Election 2016 POTUS exit poll

Well, just when you think Hillary couldn't get any more sleazy and had slimed her way back under a rock.....

Originally Posted by WebSlave

Kind of interesting how upbeat I feel since the election.

While I didn't vote for her, I've been very depressed about the outcome and shell shocked the last few days. I worry for the country. I'm sure if it was the opposite outcome, some of you would feel the same.

The rioting is stupid and people need to be arrested and fined as needed for any property destruction.

The condescending tone of some of the posts in this thread is disheartening. I assume I'll get ridiculed for even posting a dissenting opinion. oh well.

We live in a democracy and this was the choice the majority decided on, we all must strive on and make the best of any situation and have faith in the system of checks and balances.

Originally Posted by WebSlave

Well, just when you think Hillary couldn't get any more sleazy and had slimed her way back under a rock.....

Even if there were any validity, to this video's claims, I don't see it working out for Hillary.

On a side note re. the protesters and those merely taking advantage of the situation.
It is true that people have a right to protest something, should they wish to, but I am appalled, and disgusted, by those who have taken it to violence and criminal behavior.
With those merely taking advantage of the situation, well, what else could we expect from criminals and certain children.

....

Originally Posted by AbsoluteApril

While I didn't vote for her, I've been very depressed about the outcome and shell shocked the last few days. I worry for the country. I'm sure if it was the opposite outcome, some of you would feel the same.

The rioting is stupid and people need to be arrested and fined as needed for any property destruction.

The condescending tone of some of the posts in this thread is disheartening. I assume I'll get ridiculed for even posting a dissenting opinion. oh well.

We live in a democracy and this was the choice the majority decided on, we all must strive on and make the best of any situation and have faith in the system of checks and balances.

Personally, in no way, shape, or form would I ridicule you, for your opinion/post, and feel that it is not justified for anyone else to do so either.

Myself, I am ecstatic that Hillary lost. I truly believe that she would have been a destructive force for our country.
The U.S. would have head for a serious downward spiral.

I don't truly know, at this time, how well Trump will do, as a president, but at least, with him, I have hope.
I wish him the best in his presidency.

....

Originally Posted by AbsoluteApril

The condescending tone of some of the posts in this thread is disheartening. I assume I'll get ridiculed for even posting a dissenting opinion. oh well.

We live in a democracy and this was the choice the majority decided on, we all must strive on and make the best of any situation and have faith in the system of checks and balances.

I agree with your outlook. And more people voted for Hillary Clinton than voted for Donald Trump, but he had the most electoral votes. I am hoping that everyone can work together for the common good, and that the election will not continue to be divisive even after it is over.

Just out of curiosity, to those of you who did vote for HilLIARy, what was it about her that led you to believe she would make the best choice of president of the USA?

Were the negative issues concerning her just insignificant compared to those positive traits you saw for someone wanting to be the leader of our country?

Seriously, I would like to try to understand the "other" view.

Originally Posted by WebSlave

Seriously, I would like to try to understand the "other" view.

Seriously, if you go looking for an actual dialogue with someone with a different view, you might set aside the red lettering just while you are talking; it's a dead giveaway that you are not in fact serious about understanding something.
There's a lot of that going around right now in both parties, people want to show off the memes they found and be clever and have the cutest last word post, but not understand.

I am surprised and disappointed that all America could come up with was these 2 in the first place.

There was a spattering of riots when Obama won second term.

Now Trump says he'd like to keep some of the most expensive parts of Obamacare.

I think it's going to be a bumpy 4 years. I just hope all of us make it out OK. Left,Right, Dem, Rep and Moderates.

I would like to point out that both parties and the way the primaries are done, require both parties to select the one that will say the most radical things to win. If you are going to win that system, you HAVE to become more extreme then the other people running.

If you are upset about the current outcomes, you need to go to your parties website, physical address, and email people in charge. DEMAND they change the primary system.

The reason both candidates was completely unacceptable to the VAST majority of people is simply because only 41% of the voting population took part in the primary. Only 19% of them voted for the two candidates that ran.

If you depend on 20% of the voting population to select the candidate don't be surprise if they select some of the worst people.

Originally Posted by WebSlave

Just out of curiosity, to those of you who did vote for HilLIARy, what was it about her that led you to believe she would make the best choice of president of the USA?

Were the negative issues concerning her just insignificant compared to those positive traits you saw for someone wanting to be the leader of our country?

Seriously, I would like to try to understand the "other" view.

I will address this. It has nothing to do with the person. Everyone loves to view politics like a football team. They win, they lose....


But when you actually vote for someone, you are voting for the platform you hope they will support.

I will not hide that I am a liberal. I am an old school liberal. I am the original definition of liberal. I am a John Locke liberal.

So when I look at the two candidates.

I see the republicans telling people what they can and can not do. Telling people who they can marry, who they can socially interact with, what you can do with your body, what your position in society you will full fill.

Republican want to control you. As a liberal, I find that completely unacceptable.

The government and the parties should not care if you want to marry same sex or not. They should not care if you visit other Muslims, anarchists, communist, or reptile keepers. They should not care what you do to your body. If you want an abortion, if you want tattoos, if you want to be a boy or girl.

None of the above is or should be in the course of political discussion. It is in the political realm, and we have parties based on those social constructs.

As a liberal, I am going to default to the party that give the most social and cultural freedoms to the people with the smallest amount of government. Yes, we need government, but we need to make sure that freedoms and rights of the people are the outcome of that government.

When I listen to and hold down my vomit with Donald Trump, I listened to a racist misogynist bigot that has some of the most insult and degrading ideas put forward in the last 40 years. In my opinion he has the right to be a racist misogynist bigot, I have the right to disagree with him.

But if I listen to and hold down my vomit with Hillary Clinton, I find a career criminal that has infringed repeating on our basic rights. Most of the things that have completely screwed us in the last 8 years have been done directly by her or people that she supports. There is zero chance that her election would change the track of the last year 8 years. Hillary Clinton would continue to destroy our basic rights. And she would revoke the basic right to violently overthrow the government.

Now when I voted. I looked at the basic rights each candidate would strip from us. Donald Trump is a threat to basic liberty and basic rights. Hillary Clinton is a threat to basic liberty and basic rights.

In the last 8 years, we gain the right to marry who we want. And that was sorted by the supreme court. Trump may try to change the outcome of this, but it is unlikely.

Clinton WILL repeal the 2nd amendment. That right will be gone and never come back.

Now if I did not care about the fundamental right to defend ourselves, bring jobs back to this country, and building out infrastructure, I could see a person voting for Clinton. Donald trump will damage freedom and liberty for many people. He could enforce the religious ideas onto the whole country. He could create a fascist military state. And to a lot of people that is a scary idea. If you believed that this is possible, it is in your best interest to vote against him.

But if you look at the current behavior of the government and you think Clinton will continue to extend that fascist movement, we are in a fascist military state with zero rights to defend yourselves.

I don't blame people for voting for Clinton. They where put in the place to shot themselves in the hand or foot.

Some shot themselves in the hand, hoping they could run away if this turned south. Some shot themselves in the foot, hoping the could fight off the problem if this turned south.

For most people, and I mean the vast majority of people, they voted on who they thought would not screw it up so much there would not be an election in 4 years.

Most people just wanted to keep the system going. Try to improve their lot in life. They picked who they thought would harm them less. They did not pick a person they thought would hurt others, only not harm them.

Trump won because he promised to bring jobs back, to secure our country, and rebuild our country.

Clinton promised 4 more years of obama. And for those not paying attention, we are heading back to the ditch. People only voted for Clinton because they thought Trump would run over the ditch and into the lake beyond.

Each side did not vote for anyone because they thought it would be better for this country. They voted for a candidate because they thought it would not be as bad for themselves. You can not blame them for that.

Originally Posted by Lucille

Seriously, if you go looking for an actual dialogue with someone with a different view, you might set aside the red lettering just while you are talking; it's a dead giveaway that you are not in fact serious about understanding something.
There's a lot of that going around right now in both parties, people want to show off the memes they found and be clever and have the cutest last word post, but not understand.

I see. So obviously you have become an expert in knowing my mind and in so doing believe that I am lying about my request for understanding. And in so doing, this obviously negated your ability to be able to attempt to satisfy my request.

Cool.....

Originally Posted by CwnAnnwn

I would like to point out that both parties and the way the primaries are done, require both parties to select the one that will say the most radical things to win. If you are going to win that system, you HAVE to become more extreme then the other people running.

If you are upset about the current outcomes, you need to go to your parties website, physical address, and email people in charge. DEMAND they change the primary system.

The reason both candidates was completely unacceptable to the VAST majority of people is simply because only 41% of the voting population took part in the primary. Only 19% of them voted for the two candidates that ran.

If you depend on 20% of the voting population to select the candidate don't be surprise if they select some of the worst people.

And a corollary of that theorem has to be: If 80 percent of the voting population doesn't even vote, then just being along for the ride, they have no stock in the outcome of what other people decide for them.

Originally Posted by CwnAnnwn

I will address this. It has nothing to do with the person. Everyone loves to view politics like a football team. They win, they lose....


But when you actually vote for someone, you are voting for the platform you hope they will support.

I see it that way as well. Which was the root of my question as to what people saw in HilLIARy and her platform to convince them to vote for her. What platform did she support that someone voting for her was hoping to support with their vote?

Originally Posted by CwnAnnwn

I will not hide that I am a liberal. I am an old school liberal. I am the original definition of liberal. I am a John Locke liberal.

So when I look at the two candidates.

I see the republicans telling people what they can and can not do. Telling people who they can marry, who they can socially interact with, what you can do with your body, what your position in society you will full fill.

Republican want to control you. As a liberal, I find that completely unacceptable.

And the Democratic position in the above mentioned issues was what, exactly? In what way did HilLIARy differ from Trump that made her more attractive as the candidate for the presidency?

Originally Posted by CwnAnnwn

The government and the parties should not care if you want to marry same sex or not. They should not care if you visit other Muslims, anarchists, communist, or reptile keepers. They should not care what you do to your body. If you want an abortion, if you want tattoos, if you want to be a boy or girl.

None of the above is or should be in the course of political discussion. It is in the political realm, and we have parties based on those social constructs.

As a liberal, I am going to default to the party that give the most social and cultural freedoms to the people with the smallest amount of government. Yes, we need government, but we need to make sure that freedoms and rights of the people are the outcome of that government.

I agree that most people normally look out for their own best interests concerning who it is they want to vote for to hold the highest office in our government. One tends to believe (hope?) that most people think about most things in the same way they do, and therefore improvements in their own state of affairs would generally mean an improvement to society in general. Would be nice if that were universally true, but....

Originally Posted by CwnAnnwn

When I listen to and hold down my vomit with Donald Trump, I listened to a racist misogynist bigot that has some of the most insult and degrading ideas put forward in the last 40 years. In my opinion he has the right to be a racist misogynist bigot, I have the right to disagree with him.

I guess it was inevitable that a discussion about Hillary would have to also become a discussion about Trump.

So let's get those terms defined, shall we?

racist = person who believes that a particular race is superior to another.

misogynist = woman hater. a person who dislikes, despises, or is strongly prejudiced against women

bigot = a person who is intolerant toward those holding different opinions.

Now, I can't claim to have read or watched everything Trump has stated, but I believe I have watched quite a bit. But I have to say that I have not read anything that was quoted in it's entirety and not out of context, that I would agree with any of the above labels. Now I did see a LOT of OUT OF CONTEXT clips and quotes that certainly appeared to try hard to cause someone to believe that those sorts of labels applied. And as is apparent, they were quite effective reaching their intended goal. So I guess the impression anyone had come to mind about Trump probably is directly related to the effort they made to actually get to the bottom of those claims being made or inferred. Some people might very well believe that taking such things at face value without digging further was quite enough for them, so obviously, mileage will vary quite a bit with each individual's opinion.

Originally Posted by CwnAnnwn

But if I listen to and hold down my vomit with Hillary Clinton, I find a career criminal that has infringed repeating on our basic rights. Most of the things that have completely screwed us in the last 8 years have been done directly by her or people that she supports. There is zero chance that her election would change the track of the last year 8 years. Hillary Clinton would continue to destroy our basic rights. And she would revoke the basic right to violently overthrow the government.

So the question would have to be: Were those qualities that people who voted for her were supporting with their vote? I don't consider them as positives, but perhaps some others do.

Originally Posted by CwnAnnwn

Now when I voted. I looked at the basic rights each candidate would strip from us. Donald Trump is a threat to basic liberty and basic rights. Hillary Clinton is a threat to basic liberty and basic rights.

How so? That is a pretty broad claim to make about each candidate, and I will be perfectly honest, I did not get that impression about Trump when I viewed his campaign claims. Of course, I can see where illegal immigrants in this country might feel that way, but quite honestly, I just don't believe that they really have any legal rights in this country anyway, so the point is moot. On the other hand, certainly illegal immigrants would likely have HIGHLY favored Clinton in this race. Matter of fact, it appears that Obama even actively solicited the votes from illegal immigrants because of this presumed favoritism they would exhibit.

Originally Posted by CwnAnnwn

In the last 8 years, we gain the right to marry who we want. And that was sorted by the supreme court. Trump may try to change the outcome of this, but it is unlikely.

So you are claiming that Trump is also on public record being against gays as well? In any event, I agree with you that such issues are not the realm of our federal government, so I honestly did not look into that particular aspect of the race for the presidency.

Originally Posted by CwnAnnwn

Clinton WILL repeal the 2nd amendment. That right will be gone and never come back.

No, she might ATTEMPT to get the Second Amendment repealed, but the office of the presidency does not hold the power to repeal amendments. This one issue alone would have been enough for me to vote against her. All the rest of the issues I perceived of her was just mold on the cake.

Originally Posted by CwnAnnwn

Now if I did not care about the fundamental right to defend ourselves, bring jobs back to this country, and building out infrastructure, I could see a person voting for Clinton. Donald trump will damage freedom and liberty for many people. He could enforce the religious ideas onto the whole country. He could create a fascist military state. And to a lot of people that is a scary idea. If you believed that this is possible, it is in your best interest to vote against him.

Freedom and liberties for which people? Honestly the only thing I recall along such lines is that he claims he wants to deport all illegal immigrants and halt the influx of refuges until a system is in place to adequately identify the people coming in to try to prevent terrorists from being imported along with the innocents. Honestly? I cannot find fault with that at all.

I did not see or notice anything concerning Trump's attitude about enforcing religious ideas on the country. If you can easily find such a quote, I would appreciate seeing a link to such information.

The same goes for a "fascist military state". Although I can see where that could be construed in his efforts mentioned above to expel illegal immigrants and attempt to put in a system to more secure our country's borders.

Again, you mentioned reason why NOT to vote for Clinton, but I still haven't seen reasons TO vote for her other than simply to vote against what you believe are the negatives of Trump. Certainly she must have something positive going for her to entice that vote at the ballot box?

Originally Posted by CwnAnnwn

But if you look at the current behavior of the government and you think Clinton will continue to extend that fascist movement, we are in a fascist military state with zero rights to defend yourselves.

I can't argue against that. So the claim here is that Trump would make that worse, and a positive attribute of Clinton is that she would merely keep it the same?

Originally Posted by CwnAnnwn

I don't blame people for voting for Clinton. They where put in the place to shot themselves in the hand or foot.

Some shot themselves in the hand, hoping they could run away if this turned south. Some shot themselves in the foot, hoping the could fight off the problem if this turned south.

For most people, and I mean the vast majority of people, they voted on who they thought would not screw it up so much there would not be an election in 4 years.

So the impression is that most of the 20 percent who DID vote only did so to vote AGAINST the other candidate? Seems odd that there are riots and violent protests if people really didn't find something to feel strongly enough about to vote FOR to be incensed that Clinton did not win the election, don't you think?

Originally Posted by CwnAnnwn

Most people just wanted to keep the system going. Try to improve their lot in life. They picked who they thought would harm them less. They did not pick a person they thought would hurt others, only not harm them.

So the status quo after 8 years of Obama was what most people really wanted out of this election? So that was the only attraction of Clinton? That people hoped that she would not CHANGE things as much as Trump would?

Originally Posted by CwnAnnwn

Trump won because he promised to bring jobs back, to secure our country, and rebuild our country.

And that was something worthy of voting AGAINST Trump for?

Originally Posted by CwnAnnwn

Clinton promised 4 more years of obama. And for those not paying attention, we are heading back to the ditch. People only voted for Clinton because they thought Trump would run over the ditch and into the lake beyond.

Again the supposition that Clinton promised to retain the status quo, and that was worthy of wanting her to become the president of the USA. It sounds to me that what is being said here is that people preferred that NOTHING would change with Clinton, and that was preferable to someone who was promising to actually try to CHANGE things that at face value appear to be an attempt to leading this country OUT of the mess it is in now. Am I reading this right? People would prefer the promise of "more of the same" instead of wanting to take the risk that someone might actually pull a rabbit out of their hat and really make a positive change to our country?

Originally Posted by CwnAnnwn

Each side did not vote for anyone because they thought it would be better for this country. They voted for a candidate because they thought it would not be as bad for themselves. You can not blame them for that.

I can't speak for anyone else, of course, but in my case I actually did vote for Trump because I believe what he is saying is the truth. That he truly will try to make this country better. Honestly, at first I did not care for Trump at all, and that was based solely on what I perceived as his treatment of his past wives and his attitude about marriage. In the primaries I wrote him off completely because of that and voted for someone else. And honestly and truly, I had already promised myself that I would not vote solely to vote AGAINST someone again. If a candidate did not present him or herself that I felt strongly enough to vote FOR, I was going to decline to vote at all. But the more I read about Donald Trump, the more I felt my earlier concerns decline in importance to me. It finally reached a point where I truly and honestly felt that Trump, if he is ALLOWED to do what he says he is going to try to do, then he will make this country a better place. No, not for everyone, as that would be an impossible task. But for the greater majority of the people, for certain, in my opinion. The fact that HilLIARy Clinton looked worse and worse the more I read about her really just made the choice so much easier for me as it became obvious to me that her coming into the power that the presidency of the USA would give her would be a disaster in epic proportions to this country.

Obviously others feel differently about Clinton, and regardless of what some have implied here, I honestly DO want to understand what it was that people see in her that would convince them that her warts weren't so big and ugly that they would want her with that sort of power.

In any event, thank you for your thoughts.