Quote :

"He's putting multiple climate deniers and oil men in charge of the environment. He's literally picking the people that would represent the worst-case-scneario for the environment."

Or maybe those people will focus on actual environmental problems, instead of basing all policy on a not proven theory?

12/19/2016 9:12:03 AM

JesusHChrist I couldn't agree with you more.

12/19/2016 9:32:22 AM

^^ oh i really hope you're kidding.

12/19/2016 9:45:16 AM

To be fair no theory is proven. They are just not disproven.

[Edited on December 19, 2016 at 10:08 AM. Reason : N]

12/19/2016 10:07:43 AM

i get that. i just disagree wholeheartedly with his statement

12/19/2016 10:10:49 AM

the EPA transition team is full of coal industry people and climate change deniers

12/19/2016 11:14:20 AM

Trumps apparent view on the environment and potential destruction of federally reserved land is about to cause me to switch my R to a D

Do they have training courses on how to be a Democrat?

12/19/2016 11:23:41 AM

At this point, the only requirement to be a Democrat is to soberly accept the factual reality of the world, no training sessions needed.

But I'm curious what Trump has done that's broken the camel's back? Denying environmental science, the value of the environment, and hating on public lands have been pretty standard in the GOP for at least the last decade (probably longer)

12/19/2016 11:40:17 AM

You're making the mistake of assuming I'm a standard member of the GOP.

I don't really care about social issues, and I'm pretty pro-environment. What's going to do it for me is raiding federal lands for gas, oil and coal. What I won't be able to settle myself with is the money spending that Dems love so much.

Oh well. I'm a man without a party.

12/19/2016 11:53:18 AM

i saw a petition making the rounds today asking for support to stop a pipeline from going through the AT between WV and VA.

12/19/2016 12:05:11 PM

wtf, now the AT??

Well, it's not like I'm ever going to get to hike it anyway. I didn't get that luxury after college, as I had to start working ASAP. Only hipsters with no jobs get to do that.

12/19/2016 12:56:58 PM

Work smart

Not hard

12/19/2016 3:32:36 PM

Quote :

"What's the bet? [Edited on December 19, 2016 at 12:23 AM. Reason : It's fine to be a hack but try not to completely neglect common sense while you're at it]"

Quote :

"On December 19 (the actual electoral vote): One Clinton elector in Colorado attempted to vote for John Kasich. The single vote was ruled invalid by Colorado state law, the elector was dismissed, and an alternate elector was sworn in who voted for Clinton. One Clinton elector in Minnesota refused to submit a ballot, and was replaced by an alternate who voted for Clinton. One Clinton elector in Maine voted for Bernie Sanders; this vote was invalidated as "improper" and the elector subsequently voted for Clinton. Four Clinton electors in Washington did not vote for Clinton (three votes went to Colin Powell, and one to Faith Spotted Eagle). Two Trump electors in Texas did not vote for Trump (one vote went to John Kasich, one to Ron Paul); one elector did not vote for Pence and instead voted for Carly Fiorina for Vice-President; a third resigned before the vote rather than vote for Trump and was replaced by an alternate."

So, originally, that's SEVEN who bolted from Clinton and THREE from Trump.
After corrections/resignations, that's FOUR who bolted from Clinton and TWO from Trump.

Who's the hack now?

Seriously, dude, get out of our bubble and read more than the Washington Post, NY Times, and watch more than MSNBC.

[Edited on December 19, 2016 at 6:58 PM. Reason : #stillyourpresidentcomrade]

12/19/2016 6:51:55 PM

Lol republicans are officially cowards

12/19/2016 7:36:29 PM

12/19/2016 8:04:30 PM

Haha what assholes voted for Colin fucking Powell.

This country sucks.

12/19/2016 9:32:50 PM

classic protest vote

12/19/2016 9:50:02 PM

lol Ron Paul got him an electoral vote from Texas

12/19/2016 10:05:25 PM

I'm a little surprised more than 2 didn't jump ship. You'd think committing fraud and engaging in blatant kelptocracy would have raised more eyebrows.

I expected 10 or so trump electors to vote for someone else.

12/19/2016 11:06:52 PM

Quote :

"kelptocracy"

i, for one, welcome our new seaweed overlords

12/20/2016 1:12:40 AM

I mean, 90% of plain old self-identified Republicans voted for him. I don't know why anyone expected the party zealots appointed as electors to defect en masse. Republicans always fall in line.

12/20/2016 1:19:26 AM

Most electors are part of the machine, they aren't going to throw away their position

12/20/2016 5:57:41 AM

Quote :

"I expected 10 or so trump electors to vote for someone else."

Of course you did, moron.

12/20/2016 6:17:12 AM

Quote :

"I mean, 90% of plain old self-identified Republicans voted for him. I don't know why anyone expected the party zealots appointed as electors to defect en masse. Republicans always fall in line."

This isn't a knock on Republicans but when your demo is fairly similar it's a lot easier to fall in line and vote en masse. The Democrats have a much larger and diverse pool that has very different goals and problems.

Very simplistic but Trump needed HUGE numbers of older white males to win. He got them. He won.

12/20/2016 7:33:36 AM

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/19/opinion/how-republics-end.html

"Many people are reacting to the rise of Trumpism and nativist movements in Europe by reading history — specifically, the history of the 1930s. And they are right to do so. It takes willful blindness not to see the parallels between the rise of fascism and our current political nightmare..."

12/20/2016 1:11:52 PM

Not super applicable to our situation here but the rise of nationalism in Europe will be a far greater danger than any terrorist group can provide.

** in other non-reality news, 52% of Repuicans believe Trump won the popular vote? Um, this is an empirical fact that can be verified. Should I just assume 52% of Republicans in that survey are too stupid to read?

[Edited on December 20, 2016 at 1:43 PM. Reason : X]

12/20/2016 1:40:56 PM

but if you subtract the millions of illegal votes, he had more

12/20/2016 1:47:53 PM

^^^ The normalization of Trump by the media is especially worrying. The fact that he is brazenly denying access to them, and they are simply reporting on him with a "what will this all mean?" attitude rather than explicitly challenging him adversarially is beyond terrifying. He is going to silence them. He's said as much. And to date, he's behaved as much. They know he is going to silence them, and they don't even dare challenge it. They instead focus on fake news without first seeing their behavior as part of the problem.

And instead of ringing the alarm bells of the incoming evaporation of a free press, they are only asking hollow and empty questions about what his tweets mean, or writing empty think pieces about "media in the age of Trump". It's like they can't help it but bow down to power.


[Edited on December 20, 2016 at 1:55 PM. Reason : ]

12/20/2016 1:48:24 PM

12/20/2016 3:15:15 PM

Quote :

""Many people are reacting to the rise of Trumpism and nativist movements in Europe by reading history — specifically, the history of the 1930s. And they are right to do so. It takes willful blindness not to see the parallels between the rise of fascism and our current political nightmare..."

*Reads biased propaganda for the gun grabbing, free speech censoring, big gov authoritarian candidate*
*Calls other candidate Hitler*

You guys need therapy. Get out of your echo-chamber

12/21/2016 3:09:33 PM

All, your accurate reasoning and logic have spoken to me. So I'll say it:

I WAS WRONG

































There were actually FIVE electors who ditched Hillary, not four. That's 2.155172413793103% of her electors switched votes, compared to 0.65359477124183% of Trump electors who switched their votes.

Regardless, IT IS OVER, and there is NOTHING you can do about it.

12/21/2016 3:13:39 PM

Russia hacked those votes

12/21/2016 3:43:06 PM

LOL the irony of your response is clear JCE.

12/21/2016 5:53:06 PM

can someone explain exactly what Russia hacked into, the information they got, and how it affected the election?

12/21/2016 6:54:45 PM

http://bfy.tw/94eB

12/21/2016 6:57:16 PM

^^ they spear phished Podesta's Gmail account (and allegedly have other accounts from the RNC as well).
http://www.theverge.com/2016/12/13/13940514/dnc-email-hack-typo-john-podesta-clinton-russia

It's very likely the US intel agencies have done similar things to Russian and other countries. It's not surprising that Russia tried this. It's more surprising that it worked probably better than Russia expected.

However, it is more likely that it was Comey's 2nd letter than was the tipping point for Clinton. Perhaps people conflated the email-server-issue with the leaked-podesta-emails-issue and these things combined to amplify each other.

Even if we could conclude with a very high degree of likelihood that this interference would have changed the outcome election (and this likely COULD be proved) what does this mean? We can't redo the election, we have no process to recall a president, this isn't an impeachable offense, it's just a shitty thing we have to live with. We can try to punish Russia, we can expand sanctions, we can do even more hacking of their systems.

The only impact this has is that we just give Trump dirty looks knowing he's a fluke and didn't earn the presidency-- which is irrelevant to pretty much everything.

[Edited on December 21, 2016 at 7:04 PM. Reason : ]

12/21/2016 7:04:32 PM

12/21/2016 7:14:34 PM

Quote :

" they spear phished Podesta's Gmail account (and allegedly have other accounts from the RNC as well)."

so are you saying that there was specific information from the stolen emails that was made public, and that possibly changed public opinion?

if so, i wish the russians would hack every election. i wish they would hack the federal government regularly. somebody needs to expose these politicians for the pieces of shit that they are. maybe they'd start acting right if they knew there's a chance of every shady act being exposed to the public.

give them a dose of the "if you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about" bullshit that they give the citizens.

12/21/2016 7:32:21 PM

they hacked both the RNC and DNC but only made public the DNC emails in an attempt to sway the election in favor of Trump

[Edited on December 21, 2016 at 7:52 PM. Reason : .]

12/21/2016 7:51:42 PM

so the democrats are saying "no fair, we lost because some people exposed some shady shit we did" and when you point out that they shouldn't do shady shit, the only retort is "well, the other guys did shady shit too, but no one exposed it"

hard for me to feel any sympathy for the cocksuckers. i only wish they had've exposed the republicans' shady shit as well.

12/21/2016 8:03:08 PM

if the shoe was on the other foot all you democrats would be in here saying the same thing



[Edited on December 21, 2016 at 8:10 PM. Reason : also glad the US got a taste of its own medicine after all the foreign affairs we've meddled in]

12/21/2016 8:09:28 PM

It's not a "no fair" thing; it's a "Russia just meddled in and potentially tipped a US Presidential election, and most people don't care—and a sizable number what to snuggle up to fucking Putin. What. The. Fuck?"

12/21/2016 8:16:54 PM

^ Here’s the public evidence Russia hacked the DNC — it’s not enough

https://interc.pt/2hwIP7v by @samfbiddle


Now, with that out of the way, I'm positive that Russia tried to undermine our election......but so what? Of course they did. They're a major power in the world. We do the same thing to other countries ALL THE TIME. We undermine democratically elected governments and install pro-business puppets all the time. This is pretty standard intelligence community games. It should be assumed that other powers would have a vested interest in manipulating our elections. At the end of the day, we still went out and voted for a tiny handed, bombastic, orange bozo all on our own. That's on us.

12/21/2016 8:33:13 PM

I don't know of any "shady shit" that was exposed (outside of the DNC backing HRC from the start, which is a party issue)...It's more about how the constant drip-like releases of the hacked DNC/Podesta emails resulting in those leaks leading the daily news was obviously designed to influence the outcome of the election.

12/21/2016 8:36:29 PM

^As far as I can tell, the information revealed was pretty meh, except for internal party collusion like you mentioned. It just played into the "emails, emails, emails!" refrain which painted Hillary as corrupt, even though she's really just a run of the mill politician. Again, like you said, it had political motivations while revealing very little. It was just political background noise, slowly giving all of us tinnitus.

12/21/2016 8:46:32 PM

Quote :

"I'm positive that Russia tried to undermine our election......but so what? Of course they did."

i cannot accept "so what" as a viable answer to another country influencing our electoral process. if we start saying "so what" to that, what else won't we care about in another 12 or 24 months?

12/21/2016 9:26:08 PM

It's not that I don't care. It's that it isn't surprising.

Lay with dogs and get flees and all.



I mean, Jesus. We've invaded multiple countries, toppled governments, silenced domestic whistleblowers, shutdown encrypted email servers, armed foreign rebels, and supported multiple coups within OUR lifetimes.

I'm sorry for not being outraged at John Podesta for forgetting to add a capital letter, number, and special character to his gmail account or whatever.

[Edited on December 21, 2016 at 10:12 PM. Reason : ]

12/21/2016 10:00:27 PM

^i agree

12/21/2016 10:39:28 PM

Quote :

"they hacked both the RNC and DNC but only made public the DNC emails in an attempt to sway the election in favor of Trump"

#fakenews

They tried to hack both, but the RNC's network infrastructure was more robust than the DNCs, so they didn't succeed.

Additionally, John Podesta is an idiot for allowing someone else to have his account information, and then allowing that person to be stupid enough to fall for a simple phishing scheme.

12/21/2016 11:42:37 PM

Quote :

"so are you saying that there was specific information from the stolen emails that was made public, and that possibly changed public opinion?"

That was the other half of the equation... Wikileaks.

The podesta emails had literally no bombshells. The worst was the information Hillary got an obvious debate question leaked to her. Wikileaks would take other emails and post portions of them out of context, and assert they mean something they obviously didn't.

The podesta leaks were completely boring emails but were hyped up, and the mere insinuation of wrong doing was damaging. It's like how trump just questioning Obamas birth without any proof has a majority of the GOP thinking he wasn't born here.

This election was a complete shitshow dumpster fire quagmire from literally every angle.

12/22/2016 12:03:29 AM