all of the people who support Trump “deplorables”– ‘how is that any different from how you talk about Liberals? Like, at all? That’s just how people talk. n’ its horrible and they shouldn’t do it but it’s hardly shocking.’–

        It’s normal to take the things said by your own candidate and interpret it generously, while jumping on the least little thing by someone you oppose.

        I’m not saying you have to meekly accept this stuff,– stand up for your beliefs, fight to make sure that you’re not silenced,- I’m more doing the OPPOSITE of that by noting that the fight hasn’t been lost yet. Just because slightly under half of the American People voted that man into office doesn’t mean that they agree with every aspect of the most radical exaggeration of what he could possible do in the next four years and will grant him unlimited leeway.

        Even the people that /did/ let their foibles get in the way, are mostly reacting like, “Yeah, damn Immigrants stealing our jobs, we should do something about that…”

        If Trump starts rounding up all of the LGBT community and throwing them in camps to pray away the gay, there will be people that support that (which is horrible), but the vast majority of the American People would be outraged and it would lead to the end of his effective ability to lead this country.

        (For this reason, the people in the background of the Presidency would never actually let him do something like that.)

        This is going to be a bad time, I agree, I really honestly do.

        But, don’t lose hope.

        I mean, really, sometimes I feel like a lot of Liberals just want a one-party system. Effectively, if not in fact, but the fact of the matter is that you can’t really have a social movement that ignores and demonizes half of the country.

        • Ira


          If Trump starts rounding up all of the LGBT community and throwing
          them in camps to pray away the gay, there will be people that support
          that (which is horrible), but the vast majority of the American People
          would be outraged and it would lead to the end of his effective ability
          to lead this country.

          (For this reason, the people in the background of the Presidency would never actually let him do something like that.)

          Thank you, by the Gods, someone else actually realizes this. Seems like most think whatever a president says automatically gets instated on the spot.

          • Mechwarrior

            When has Donald Trump ever, in his entire adult life, demonstrated that kind of foresight or concern for other peoples’ opinions?

        • Mechwarrior

          Trump’s racism was not something that you had to dig deeply to find. It was the front page of every newspaper and the topic of every news show for months. And the vote’s already been cast, so it’s too frelling late for anyone to say “but I didn’t really want him to round up Hispanics!”: voters can’t do anything about what he does for at least two years when the 2018 Congressional elections occur. And that’s a long time that a lot of damage can be done in.

        • Weatherheight

          I hd a discussion with a long-time Democrat from Texas, she volunteers for voting stations, and is part of the poll monitoring system. Wonderfully nice lady, and someone I very much respect and admire. When I pointed out that the “trash talk” she was seeing from the Republican side of the aisle also happened a lot from the Democratic side of the aisle, she wouldn’t accept it. After about 30 minutes of discussion she reluctantly admitted that both sides have a problem with demonizing the other.

          Civility is slipping in the good old US of A.

  • Shjade

    No need at all to apologize, Molly. I hope you’re holding up okay through all this. <3

  • crazy j

    This place is a salt mine.

    • I Am Helpy

      Sure, he openly states he wants to introduce ethnic and religious cleansing, but somehow that’s not fascism. OK.

      • Rumble in the Tumble

        Yeah, like Hillary, who hates women and makes fun of the disabled is any better. Sure, that’s fine.

        • I Am Helpy

          That outrageously false smear you made up sure proves something-or-other.

          You ought to be ashamed of yourself.

          • Rumble in the Tumble

            Tʜɒƚ ouƚɿɒǫɘouƨly ʇɒlƨɘ ƨmɘɒɿ you mɒbɘ uq ƨuɿɘ qɿovɘƨ ƨomɘƚʜinǫ-oɿ-oƚʜɘɿ.

            You ouǫʜƚ ƚo dɘ ɒƨʜɒmɘb oʇ youɿƨɘlʇ.

          • I Am Helpy

            Yes, I get that you sold out the US to Russia.

          • Rumble in the Tumble

            [citation needed]

            Right, it would be better to sell it to every single lobbying interest group ever.

            How does it feel to be a Reptilian shill? :^)

          • I Am Helpy

            OK Putin.

      • crazy j

        Couple of pages ago, Max was criticized by Allison for hiring illegal immigrants. The only reason why Max can pay low wages like that to illegals is because the laws are not enforced and there is an abundant supply of manual labourers, all of which disproportionately affected minorities by suppressing wage growth. If you have too much supply, then prices (i.e. wages) will remain low.

        Besides which, how much of a racist could Trump be if 1 out of 3 Hispanic voters in the U.S. voted for him? You cannot claim its just the Cuban vote, since southern Florida went blue.

        • I Am Helpy

          OK. That’s fiction.

          • crazy j

            That’s reality for many poor minorities in this country for poor minorities who’s only resource they can offer the job market is their manual labor. Look at the unemployment rate for African-Americans who only have a high school diploma. You can’t get a job in a factory nor a service job such as janitor (or grounds keeper) because the labor market is flooded. Now I do believe that a good education is a way out of poverty, but you have to understand that not everybody can just go learn to code.

            This is a video of a bunch of Carrier employees being told their plant is being moved to Mexico. Now you can clearly see it’s not just the white people who are pissed about it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3ttxGMQOrY

            Now who do you think those guys voted for?

  • Lucy

    First of all, much thanks to Molly and Brennan <3 This comic is really important.

    The first election I was eligible to vote in was President Obama's re-election in 2012. I'm in a swing county in a swing state, and it was quite noticeable to me that Hillary Clinton's rallies in my home-town this year had much lower turnout than Obama's rallies in 2012. And in 2012, Obama was less popular than he was in 2008, because there was already some disappointment at the slow progress of the ACA and some other plans of his. But, still, the turnout for the rally was phenomenal. Hillary Clinton's rally was…okay. It was full. It wasn't as huge a draw as when Laverne Cox came to campus tho, much less when Obama came.

    Anyway, so, that got me thinking: the way to win 2020 (and to take back the Senate in 2018) is to figure out, who voted for Obama that didn't vote for Hillary? Like, I don't think it's all that important to find a middle ground with Republicans who voted for Trump. I think we have to figure out how to win back the non-voters, those who left the president box blank, and the third-partiers.

    The fact is, the Democratic party made a lot of mistakes in their campaigning this year. The biggest one, though, seemed to me to be focusing so much on catering to moderates (as seen in the unremarkable VP pick, and certain commercials featuring Republicans voting for Clinton because they are disgusted by Trump, of which I saw at least two repeatedly).

    Now, while I wouldn't go so far as to say Sanders would've beaten Trump (I mean, honestly, who could say for sure?) I will go so far as to say that whoever we run next time, for President AND for other races, needs to have certain, er superficial qualities that make people get excited and turn out in droves for rallies etc. Charisma; passionate speeches; concise plans that, while being backed up with minute necessary details, can be stated in 3 sentences (I mean, when Clinton kept saying in debates that people should look at her website? Come on). A profound understanding of certain marginalized groups (black people, young women, certain others) that went beyond "Well, I'm not actively sexist or racist like my opponent".

    And of course, there are certain things that the Democratic party should keep in mind. For example: NAFTA was unilaterally bad for blue-collar workers in the Midwest. So…maybe don't put up a candidate who voted in favor of it? Also, nobody liked the war in Iraq. So, again, maybe weigh that extremely unfavorable vote in the "minus" column when considering a candidate.

    That being said, there are legal challenges, such as the Voter ID Laws in Wisconsin, that did not exist in 2012. That is something that should be navigated not only by the Democratic party, but by organizations like the ACLU, which I'm glad Molly and Brennan are promoting.

    TL;DR — The Democrats can definitely win the next election, and *probably* win back a House majority, without compromising any liberal values IF they select a candidate who has some popularity "plusses" and lacks Clinton's very un-liberal voting record on key issues. This is going to be a tough four years (or, hey, maybe two years? Because a liberal congress could stop a lot of Trump plans) but I am optimistic that, if Democratic Party learns the right lesson from this, we could win again.

  • Riley McMurdie Thompson

    I don’t have words to state how terrified I am for others with these election results (as a straight white male I recognize my privilege). I have never commented on the site before but 1/2 of the reason I love this comics is the community and the discussions (i’m kind of a lurker sorry). This is a great way to show your support, and I am excited for the next round this so I can help out. All of these organizations are great, and the creators of this comic bring a positive message into the world. I may not know all of you but I will do what I can to help. Once again thanks so much to the community here at SFP and to the creators.

  • Alon Rand

    I just want to say, Molly, that I both sympathize and empathize with your feelings regarding recent events, and completely understand your need to have some time to process it all.

  • Garrett Kunkel

    <3

  • Ira

    I supported the Trump presidency for a few reasons, first of which being: Logically, he doesn’t really have the ability to do anything significant. Not that he wont try. By the way laws and practices are passed, they have to run through too many other people in a party of people in power that already don’t agree with him.
    Second, our political system needs broken. Not just cracked and repaired, but broken. If he can do that, regardless of the horrible things he might even manage to pull off, long term it should be better for future generations. Policies can be rectified with a new person in power, the standards that (hopefully) shape peoples minds tend to last beyond terms and outside politics; that the two party system is not the way to go, that anyone really can run with enough backing, is something we need to start moving toward, and in time the country might see a working class president. It’s a far shot, but it’s better than nursing the dying, comatose, braindead patient that is presently our country until the bitter, expensive end.
    Third, while Trump is seemingly a pretty horrible person, on a private level, we still have no real idea how he will work in politics. Hillary was a more of the same politician, who is known and proven to lie and deceive for personal benefit. Trump didn’t need the presidency for further influence, he could very well have worked on many of his ideas from private sector and from the shadows with the political game instead of being a big douchy figurehead.
    Finally, given the above as well as several personal thoughts, and projections, I’m prepared to live through hell and struggle as I truly believe that this is the better path for the future. If I was worried about here and now policies where I could seem to live safer, I’d have supported someone beside Trump.
    In the end, I feel like it was just a choice between one more term of morphine drip for cancer or playing reverse Russian Roulette where one bullet is a miracle.

    • I Am Helpy

      This boils down to “I’m selfish and I don’t care what happens to other people”. Thanks for hurling everyone under the bus.

      • Arklyte

        Thanks for being offensive to people the second their opinion of others does not support yours and blaming them for whatever happens, “better half of US population”.

        • I Am Helpy

          I honestly don’t care how you justify what you did to yourself; supporting Trump is monstrous. People are going to suffer and your excuses are feeble.

          • Rumble in the Tumble

            It’s funny to me you should believe that, as all people not supporting Trump are scum, says me. My opinion is fact. You are going to suffer and you well deserve it, you monster.

            I’m the good guy here, cause I’m right.

          • I Am Helpy

            Yeah, based on this and your other posts, I don’t give a damn what you think.

          • Rumble in the Tumble

            And that is why you fail.

            Enjoy your new president :^)

          • I Am Helpy

            I didn’t fail.

          • Rumble in the Tumble

            >Nuh-uh!
            Yuh-huh.

          • I Am Helpy

            OK sorry you’re a child.

          • Rumble in the Tumble

            Boyo, you’re so incapable of self-reflection, you’re not showing up in mirrors.

          • I Am Helpy

            I’m sure you thought that was a very cutting remark, for some reason.

          • Arklyte

            And what lives have I helped to destroy in your country from my country? Please, enlighten me!
            For now I just see a piece of [Redacted] who beliefs that (s)he’s better then everyone else around. Do you also have Hitler plushy under your pillow, “the representative of better part of US population”, huh?

          • I Am Helpy

            Ah, OK – you just wanted to leap in and defend the indefensible because (who cares).

          • Arklyte

            Oh, so now you’re just saying goodbye? And what is your excuse for being a [Redacted] [Redacted] [Redacted] you are, huh? What’s your excuse for insulting people just because they have freedom of thought? Where were you when your country was ruining lifes, Mr.”Globe of USA”? Come on, you were so eager to voice everything a second ago!

          • I Am Helpy

            Sorry you’re mad about (who cares)

        • I Am Helpy

          Also, I don’t see how you getting offended is any way comparable to the lives you’ve helped destroy.

      • Ira

        Pray tell, what did you read to come to this conclusion? I have nothing to gain from this presidency. This is a matter of playing the odds toward a better future in generations beyond this.

        If you’re only thinking about the implications of this term, then yes, I’d throw everyone under the bus. I’ll throw the whole damned town under the bus, if that’s all that’s left to throw, right along with myself because that bus is headed toward a weak section in a nuclear reactor and if one body pile has a chance at stopping the bus or making it veer off course, then it’s well worth it to keep everyone else safe from the fallout to come.

        I do care about what happens to other people, those people just don’t happen to be the individuals who stand to benefit in the short term by avoiding a problem. Instead I care about the people who don’t know they’re in danger further along and don’t have a way to prepare themselves.

        • I Am Helpy

          Yes, if I don’t like my home renovations I too seal my family inside and set fire to it, who wouldn’t.

          • Etveck

            If your houses foundations are rotting and breaking you may have to knock down the house and start again.
            Look, people voted for Trump and he won. At this point arguing more about that is pointless, and trying to smear his voters as racist and sexist is just going to widen the rift between people in this current political climate.

          • I Am Helpy

            Sure, let’s pretend that people on the left didn’t help this happen.

        • I Am Helpy

          I mean, what with living conditions and wages being literally the best they’ve ever been, in the richest and most powerful nation in all of human history, I’m finding it difficult to understand why you’d willingly hand over power to THE EXACT PEOPLE CREATING THE PROBLEMS YOU ARE COMPLAINING ABOUT. Maybe that’s just me and my weird ability to spend five seconds thinking then not do the stupidest possible thing, though.

          • Ira

            This nation is printing money to pay people off, this is a temporary solution and one that inevitably ends in more economic problems.

            As well, this is not the best living conditions and certainly not the best wages in relation to what you can buy with the wages. The highest numbers, perhaps, but for how much you spend to what you get, it’s a pretty poor situation. Prices of many things have doubled or more (food and gas come to mind right away), while the general wages on lower end jobs is hovering around $10-12/hr(in this area and those surrounding). Over a decade ago, the wages have been within a $1-2 difference and costs were not nearly so high. Going further back, into the 80s and 70s you can note similar trends, while also having higher quality of goods.

          • I Am Helpy

            OK, but I don’t really care which falsehoods you tell to yourself in order to justify your gross actions.

          • Ira

            I welcome any actual information you can provide. So far, you’ve stated nothing of actual content and seem quite satisfied to just yell at people. It’s a fine mob mentality, but it doesn’t actually progress things in a good way unless the goal is disruption of some sort.
            Mob mentality got Trump where he is and disruption was what I wanted out of him…in essence you’re not much different than that you so despise, only instead of breaking something useful like stagnated and toxic a political system, you’re attempting to shut down general discussion.

          • I Am Helpy

            I don’t really care what you think, though. You’ve made it clear that you’re a selfish monster.

          • Santiago Tórtora

            If you don’t care, why be upset when Trump wins? Trump isn’t some unavoidable phenomenon of nature like a tornado or an earthquake, you know. You deserve some of the blame for not being too grossed out to bother to address those falsehoods.

          • I Am Helpy

            Why is it my job to do any of that?

          • Santiago Tórtora

            You remind me of Max.

          • I Am Helpy

            OK.

          • Izo

            Oooh that’s a low blow. Max tends to use actual facts and respond to what the other person actually said.

          • I Am Helpy

            PS: exactly none of another person’s choices are my fault.

    • Sterling Ericsson

      In short, you’re willing to ruin the lives of thousands of people so long as you get yours.

      • Ira

        What are you even reading?

        • I Am Helpy

          Exactly what you wrote, friend. That is LITERALLY what you just wrote, then doubled down on in your reply to me. What is wrong with you?

          • Ira

            You mean where I doubled down on making it clear that I don’t stand to get anything out of this presidency. Thank you…

          • I Am Helpy

            You explicitly stated you didn’t care if people were harmed.

          • Izo

            I just read over her post twice and don’t see where she said that.

          • I Am Helpy

            You think the Clinton Body Count is real; I don’t care what you think about anything.

          • Izo

            Yes I notice this is a trend with you to not care what other people think of anything that you don’t agree with or to which you don’t have a good response. It seems it’s your standard answer to anything. 🙂

          • I Am Helpy

            See previous post.

          • Izo

            I swear, it’s like arguing with a child 🙂 Almost doesn’t seem fair the advantage I have.

          • I Am Helpy

            See previous two posts.

          • Izo

            You know, you could just not respond at all?

          • I Am Helpy

            See previous three posts.

          • Izo

            Really seems you’re making more of an effort to say that you won’t respond by responding than it would take to, say, not respond.

          • I Am Helpy

            See previous four posts.

          • Izo

            Oh wait I get it! 🙂 You’re one of those people who equates having the last word to winning, even if your last word says nothing substantive. Gotcha 🙂

            I Am Helpy: “See previous five posts.”

          • I Am Helpy

            See previous five posts.

          • Izo

            Yay I’m psychic!

          • I Am Helpy

            See previous six posts.

          • Izo

            I think I’ll stop responding when you say ‘See previous ten posts.’ It’s too much fun so far.

          • I Am Helpy

            See previous seven posts.

          • Izo

            I know the comic has progressed but I sorta really want to see you write ‘See previous ten posts.’

          • I Am Helpy

            See previous eight posts.

          • Izo

            Two more to go.

          • I Am Helpy

            See previous nine posts.

          • Izo

            One more now! You can do it!

          • I Am Helpy

            See previous ten posts.

          • I Am Helpy

            Wow, most people are bright enough to realise they’re arguing with a script well before now. Not you, though.

          • Izo

            Boo. You changed it.

            And it wasn’t a script. If it was a script, it would be ‘See previous 9 posts.’ Not ‘See previous nine posts.’

          • I Am Helpy

            See previous post.

          • I Am Helpy

            In fact, you’re right – it knows up to the word “twenty”, and then it starts using numbers. Only one other person has been dumb enough to get that far, but I’m positive you’re a strong contender.

            Sorry you’re broken in the head!

          • Izo

            Nah, I don’t believe you 🙂 Say See previous ten posts. Cmon.

          • I Am Helpy

            See previous post.

          • Izo

            Boo. Laaaame. You left out the ‘ten’

          • I Am Helpy

            See previous two posts.

          • Izo

            Aw man, am I going to have to respond to your lame posts another 8 times?

          • I Am Helpy

            See previous three posts.

          • I Am Helpy

            Wow. You’re… you’re dumb as hell, aren’t you.

          • Izo

            No no no, you’ve gone back to just namecalling and insulting. Say ‘See previous ten posts.’

          • I Am Helpy

            See previous post.

          • Izo

            Yknow, I just realized, your little story about how it’s a script instead of you stupidly just writing the same thing over and over again would mean that you’re so pathetic that you programmed a script to avoid justifying your responses. 🙂 Not to mention that you’d have, for some reason, made the script overly complicated to write out numbers up to twenty, rather than just X, X+1, etc

            Go on, lets see the script! 🙂

          • I Am Helpy

            See previous post.

          • I Am Helpy

            I get that you simply refuse to believe you’re a gullible, argumentative loon. Oh well.

            Here’s what happens when you pass twenty:
            https://disqus.com/home/discussion/alternet/robert_reich_dear_bernie_a_note_of_thanks/#comment-2731381344

            And here’s the all-time record:
            https://disqus.com/home/discussion/alternet/robert_reich_dear_bernie_a_note_of_thanks/#comment-2731478136

            Note that this was the SECOND time this guy had done this.

          • Izo

            Sounds like a pretty idiotic script if it was true. Considering you could just start with numbers the entire time. But I guess it’s possibly that you could have made a script that you REGULARLY use because you’re too intellectually incapable to respond with logic. 🙂

            Btw, the reason people keep responding is because it’s incredibly amusing for us to watch you be angry, given what a hateful little troll you seem to be 🙂

            Seriously, lets see the script! Prove it’s a script and not you sitting in your parent’s basement, watching your email to respond with the same repetitive post. 🙂

            Cmon, lets see the script.

          • I Am Helpy

            See previous post.

          • Izo

            You really have a problem understanding what the word ‘literally’ means, I’m literally seeing.

          • I Am Helpy

            This is not an argument you want to get in to with me, trust me. You will lose.

          • Izo

            I doubt I’d lose any argument with you. From what I’ve seen, when someone is beating you in an argument, which seems to be almost every time you get into an argument with anyone, you just say ‘I don’t care what you think’ and issue some threats or insults. 🙂

          • I Am Helpy

            OK, sorry that you think you understand what words mean; you’re as wrong about that as everything else you’ve said.

          • Izo

            It’s a shame that you don’t read past the first sentence of anyone’s posts then 🙂

            You didn’t even respond to what I wrote. heehee.

          • I Am Helpy

            See previous post.

      • Michael Smith

        You’re wrong, Sterling. It’s millions and billions. Not thousands. Ira is willing to destroy the whole world like a child kicking over a game of checkers when she’s annoyed. “Logically, he doesn’t really have the ability to do anything significant.” Well, he could set off the nuclear bombs, for starters. Trying living through that hell. Ira. You don’t know what hell is. But because of you and people like you, we’re all going to learn.

    • Santiago Tórtora

      So it’s kind of like when your microwave or TV stop working and you give them a whack on the side hoping that will fix them. That does work occasionally, but it takes a special kind of optimism (or is it desperation?) to try that with the machinery of national politics.

    • Cartheon

      I’m going to address your points one by one. First, the problem is, because so many of the politicians didn’t support Trump, he is more unfettered than a President normally would be. He won without their support, so he has the mandate and owes the establishment nothing. If they get in his way he can appeal to the public that they are spitting on the public’ choice, which in turn threatens their incumbency. The pressure to go along with Trump will be immense. He controls the party now, as any President does if not moreso, and he can forge it into his image. You already see a bunch of previous #nevertrumpers attempting to make amends.

      Additionally, to your first point, regulatory law is the purview of the executive branch. A whole bunch of regulations can be repealed or changed without Congressional approval. Additionally, he will get to nominate one and maybe more Supreme Court justices. Trump may be around for four years or eight at the most. Supreme Court justices have lifetime appointments. We could be dealing with the fallout from this for 50 years.

      Breaking the system completely is not an effective solution. There is no telling you will end up something better. We could have an illiberal democracy, or, as the founders called it, mob rule. That may sound good, until the mob decides you’re not in their group and need to be displaced. You will never change the two-party system with the first-past-the-post voting method that is built into our political culture. The stable condition for that method is a two party system. Any additional parties eventually coalesce into a two party system. We will need multi-member districts and/or something like the ranked voting that Maine just passed.

      As for your final point, that depends on which side of the devil you know argument you fall on. Hillary may have been more of the same, but I will take that over the mystery box that might be filled with candy or a rabid rottweiler.

      • Ira

        I appreciate these views and there’s really no argument to be made to them beside to needlessly try to reinforce my own views with more estimates. I’m not really here to argue, I wanted to make a point that there were reasons beyond the man’s words as to why someone may have voted for him.
        That said, I feel like this is to the same effect as what I wrote, being our best estimates on potential outcomes.
        I would also assume, based on your latter statements, we seem to be people of different courses of action; you would seem(based on the text) to tend toward keeping the machine running while switching out parts, where I would rather just make a new machine. Both are viable options, it’s just a matter of preference and when you want to finally make the replacement of the main unit.

        • Cartheon

          Out of curiosity, what are you looking to replace what we have with?

          • Ira

            Really, just a revamp. If we could wipe democracy as we presently know it and restart, it should be fine for another couple hundred years. Many systems of rule have a solid base to them, where the common factor that ruins them is greed and complacency. So, if we switched over to anything else for a couple generations and then eventually overturned that government and reinstated democracy, people would have a basis to look at from history, but none of the presets in mind so they can better learn from the mistakes of the past and build on them. It will inevitably go corrupt again, because that is the nature of people, but it should last longer the second time around if our problems now are taken into account then.
            For my own end, I’d like to run an experimental group for 3 generations to get rid of money. I’m fairly certain that, in that time, you could effectively do away with both greed and ownership, instead driving people on a force of community betterment. The catch would be that all of the first generation would have to be in agreement to work with such a system and not instill the concepts into the second generation. Allowing for some error, the second to third should be pretty much pure, ergo 3 generations. Obviously, this goes against pretty much all established standards, so a global scale of this is pretty much impossible without being a world dominating dictator first.

    • SJ

      Second, our political system needs broken. Not just cracked and repaired, but broken. If he can do that, regardless of the horrible things he might even manage to pull off, long term it should be better for future generations. Policies can be rectified with a new person in power, the standards that (hopefully) shape peoples minds tend to last beyond terms and outside politics; that the two party system is not the way to go, that anyone really can run with enough backing, is something we need to start moving toward, and in time the country might see a working class president. It’s a far shot, but it’s better than nursing the dying, comatose, braindead patient that is presently our country until the bitter, expensive end…

      Oh, really? Now the system “needs broken”? In case you haven’t been paying attention, the system has “needed broken” for some time now. It “needed broken” when Bush 43 was elected. It “needed broken” when Reagan was elected. Hell, the system “needed broken” when Harding was elected!

      That it was this point in history during which people decided to elect a demagogue in order to break the system, to me, speaks to a schism between marginalized groups and the majority. For decades, marginalized groups have been saying that the system is broken, and have been told, “Shut the fuck up!”, “Quit complaining!”, “Stop standing around, waiting for handouts,” “Love it or leave!”, “Pull yourself up by your bootstraps,” and this, that and a third, and all this other bullshit… And it wasn’t until the privileged majority began to complain that the system “needs broken.” Miss me on all of that.

      • Ira

        Ummm thank you? I didn’t give a when, so I’m not sure why you went off
        on a rant like this I was bringing this up as a new problem. I’ve known
        as much since grade-school.

        • SJ

          Ummm thank you? I didn’t give a when, so I’m not sure why you went off
          on a rant like this I was bringing this up as a new problem.

          Because, whether you thought it was a new problem or not, the point is that there weren’t dozens of millions of people willing to blow the broken system up until the system being broken became a problem for the privileged majority.

          When the system being broken was only disproportionately affecting marginalized groups, weren’t nan one of those people wanting to blow the system up, and start over. When the system being broken was only putting its foot in the ass of POC, immigrants, LGBTQ, non-Christians, etc., all we heard was ‘bootstraps, bootstraps, bootstraps’. Now that the system being broken is putting its foot in the ass of the privileged majority, too, it’s “BLOW IT UP!” And that fucks with me, hard.

  • Izo

    I’d like to mention something unrelated to the election or anything political or upsetting to anyone… really nice picture of Molly and Brennan.

  • Vertorm

    I love this comic and this story. =) I found your Kickstarter back when you were doing it for your first book, and I thought “Oh, a Webcomic that I’ve never heard of? Eh, I’ll drop the dough,” and I backed your book without even looking at your content. I then forgot about it, like most crowdfunding I’ve done, and when your book finally arrived, it was a pleasant “Oh, right! This book!” feeling. I’ve been an avid fan ever since. =D

    As far as the other stuff… Life will never be easy. There will always be hardship, for everyone. Life wouldn’t be life without challenges and barriers to overcome. As long as we stay united and work together with the people around us, no matter what happens, things WILL be okay in the end. And that is a fact. Leaders around the world can say and do whatever they like, try and pass laws and ruin lives… But if you just keep fighting for your right to happiness, and for the people that are in your life, then we can turn the tables around.

    If we want a happy, united world, that doesn’t mean removing people like Trump from power. It means showing them what a united and happy world looks like, because Trump and people like him are all a part of this world too. If they aren’t surviving as well as everyone else is too, then we aren’t helping absolutely everyone, now are we?

    So don’t be afraid for the future; instead, feel hopeful. We can make a difference. We can change people’s minds. Don’t fight against racism. Educate them. Change their lives so that they can be better people. That’s the way to a happy, united world.

    • Bunny

      I love your post and agree with everything you said. Your post breathes hope and unity, which I really need right now.
      When people say that the world is shit now or it’s very dark, they don’t see that it’s always been this way. Humanity has always been fighting and will probably drive our race to extinction by fighting.It saddens me on the amazing feats humanity could reach if we would just sit down and talk to one another.This election has just divided and angered people even more. I will give Trump a chance and hope he does more good than harm.I only wish that we can find some sort of peace at the end of this hellscape.

      Sadly, I’m not a peaceful person as I carry myself as. I know I’m as worse as an racist, homophobic,xenophobic, mygonist, the list goes on. I will be long dead before this fighting ever stops.

  • Sterling Ericsson

    Oh geez, look at this BS i’m having to deal with in a Facebook comment section.

    Me: “So you’re saying that Trump didn’t pick a VP that supports electro-shock conversion therapy and ruined his state’s economy just so he could negatively affect the LGBT community?”

    Them: “I am saying that. That nonsense is an outright lie. More propaganda from the establishment media. I doubt you realize it, but the leftist media does nothing but lie and fabricate the picture so that they can achieve the agenda they aim for. The major media outlets are all owned by a small group of people roughly five major companies, and they all have the same globalist anti-American agenda. Trump had a gay man speak at the RNC, who will now be joining his cabinet. His campaign is the first campaign to win with a woman at the head of the campaign. Ben Carson, a black doctor will also be taking a cabinet position. All this garbage about racism and homophobia is absolute propaganda and lies.”

    • damocles6

      Yeah, I had a Fb conversation like that today too. What do you even say to that? I’m getting really tired of being called a “libtard.”

  • Edgedy

    Love you guys, stay strong and don’t give up hope.

  • Richard Wolfe

    You are not alone in your determination to fight for a better government. I’m a big fan of SWF, and I appreciate your perspective. Progressives need to stand up and wrest the Democratic Party back from the corpocrats, banksters and incrementalists. We can only do that if we stand together. SWF is an inspiration. Know that you have a dedicated base of support.

  • Rumble in the Tumble

    Everyone and their mums are currently making videos and writing articles on “how could this happen that Donald Trump won the elections”, but I feel that this guy’s done it with ~class and in a timely fashion.

    https://www.facebook.com/viralthread/videos/598130190359668/

    Give him a watch, it’s just five minutes. You might gain some insight into… something, I guess.

  • Alexander

    We love and support you. I want to write more, but nothing seems appropriate. Just because the world seems against what we believe in today doesn’t mean that any fewer people share our ideals, just that those who don’t shouted louder. Support where you can, if you can’t support then endure. I do have faith that humanity will find a more enlightened path eventually – I just hoped it would be sooner than it appears it will be.

  • Mechwarrior

    You know, I think the real thing to take away from this election is that millions of Americans decided to express their frustration at The System by electing an old, rich, white conservative with massive ties to Big Business and Wall Street.

    • crazy j

      As opposed to the old white liberal who was funded by Big Business and Wall Street?

      • Mechwarrior

        Piss off, troll.

  • Graeme Sutton

    Ah yes, the Southern Poverty Law Center, protecting and combating hate crimes by smearing any muslim who dares to speak up about freedom of speech, women’s rights, gay rights or freedom of religion in the muslim community as an “Anti-Muslim Extremist.” Pass.

  • Arkone Axon

    http://imgur.com/gallery/Q7dbJHF

    And suddenly Trump doesn’t seem so bad… @.@

    • Cartheon

      Replace Choi with Putin and it’s probably very similar.

      • Arkone Axon

        No, because Trump didn’t make Putin his BFF and consult him for literally everything. He just said, “you know, I don’t think it’s a good idea to annoy the leader of a nuclear power when diplomacy might be more productive.”

  • Thanks you two.

    As a pair of very, VERY visible transwoman living openly in Texas, we don’t have it as bad as many others. But we are concerned when the KKK and the nazis are marching together, emboldened by the new regime of intolerance. We’ve made such strides- heck, we got married in March because we finally could, y’know? Her health care will actually cover her bottom surgery this year.

    Now suddenly it seems it could all be taken away, and far more.

    There is a lot of fear out there, and call me simplistic and naive but we just can’t live in fear. I’ll be out there with my chin high, chest out, strutting at high speed everywhere I go causing traffic accidents and spousal arguments in my wake. I’ll be loud and proud and change one mind at a time about us. I’ll work my job and live my life and write my little comic and I will have good times and joy while Luthor and the Legion of Doom take over the White House and wreak havoc upon the country and the world.

    One of the most significant reasons I can do that is because I know that I have friends… lots of them, who stand behind me. And if needed stand beside me or even before me to shield me. The haters can demonize us all they want- call me a child molester, call me a pervert and an abomination and whatever slings and arrows they can conjure. They can try to legislate us out of existence. Because I know that to have such friends who are family as are these wonderful, diverse and beautiful people then I am most definitely not what they think I am. Clearly I must be pretty darn spectacular to have such friends.

    That’s what will give me the bravery to face every day.

    So thank you for being friends and allies… and family.

  • tdphette

    Thank you for continuing to create something beautiful and sharing it with the world. Your work is positive and it important. It genuinely makes the work a brighter, more hopeful place. Thank you.

  • Sage Catharsis

    I’ve been reading your comic for a long time. In response to you, in response to all accusations, I don’t know what to say. Men have made themselves all types of powerless to finally accept love from who accuse them of monstrosity only to find themselves alone. May God Bless you.

  • Human Rights Campaign is actually pretty crappy to trans people. They have a significant history of throwing trans people under the bus to pass things in the interest of LGBQ people

    • weedgoku

      Such is why I always have trouble blindly supporting causes. Despite how big of an asshole I am in these comments, I genuinely do all I can to support the rights of fellow humans in the real world, I very much believe in what I say when I talk about how people shouldn’t hurt one another. I can’t count the number of times I, alone, have witnessed one group just drop another to the wolves if it meant getting better treatment for themselves. Or cover up horrific abuse and mistreatment because “it would hurt the cause!” This isn’t, in any way, trying to say that LGBTQ groups are self defeating or bad people. Just that you should always throw in a helping dose of measured caution when you start opening yourself to large groups and social circles outside of your own. No human being is perfect and the temptation to be a bully on the playground to impress the cool kids sometimes does win out, even in real world struggles.

  • This nation survived eight years of Nixon. This nation survived eight years of Saint Ronnie. This nation survived eight years of Shrubbery. This nation will survive four years or fewer of Trump.

    • Mechwarrior

      It’s not really a question of whether or not the country will survive but what the effect is going to be on the people. Nixon saddled us with the War on Drugs, which has resulted in an increasingly militarized police force and the incarceration of tens of thousands of people on non-violent offenses. Reagan did the Iran Contra deal and mishandled the AIDS epidemic, resulting in thousands of preventable deaths due to misinformation. Shrub, of course, got thousands of people killed pursuing his idiotic military adventurism and left a large section of Asia dangerously destabilized, creating a refuge epidemic and further suffering.

      • At this point, all i want is to survive. Not so much for me, but for my granddaughters; i hope we can fix some of Trump’s worst damage in time for them to grow up in a halfway-decent nation to live in.

        • Mechwarrior

          You and me both.

        • nat365

          War on drugs has also resulted in the deaths of millions worldwide (because America’s bullshit policies have a tendency to spread). A sensible, evidence-based drug policy would have brought taxes into governments and kept drugs legal and safe – so addicts would be both able to function more easily in society, and be more likely to get help.

          I shudder to think of the long term effects Trump/Pence will unleash upon the world.

          • The Official Federal Narcotics Price Support Program is one of the stupider things any Administration has committed.

    • crazy j

      Nixon never held office for eight years.

  • gilad

    Dear Molly,
    I Just want to tell you that this comics is grate. I like to read, but recently I find that nothing I read is anywere near as complicated as real life. Allways the heroes are naive, are absolutly “good”, or absolutly indifferent – never convincing. Your commics on the other hand is really up to the task, it is refreshing, and in a way inspiering.
    I think your comics is not just a good comics, it is an important one, and it is people like you who will make the world a better place, in years to follow.

    I am not from the usa, but I (and my friends) see your shok in this time, and sympthise. And maybe this is the best most hopefull thing to remmember: the people who only care for themselves are many, but they are varied and devided – egoism allways is, by its nature. While people who care for every body -we are united, again by our nature. And though we are far appart, in these days we are connecting from all around the world. We have many differences and meny opinions, we make many mistakes, and get devided time and again, but we are united in a single thing, the caring for other beings, whoever and wherever they are. And as we connect, this movement becomes a power the like of which the world have never knew. So a better future is at hand…
    gilad

  • Harlequin

    Correct me if I’m wrong (I’m not American), but aren’t most of those issues Congress related rather than Presidential? And that the Republicans have had congress deadlocked for the past few years? That is to say, if they were going to do those things, wouldn’t/couldn’t they already have done so?

    Does the President really have that much clout? Obama seemed pretty ineffectual in the face of all that, and it’s not like Trump is exactly on good terms with the Republicans.

    I mean, I don’t mean to trivialise the institution of the presidency, but it seems like he’s just one tip of a very complex and broad pyramid, in a field filled with other pyramids.

    • Cartheon

      The major issue is the Supreme Court. The President nominates the Justices and the Senate approves, and we currently have a vacancy that needs filled. There might be a few more vacancies in the next four years, and considering its the liberal justices who are older, the court could swing conservative very easily. The Supreme Court is where many of the big issues get settled, not with Congress or the President. Abortion? Supreme Court. Gay Marriage? Supreme Court. Citizen United? Supreme Court. Obamacare being ruled constitutional? Supreme Court. A whole lot of progress over the past 50 years can be overturned because of this one election, but people tend to ignore the Supreme Court and never think about it during elections.

      The second issue is that while Congress has the purse-strings, the President tends to set policy with the advent of the “Imperial Presidency” over the course of the 20th century. Congress is a reactionary body and the administration is the pro-active body.

      Finally, there is the issue of regulatory law, which is controlled by the various government agencies and supported by “Chevron deference” by the courts. All the regulations enacted by the EPA to curb global warming and the current court cases being pursued by the Justice Department could by thrown out, because they’re under new ownership.

    • Weatherheight

      The presidential veto, and the threat thereof, has a great deal of political power in our system of governance. Congress hasn’t had a numeric or ideological supermajority necessary to override a presidential veto in many years (although it has been close at times). So more extreme measures need to be toned down in order to pass that potential hurdle.

      And, far more significant;y, what Cartheon said. 😀

    • Sterling Ericsson

      Obama having the veto was basically the only thing holding back the GOP from passing a lot of detrimental stuff.

      And the Supreme Court is also a large concern.

  • Robert

    To the author.

    You have more support than you know. I’m 47, white, male, with a closet full of guns and ammo. I voted Trump, and have a 16 year old daughter who came out when she was 14.

    Know what my response to her was? So? Rules don’t change. Guy, girl, I don’t care who you like or why you like them. Not my business. She’s not allowed to have any SO’s overnight, not allowed to single date until after she gets her driver’s license, etc…

    Here’s why you don’t know how much support you really have from hillbilly white privilege demon male *insert favorite “the man” descriptor here*…

    It’s all about the coin. Let me explain… and this is now moving away from the author, or anyone in specific, and dealing in generalities…

    There are three sides to every coin, and four dimensions. You have the side/dimension of heads, the side/dimension of tails, the side/dimension of the edge, and the dimension of time.

    All issues can be related to the concept of the coin. If you pick a side, and ignore the other sides, and dimensions, then you will receive push back from everyone who doesn’t “side” with you. (see what I did there?)

    If you truly want change… the first thing you have to do is shelve the feelings. There is no safe space. Ever. The world is a dirty, hateful, suspicious, dangerous place, and will be for the rest of your life. You CAN change things, if you do it right. So pocket those feels, and then flip the coin.

    What does the other side thing? What does the other side feel? WHY do they feel/think this way? What common ground does the side I identify with have with the other? What ways would they be willing to meet in common with me be? What ways would I be willing to meet with them?

    Once you figure out common ground, then you can start to use the fourth dimension to bring people to that middle ground.

    EXAMPLE TIME! I know, I know… but you’re going to get it anyways…

    Trans bathroom privileges.

    The average person doesn’t care. You want to be whatever… guess what? NO ONE CARES… not until you shove it in their face and demand they agree with you. THEN they care.

    Regardless of how you feel… if you were born with ovaries, you are female. If you were born with testes, you are male. If you were born with both or neither, well… you’re kinda screwed from the get-go, help yourself to the punch and cookies, yer a special case I’ll not be addressing here…

    In our society, we feel uncomfortable sharing certain spaces in a mixed gender setting. Women feel uncomfortable being in a bathroom with a man, and vice versa.

    That is the reality, regardless of personal feelings wishing differently…

    So the first step is accepting the feelings of others having the same legitimacy as your own.

    What’s the second step?

    Solution.

    Gender neutral bathrooms.

    Is it perfect? Nope, but if you’re batting for perfection, expect to strike out.

    Truth is, it would be far easier to push for gender neutral bathrooms than it would be for trans acceptance… because, let me repeat… NO ONE CARES WHAT/WHO YOU WANT TO BE… unless it inconveniences us.

    Another example… only because that person *points randomly* groaned at the last one.

    Gay marriage.

    I am all for it. Anyone should be able to make the same stupid mistake I did 20 years ago. Regardless of gender, identity, race, color, or shoe size.

    I will point out, that the fight would have been over faster if no one tried to co-opt “marriage” (which is a religious ideal ported into law) and went for the legal side of it. A civil union would have been much easier to get done… THEN, when time had passed, and people saw that the world hadn’t ended, religious acceptance would have been easier.

    Hey, people want to fight the fight? Go for it… but screaming at me about something I have no interest in is a great way to get me to vote against you come election time… Fair warning…

    Racism… I love it. Black lives matter… Oh, is it only black lives? Now THAT doesn’t make me feel marginalized… wait, I can’t say anything because I’m white? Oh.. hmm… not racist at all.

    *sighs*

    Put the feels away people, and take a hard, honest look at the stupid pouring out of some faces. Three sides, four dimensions. Do not marginalize others in your quest for the feels. They are people… people whose support you’re going to need if you ever intend to actually enact change.

    One last thing, and this is directed at everyone.

    If you think I’m going to sit back and watch people get singled out for “special treatment” based on their beliefs, then you don’t understand America. Whether I agree with you or not, you have a right to say/believe what you want, and I will use whatever means I have to protect that right.

    All I ask is you use thought, reason, wisdom and restraint when you spread your message.

    Consider how I feel, or better yet, ask… before you label me and marginalize me…

    In other words, try treating others how you’re DEMANDING to be treated.

    Respect is not one sided. We tend to forget that when we become emotional.

    • guesty

      While I might agree with you in theory, I think this tends to be a black and white view of the world – of a world that is not black and white.
      The things that people tend to argue for/demand are things that tend to be important: case in point, trans bathrooms rights can help protect people. How?
      Well consider all the crimes reported by people committed by trans people using the bathroom of the gender they associate with. Last I heard, it was zero. Nada. Zip. At all.
      On the other side is the amount of crimes reported against trans people. Transwomen in particular are one of, if not the most (I’ve heard at times that they are the biggest population of victims of violence, especially if they are also of another minority population), vulnerable population to harassment and crime. Bathrooms are a place where people are alone, where they are vulnerable. This issue isn’t just about the right to act as you are, and it’s not just about feelings safe – it’s about BEING safe.
      And I suppose that I understand the reactionary side – you see a 6 foot tall woman who clearly has the musculature of a man, and if you’re a 5 ft tall woman who isn’t totally comfortable with that transwoman being in the same bathroom – that’s not your fault, per se. But the feeling is not the same as the actual risk.
      Also, besides the point, but male =/= testes and female =/= ovaries. Intersex people are actually vastly more common than is usually believed since more abnormalities don’t affect anything, really, and tend to be internal, not external. Point being: nobody really knows until you go digging around in there.
      Also, this is a huge point: when you are developing as a fetus, different parts of your body develop at different times. Meaning that you could have a course of extra testosterone when your genitals are developing, and end up intersex as a result, while all brain structures developed female since the normal hormones levels were present. It’s a vast oversimplification, but it’s a rough outline of how that works (although many would probably attribute other causes/effects, etc).

      Onto gay marriage: there’s a shit ton of rights and laws that only apply to married couples, hence the push for marriage. So my point here would be that – one person’s belief that it is wrong AND the right to say that, and live that way, is not equivalent to the right of a couple to, say, adopt. Or make decisions on the behalf of the other (like, organ transplants if the partner died, or financial decisions, or most importantly receive benefits from government and employers – filing taxes jointly, being added to each others’ insurance, etc). Honestly I kind of agree with you there: social change takes time, and the push for a distinct civil union that we could then change into general marriage rights would probably have been quicker (and thus helped more); although I would also consider the case that it would have more backpush against it.

      As for black lives matter… Here’s the thing: not every group has to address every issue. Sometimes you can focus on one thing, one aspect. Black lives matter is about addressing police brutality towards black people. It tends to be seen as making light or dismissing their valid concerns when it’s turned about – which is to say, ‘sure, all lives matter, but not all lives tend to be at risk.’ When people ignore the “black” part of it, then they lose the heart of it: that some people are more in danger than others for racist reasons. Something that anyone involved deeply in charitable work could tell you is that it pays to have achievable goals: solving racism is not an achievable goal for any organization. It’s an admirable one, but not an achievable one. So instead you focus on things like police brutality. You don’t have to take on the world to do good.
      Of course, that is not to excuse, say, rioting (although I’d mention that those who riot tend to be those who want to riot; it’s not a thing that’s caused by the cause, in other words).

      I suppose in short: everyone has their concerns, and that’s okay – that doesn’t mean those concerns are in any way of equal value or equally worthy of action against. It’s a false dichotomy to have to choose between those two positions. Some (from the statistics I’ve seen) white, rural folks are concerned about the economy? That’s bad. We should fix that. Some, for example, black transwomen are worried about being murdered or something, and not about the economy because no one will hire them in the first place? We should probably fix that first.

      But in addition I would also say – and it’s been said a lot here – that what you personally believe about, say, gay marriage isn’t relevant if you vote for someone who is against it – you are either passively or actively supporting the cause, and there are going to be people who suffer because of it, because of that choice you made.

      Obviously now this is a problem not necessarily due to you and those who like you voted Trump because from a lot of what I’ve seen the surprise turnout for him was a good bit from those who think the same as you – supporting some of his policies, not all (or even many). And that’s a huge part of the problem with the American political system – two major parties means two major options means no matter what, your party isn’t going to address all the issues you want them to, or deal with all the problems the way you want them too. Case in point: many fiscally conservative but socially liberal people will vote republican because they know the libertarian party doesn’t have a chance. The flaws with that philosophy are a whole ‘nother debate.

      I’ve had respectful debates and arguments with everything under the sun: creationists, bible literalists, homophobics, transphobics (I wish there were better terms because “phobic” is not really accurate), bigots, racists, and everything in between. That does not mean I respect their ideas. Their ideas are almost exclusively laughable, the domain of children who think the world revolves around them, who dismiss anything that doesn’t conform to their worldview, and are willfully ignorant.
      But I respect them as people, as individuals – and I think you are confusing the two of these things. I don’t need to – nor should I – respect the “Trump” philosophy. Many of his ideas and policies are vague and make little to no sense. That doesn’t mean I would dismiss his followers – although, I would because I’m a judgemental prick. But it’s not because I don’t have respect for their ideas, it’s because I just very thoroughly like and enjoy hating things.

      So the respect “we DEMAND” is not the respect of our ideals but of our persons (frequently the two mix) and often times the respect others demand is of their ideals because they already exist in a position in which they are respected as people; and these ideas rather often include not respecting others – e.g. anti-abortion (yes, anit-abortion; the labels pro-life and pro-choice are horrible and are at best, just not descriptive at all of the position, and at worst are just emotional appeals). I digress.

      Often the “special treatment” you’re talking about isn’t the addition of more rights, or special privileges, but just the extension of the rights that other people have to cover people who’ve been marginalized. Are there issues we can reasonably disagree with? Sure. Affirmative action for example is kind of iffy, both morally and law-wise, and it’s debatable whether it is the most effective way to go about things. Abortion is also a good one: hard to argue against the basic tenet of someone’s right to their own body (though many try), but the details are more difficult – what term should it no longer be legal? Where should it be practiced? By who? What kind of safety regulations, and so on and so forth, should public money be subsidizing it, on and on.
      Sure, there are people who take this kind of thing far; the “rampant” runaway political correctness monster sometimes exists, but coming at things from an objective standpoint, with an understanding of history and context – usually, that’s not the case.

      I had a couple more points to bring up but I already have the feeling no one is reading this.

      • Robert

        Believe it or not, I read it all.

        We’re looking at the issues from two different perspectives, both wanting the same thing… which is for people to be able to be themselves without having to worry about their safety.

        First, let me state simply. Safety is a lie. It always has been and always will be. There will never be but an illusion of safety. This is close to being a universal truth.

        Second, most, if not all, people view topics that lack personal interest in the form of black/white. It is simpler to do so. Right/wrong = meaningless, it’s how people are.

        Third, my viewpoint is one in which I have no dogs in any of these fights. I truly don’t care who uses what bathroom. I also am not homophobic in the slightest. A woman interested in me causes the same stress as a man. I’ve had women and men, how should I put this, try to get close to me. I’m not interested in the men in that way, and was married for 20 years, and not interested in the women either.

        I guess my whole point was lost… I need to learn brevity…

        My point is this. You cannot expect others to change for you. Unless they are already willing to accommodate, you will experience an excess amount of resistance, as folks will resist being forced into something as well as that something being uncomfortable to them.

        Ever heard the saying about honey and vinegar?

        That goes to everything. An ALL LIVES MATTER rally would advance the cause vs. police brutality far further than an *INSERT SEGREGATING RACIAL DELINEATION HERE* If I had formed a group called WHITE lives matter, I’m racist. If I form any other group, it’s ok. How can you expect white Americans to get behind a cause, and support your agenda, if you’re excluding them, AND piling undeserved guilt on their heads for things they have not done. I’ve never oppressed anyone, I’ve never owned anyone, I’ve never committed a crime against someone based on color, race, religious preference or any of the minefield gender/sex issues. So why am I part of the “problem” because of my skin?

        For that matter, why am I at fault when others feel marginalized? Painting with the same size brush you’re painted with doesn’t work.

        You also misinterpreted my use of “special treatment” I’m talking about any systematic oppression of any group of people. Most obvious, relatively recent one would be the Jewish people in nazi Germany. See what happens when you look at something through feels? I will state it a different way, hopefully clearer…

        I will not stand idly by, but put my experience with, and capabilities for, armed resistance to work opposing any systematic oppression by our government against any of its peoples. If they start rounding up folks, I’m one who will do the un-rounding (is that even a word?).

        But I don’t appreciate having someone’s agenda shoved in my face, and rammed down my throat. I think I can safely speak for quite a few people in this country. Less ramming… that’d be nice.

        I guess maybe I’m saying, you’ll get more allies with calm facts, rather than fiery rhetoric. And that goes for everyone.

        Since there’s no divisive rhetoric, this comment will fall by the way. *shrugs*

        Good luck out there. I’m afraid we all have much more to worry about than who is in charge of this sinking ship of ours.

  • Frank Hand

    Also please remember LESS THAN HALF of the voters supported this person. There are far too many people who support the hate and bigotry but we DO have them outnumbered. For anyone out there that is scared or worried you are not alone, you have millions of allies throughout the country. Hatred and bigotry are not core American values and I have faith we will rise to this challenge. I once served to defend the citizens of this nation and I’m not about to stop now when it matters the most.

  • RainWall

    I didn’t expect this kind of divisive fear-mongering from you, Brennan. I’m pretty disappointed. No one is getting rights taken away. No one who is here legally is being deported. Obamacare is going to be replaced with a system that *actually* helps people. We’re going to be okay.

  • Oz

    Stay strong. There are a lot of us out here who don’t support the Trump agenda and will do everything we can to maintain and increase the civil rights of all citizens.

  • Dan Nicholson

    One third of my country voted to confirm that they are racist. There is no “supported him but I am not racist.” That’s “I supported racism.” It’s “I believe bigotry is OK.”

    One third. It’s the Republican ideal. Help the rich, fuck the poor, blame someone powerless… and complain that government isn’t doing enough… so keep voting for the same assholes. The country is full of people who’ve been isolating themselves from any knowledge that might make ’em question their religion or politics… or their racism.

    And now, a week on… I have people telling me that Trump is not racist. Only the “liberal media” portrays him that way. This is not different from people denying the fucking holocaust. This is people normalizing their racism and pretending it didn’t happen, so that they can hopefully do it again without smarter people stopping them. They’re rebranding neo-nazis into alt-right. White supremacy into white nationalism. Which is like “It’s not that I think white people are the superior race. I just think all the other races should get the fuck out of my country because they’re bringing it down.” It’s garbage.

    And I depend on the ACA for my anti-depressants. If I go off of them while I’m dealing with something as depressing as the political reality… I’m probably going to die. That’s what happens when you are resisting suicidal tendencies and someone cuts you off and gives you no options to survive.

    This election was life and death for me, and my friends went 3rd party. And I can’t fix anything. I can’t hope for the future, there’s very bad people pointing guns at all of us, and printing lies about how they’re not… and I can’t do anything until they start shooting and even then… I might not be able to.

    And I’m pissed, because I’d finally got where I was looking forward to another 50 years on the planet. The VR might get GOOD by then. I could retire into a holodeck. That would have been nice.

    • Shweta Narayan

      *offers support* Having had friends like that… I think you may need better friends :/ (I’d say hit THEM up for meds costs but I know how fast that kind of friend vanishes when we actually need anything.)

      Mutual support systems with other spoonies are like. the thing that’ll keep more of us alive, i think.

      • Dan Nicholson

        Dude, they’re slightly higher-functioning spoon-bearers. ^^; They just would not talk politics. Granted, one’s got pro-trump parents. >_< Educated pro-trump parents. Because racist.

        *hugs*

        • Shweta Narayan

          *hugs back* and GAH that’s even worse! All round. All the sympathies 🙁 And new plan: STEAL THEIR SPOoNS ALL OF THEM MUAHAHAHA

          (never said I was a good planner)

          (seriously though, if we manage to be vigilant, the ACA may survive this? Vigilant with what spoons is always the problem of course but I’m telling myself we just gotta. Given the ableism and especially psychophobia already on display among other anti-Trump people I don’t trust them for this.)