Donald Trump

The 5 Stages of Losing an Election to Donald Trump

Good grief.

|

Though many things have changed in American political life over the past couple of years, one aspect remains a comforting constant: Democrats never lose an election. Not really. Not fairly.

Elections can be stolen. Americans can be misled. Big Oil or big business can buy elections, because these institutions possess the preternatural ability to control human actions. Whatever the case, something fishy and nefarious must also be going on, because there's absolutely no way voters could reject Democrats.

From the night of November 8 onward, the political coverage has been dominated by a series of conspiracies to explain the election of Donald Trump. Never acceptance. Always denial.

FBI Director James Comey: Weeks after the election, conventional wisdom had coalesced around the idea that his letter informing Congress that the bureau had found new evidence relating to the criminal investigation of Hillary Clinton had irreversibly changed the election. After hammering Trump with one accusation after the next—some of them legitimate and some of them completely unproven—Democrats seemed to believe their candidate should be immune from news of her own doing. But it was Clinton who used a secret email server to circumvent transparency. She was the one who sent unsecured classified documents. She was the one who attempted to destroy the evidence. She was the one who lied to the American people. And she was nominated by Democrats who never seriously entertained any another candidate.

Voting machines: Conspiracy theories over rigged elections are nothing new. We saw them in 2000 and 2004. Trump had also peddled the rigged-election conspiracy before Election Day. I remember this because I was told that the Republican nominee was irreparably undermining public trust in our institutions. By devoting so much time to stories that aren't newsworthy, our media does the same. One instance is giving widespread attention to partisan "experts" who claim that Clinton "may have been denied" as many as 30,000 votes in Wisconsin.

The Constitution gets it wrong again: We are now in the midst of widespread anguish over the imaginary popular vote. Not only is the system we've used to elect presidents since the founding of the republic "unfair" and "undemocratic," critics say, but like anything else progressives dislike these days, it's also tool of white supremacy and sexism. One could argue that Democrats oppose dispersing political power and states' rights and one of the core ideas of the Founding Fathers, but that would be giving them far too much credit. They only seem to oppose those things when they're losing elections.

Fake news: After some ginned-up alarm over the proliferation of "fake news," Clinton recently joined the chorus by claiming it is "an epidemic" in America. The fake-news panic of 2016 is a variation on a long-held liberal notion that people are too easily manipulated by conservatives. This is one of the reasons Democrats are interested in empowering the state to ban political speech by overturning Citizens United, passing a Fairness Doctrine or handing control of the internet to the government. It's difficult to dispute that voters are often susceptible to believing stories that reinforce their preexisting views about the world. But no one is innocent. Surveys say that at one point, more than half of Democrats believed that President George W. Bush knew about 9/11 before it happened. But since most of the media treated Trump as if he had absolutely no chance of winning the election, the unfathomable turn of events has to be explained by something.

The Russians are coming: Now, we're shifting into our Russia Panic phase. The CIA claims that the Russians attempted to interfere in the election to assist Trump. This seems wholly plausible, considering Trump's favorable view of Russia President Vladimir Putin, and it should be fully investigated. There's still debate among U.S. intelligence services about the Russian hacks, but that hasn't stopped some Democrats from questioning the patriotism of those who refuse to accept the hysterical version of events. Well, unless the Russians transformed Hillary Clinton into an unlikable, ideologically malleable, corrupt, inveterate fabricator over the past 30 years, the claims that the Russians stole an election should, like all other panics this season, be received with a giant dose of skepticism.

Of course, there will always be overarching theories about why Republicans win elections—like assuming half the country is racist. The left is so enveloped by its identity politics that it may not understand that the other half of the country is sick of it. While I'm no fan of Trump, Democrats have been demanding that I panic over every Cabinet pick, every statement and every event. It's not normal.

COPYRIGHT 2016 CREATORS.COM

Advertisement

NEXT: How Ayn Rand-like is the Trump Administration Shaping Up to Be?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Elections have consequences. Trump won.

    Oh and Democrats always prove themselves to be fucking fascists when they lose….

    1. Yeah really. It was a threat to democracy itself that Trump said he’d see whether or not he’d accept the election results. Now they don’t want to accept the results and they’re ready to undo the republic… whatever it takes.

      1. Conclusion: They’re all jackasses

        1. That’s been true, for the most part, since the election of 1860.

    2. It’s also worth noting that the party currently shitting its collective pants over how EC is so wrong and subverts democracy and the popular vote (and on and on and on and on…) is also the same party that uses a system of super delegates in their primaries to ensure that the little people won’t accidentally vote for and elect the wrong person.

      1. They’ve learned a lot from Wall Street, but don’t you dare say that out loud! It’s different when they do it.

    3. Unfortunately, Republicans often do the same. Fascist economics retain the veneer of private business ownership, but government is part of their decision making process. Whether through subsides, like Carrier or through the Ex-Im bank like Boeing or like tariffs like on steel (or today any company that moves any manufacturing out of the country) or any of a number of other ways government skews and/or controls the market.

      1. Heck, Obama shut down a move by Boeing(?) from a union state to a right to work state.

        1. No he didnt, despite the Left’s anger about a business exercising its property rights…

          1. You are correct. he didn’t try to “shut down” a move by Boeing.

            What happened was much worse. Having made the move his NLRB tried to make them undo it.

            http://www.politico.com/story/…..ama-064199

      2. Um, no. The last two contested presidential election results were contested by Democrats. The Democrat party is the only one that, after contesting an Federal election, continues to search for votes until they win (see Minnesota and that piece of cow dung Al Franken). Your statement is fallacy, not grounded in reality. NAFTA, passed under Clinton, sent jobs south and started the closure of 70K American factories. The Dem party, aided and abetted by career politicians on both sides, is responsible for the sorry state of our Union. Accept the present and become a part of the solution, and stop trying to rewrite history: Americans are smarter than that and they have spoken.

    4. I currently gain in the span of 6000-8000 bucks on monthly basis with my internet task. Everyone eager to work easy online tasks for some h every day from your house and gain solid income for doing it… Then this work is for you… http://www.ezycash5.com

  2. Trump had also peddled the rigged-election conspiracy before Election Day.

    Records: Too many votes in 37% of Detroit’s precincts

    1. It’s a commonly accepted belief on the Right that the GOP presidential candidate not only has to win, but has to win by enough to overcome the margin of fraud. This isn’t a new, extraordinary Trump thing, but dates back to the days when Trump was a Democrat.

      1. That fraud that progs claim doesn’t exist except in the overwrought imaginations of conservatives? THAT fraud?

      2. Well, yeah, inner cities routinely have more votes than voters.

        But somehow any claims of fraud there is only about voter suppression and disfranchising minorities.

        1. See Detroit 2016…but that was just a series of unintended accidents, according to the local poll officials.

      3. I’ve worked on a few Republican city council campaigns in NYC, and I can confirm this.

        It’s not some performance for the cameras or propaganda to tarnish the Democrats; every campaign I’ve worked on has fully believed — and not without reason — that the Democrats engage in fraud as a matter of standard operating procedure, and in order to win elections they not only have to win votes, but win enough to beat the inevitable fraud.

        This reality was discussed in closed-door campaign meetings between senior staff with absolutely no incentive to lie or exaggerate in that context.

        It’s just how elections are run; Democrats cheat. They bus in voters from other districts, they use names of dead people who should have been purged from the rolls, they use the ballots of people who they know aren’t going to vote (elderly, incarcerated, etc.) and they are pretty flagrant about it. It’s basically a fact.

  3. Seen somewhere else: “Democrats haven’t been this angry since Republicans ended slavery”

    1. That’s such a good line, I had to look it up. From Rob Schneider’s twitter: “I haven’t seen the Democrats this mad since we freed the slaves!” I like your harder twist.

      1. The version I saw was, “I haven’t seen the Democrats this mad since a Republican president freed the Democrat’s slaves!”

    2. On a related note, nominating Hillary was the Democrats’ biggest mistake since firing on Fort Sumter.

      -jcr

      1. That is the biggest news sine the Big Bang!

      2. No doubt about it.

  4. I feel like if we had a Republican in the White House, and a dozen or so cyber attacks were launched on Georgia’s election system from the Department of Homeland Security, that would be a pretty big story right now. It seems like it would be if George Bush was in office, I mean.

    It also seems like it would be a bigger deal that Obama is openly sending out threats against Russia after having Biden do it months ago. Or that Obama politicized the intelligence in question when he ordered the heads of the intelligence agencies to publicly blame Russia during the election after he couldn’t get Congress to do so.

    1. I repeat my comment from last week: there is evidence that team Obama attempted to influence the Ukraine election to secure the election of an anti-Putin candidate. Did Obama not expect that Putin would pay us back in kind?

      1. It’s different when the Good Guys do it!

      2. Affected the election? LOL, the US supported the coup that threw out the democratically elected but pro-Russia government!

        Thats when Pu-Bear reabsorbed Crimea and started arming the Ukraine militias…

      3. And Barry tried to influence Brexit. And he tried to influence the Israeli election. But it’s OK when Dems do it. He’s supposedly a good guy.

    2. Well, there’s something of a false narrative. There was no attack on an election system, they simply hacked the email servers of a political party and released them.

      Had the Democrats not been incredibly corrupt, then there would have been nothing to report on.

      1. “It wasn’t immoral when we did it. It was immoral when they reported on it.”

      2. Bingo. The DNC and fucking John Podesta are not ‘the election system’. They’re two private entities. They are political, but they are are NOT organs of the federal election commission or any other part of the government. Saying that ‘the election was hacked’ is a bullshit narrative designed to make this sound like American democracy is at risk here. It’s not.

        And… remember when journalists used to do this kind of thing? Dig up dirt on corrupt politicians and publish it? Remember when we had something called ‘investigative reporters’ who’d specifically go out and find exactly these kinds of documents, and then publish them in major news outlets? Good times.

        If there is a sad part of this story, it’s that we’re depending on fucking Russian hackers to do the job our press used to do.

  5. The Russians are coming: Now, we’re shifting into our Russia Panic phase. The CIA claims that the Russians attempted to interfere in the election to assist Trump. This seems wholly plausible, considering Trump’s favorable view of Russia President Vladimir Putin, and it should be fully investigated.

    Why does it need to be investigated? Every Democrat in the land, from Obama on down, is declaring it a slam-dunk conclusion. So they’ve already investigated, right? All they have to do is show their work. They’ve got tons of evidence no doubt; they only need produce it. They should be able to do that today.

    And while they’re at it they can explain why the Dear Leader Obama and his 16 intelligence agencies allowed this to happen on his watch. Somebody needs to tell them that a watchdog does more than just watch.

    1. At least watchdogs watch. These guys just make shit up.

    2. They can’t show the evidence because it would reveal sources and methods.

      /actual derp from my derpbook feed

      1. The yoga a perform to maintain our beliefs.

      2. And that might actually be true. But if it is then you shouldn’t be talking about that in public. Put up or shut up.

      3. And simultaneously they insist that it be shown to the electors. How many of them have Top Secret clearances, I wonder?

        1. TS would not be enough. You would need SAP as well.

          1. Really? How much clearance do you need to listen to made-up crap?

    3. “They’ve got tons of evidence no doubt; they only need produce it. They should be able to do that today.

      And while they’re at it they can explain why the Dear Leader Obama and his 16 intelligence agencies allowed this to happen on his watch.”

      EXACTLY. The only thing I would add is that many (even Rush Limbaugh!) whiff when they say that Trump was just kidding when he “invited” the Russians to “hack” Clinton’s emails. Trump said not such thing. The 30,000 emails were ALREADY “missing” and Clinton claimed she didn’t have them. Trump said, tongue in cheek, that maybe Russia could “find” them — not steal them.

      1. Exactly. It’s like so many of Trump’s statements that are twisted and changed to say something quite different – and then that false statement becomes ‘fact’ to so many Progs.

        Remember when Palin said: “I can see Russia from my window.” ? Yeah, never happened – it was Tina Fey.

        These guys never change their dishonest tactics.

      2. And let’s also not lose sight of the fact that John Podesta’s email password was ‘p@ssword’.

        No amount of cyber security is going to save you from that kind of fucking stupidity, and you don’t need to be a L33T Ru55ian HAxOR to figure it out either.

    4. Did I slip into a bizzaro world or did the Obama administration threaten to prosecute journalists for refusing to turn over the identity of CIA leakers? But the the Administration is eager to endorse these stories sourced by anonymous leakers but contested by other anonymous leakers.

      If I didn’t have full trust in out virtuous government, I’d *almost* think this is all political theater.

    5. Have you noticed how the Russia panic has diverted attention from the content of the leaked emails; namely, the breach of journalistic ethics that occured when supposedly neutral Reporters surreptitiously worked hand in glove with a political candidate to secure her nomination and election. Do I recall correctly, or did this leaked information reveal that Reporters worked secretly with the Clinton campaign to build up Trump during the Republican primaries?

      1. Have you noticed how the Russia panic has diverted attention from the content of the leaked emails;

        Which is of course the actual goal of the ridiculous Russia hacking claims. These assnuggets are actually willing to antagonize and publicly attack a nuclear power in the interest of trying to undermine a political opponent.

        1. ^ This.

          They’re into the stage of not even distracting from the content of the emails anymore – now we’re supposed to feel sorry for Brazile, Podesta, and Wasserman-Schultz because their reputations and careers were damaged by those evil Russians.

          They count on tribalism because they can.

    6. yesterday the CIA refused to show their findings before congress. I wonder if the dog ate their work

      1. Nope; they are just extremely careless.

  6. No. It’s not normal. At all.

  7. In “explaining” Clinton’s loss, one person who is not mentioned nearly as often as she should be is Debbie W. Shultz. The behind-the-scenes scheming by the Democrat establishment against Bernie Sanders kept a lot of “D” voters home.

    1. ^This. Or voting for Stein, but same net effect.

      1. Not really. Stein = GMILF. Hillary = not enough Viagra in the world.

        1. Put a damn trigger warming before any statement that puts the image of Clinton sexually in my mind! It burns…

          1. Then think of Harry Reid. That’ll kill all feeling.

          2. trigger warming? Is that when you have to keep your finger on the trigger because they never stop coming?
            (Zombies, fake news stories, democrat distraction, whatever; it never stops)

            1. “trigger warming?”

              Because there’s nothing worse than a cold trigger.

    2. I’ll be interested to keep an eye on how many Sanderistas have memory-holed the way the DNC treated them vs. how many continue to get alienated from the Dems through this shit.

      Factions of Team Blue have started referring to sites like ThinkProgress as “fake news,” and are trying to get sympathy for poor DWS because the Ruskies leaked her pissing in Sanders’ face.

      They clearly think this is a winning strategy for getting the BernieBros back. Will it work?

  8. I also notice this weird trend where particular leftward leaning stories instantly start to trend on Facebook with supposedly always 1m shares. I mean, the typical story has a tiny fraction of the shares as that, at least on mine. But these stories like Obama threatened action against Russia this morning, or Clinton saying it was Putin holding a grudge? Or, hell, a story on Michelle Obama may just be on there instantly with 1m.

    1. Democrats have nothing better to do than share fake news on derpbook

      1. This was a hunch of mine, as well. I know zero about Facebook, but wonder if D’s vastly outnumber R’s on it, and/or if they are just more apt to share news stories.

        1. Or just own and operate it.

          1. Well, that too.

        2. I have pretty much stayed off Derpbook since Nov 8th, except to wish friends happy birthday.

        3. No, it’s not that D’s vastly outnumber R’s. It’s that the D’s are just more vicious and hyperbolic in their posting. I know a number of R’s that complain they can’t say anything on Facebook without an avalanche of hate and lost friends/contacts. The D’s however, happily post/link/forward the worst of the worst in terms of hate and conspiracy.
          It’s really effed up…..and a big reason why the D’s are so shocked Trump won. Few if any actually appreciate how many others disagree with them and are appalled at their behavior. The echo chamber is huge, with thick walls, and alternative voices have been trained to keep their mouth’s shut about everything from abortion to climate change.

        4. The democrats have time to sit around and bump the fake news; the Republicans are at work.

      2. but, but, but….MUH FACK CHEEECKS!!

  9. “Well, unless the Russians transformed Hillary Clinton into an unlikable, ideologically malleable, corrupt, inveterate fabricator over the past 30 years, the claims that the Russians stole an election should, like all other panics this season, be received with a giant dose of skepticism.”

    My take home for the day, and it’s early yet. Thank you.

    1. Yes the Russians did! They used their advanced psychic warfare powers to make Hilary a dishonest corrupt war monger! I’m telling you THE RUSSIANS DID IT!

  10. Good article. You’re “preaching to the choir,” of course; the people who could most benefit from this analysis will not read it and will not accept it.

    And the Democrats themselves, particularly their party leadership, are as much to blame as their candidate. They were told loudly and repeatedly by swing voters, independents and others that their preferred candidate was unacceptable and would not get those votes. Yet they nominated that candidate anyway, then deluded themselves that those votes would indeed come to them because of the horribleness of the Republican candidate.

    1. What the looter media reprint leaves out is that the Libertarian Party’s spoiler votes weakened the Republicans three times more than the Democrats. I’ll explain. Where the LP total was more than the gap between winning and losing wing of the Kleptocracy, we diverted thrice as many electoral votes in those 11 states to the Dems as we diverted to God’s Own Prohibitionists. I am thoroughly against the GOP as a superstitious prohibitionist danger to the economy, and against the Dems for deliberate data fraud in an effort to cripple energy production (as during the Cold War). But our candidates were a net benefit to the Dems, who still lost for throwing youth under the bus of marijuana prohibition just like the Go-Pee party. So it is only fair that the Dems should hand us a dozen or so of the 30 electoral votes we helped them get. They’ll still lose, but America will be much better off just as it was when Hospers/Nathan got a single electoral vote and Roe v. Wade was next month decided in favor of women’s rights. The LP efficiently parlays votes into repeal of bad laws. That’s winning!

      1. Woops… misread the spreadsheet at 2AM. Assume (this is an oversimplifying assumption) that in each of the 11 states where LP votes covered the gap the loser lost because we took votes from them. Then the LP was instrumental in costing the Dems 90 electoral votes, and costing the other urinalysis party, the GO-Pee, 35 electoral votes.
        Still, Gary’s 4 million votes ought to at least be worth a dozen or so electoral votes from the Dems (who have lost the damn election, Hail Mary’s to the contrary notwithstanding). Unless Dems want to bring back coathanger birth control or experience another asset-forfeiture depression, it makes sense for their electors to vote libertarian. One such vote for John Hospers and Toni Nathan in late 1972 got Roe v Wade decided in favor of individual rights a month later. Imagine a dozen Atlas Shrugged electoral votes…

  11. they are called progtards for a reason.

  12. I can see complaining a little, like many conservatives did when Obama was elected, despite all we found out about his past associations and hard left plans. But liberals are just going bonkers over this.

    For crying out loud, Trump was a DEM for most of his life. I questioned his “conversion” myself, and some of his cabinet picks and backtracking on some points worry me.

    Trump is all over the map. It’s hard to pin him down to a firm set of beliefs. Just chill and wait until he actually does something.

  13. 1. Clutch Pearls
    2. Cry
    3. Throw Tantrum
    4. Shit pants
    5. Go back to being normal angry, mean, and stupid bitches.

  14. >After some ginned-up alarm over the proliferation of “fake news,” Clinton recently joined the chorus by claiming it is “an epidemic” in America.

    For decades America’s news media has been dominated by leftists and leftist viewpoints. The vast majority of news from traditional news outlets the past two years has been critical of Trump. They reported scandal upon scandal at Trump’s every idiotic utterance, yet somehow it is the “fake news” proliferating on Facebook that swayed voters Trump’s way.

    It seems to me the media is reaping what it has sown. If it wants to regain legitimacy then it needs to regain its long-lost impartiality.

    1. Or at least not totally misinterpret quotes from Republicans in ways that would make McCarthy blush. They are certainly allowed to oppose, and show their opposition to Republicans in their writing. However, don’t be surprised when the people who support Republicans and their ideals get sick of being called, “Lazy, good for nothing, deplorables, Facists, Nazis, Racists, White Supremicists… etc.” and don’t listen to your opinions any longer. There’s a reason that the press got repeatedly booed at Trump rallies, and it has a lot less to do with the fact Trump called them out than the fact that most conservatives are not nearly as idiotic as the press makes them out to be, and realize that the press is in fact an enemy operative in political terms, and that the majority of the press thinks that their ideals should be forced, with government guns, upon them.

    2. The Nixon anti-libertarian law PAYS the media to ignore the LP and focus on currish fawning toward the looter Kleptocracy. (And does it matter which half?)

  15. “While I’m no fan of Trump, Democrats have been demanding that I panic over every Cabinet pick, every statement and every event. It’s not normal.”

    On the contrary, it IS normal. The Democrats managed to oust Nixon over behavior that closely mirrored the previous two (Democrat) Presidents. Ever since they have considered that any Republican victory is a temporary aberration correctable if they make enough fuss. That it didn’t work on Reagan, or Bush II, and is wildly unlikely to work against Trump never penetrates. That it annoys a lot of the electorate, and erodes their own ability to play the game by the actual rules would never occur to them.

  16. I spent two hours last night listening to two friends I rarely see rant about Trump’s election. They are DC journalist types, and at least one of them really seems to believe that Armageddon is nigh. (The other seems to mostly be depressed and angry, but not quite off the deep end.) It was truly an impressive display of bile and spleen being vented. Not only did the Russians steal the election, but the people who voted for Trump are all stupid bigots. Oh, and there aren’t actually very many of them. (And yet they won the election somehow.)

    I tried to point out that some of the people who voted for Obama must have also voted for Trump to flip the Rust Belt states he won. I tried to point out that for many Americans who live away from the coasts and the big cities, the status quo has sucked for a long time and they were hungry for change. Nothing penetrated. So I gave up.

    It is scary to see people so deep in their own angry bubble that they can’t even consider a different narrative.

    1. I tried to point out that some of the people who voted for Obama must have also voted for Trump to flip the Rust Belt states he won.

      Trump got fewer total votes than Romney, so this is not necessarily true by that measure.

      Nonetheless, if one considers interviews of voters, it is certainly true.

      1. Good point. It’s not a numeric certainty.

        1. (But probably not relevant to my friends from DC visiting me here in the deplorable hinterland.)

      2. “Trump got fewer total votes than Romney”

        That is not true. Trump pulled down 62.9 million….Romney 60.9. Total was 136 mil 2016 versus 129 mil 2012.

        Hillary’s popular vote surplus is almost entirely due to California…..4.4 million voter advantage just in that state alone.

        CA….Romney 4.8mil, Trump 4.4mil.
        Fl….Rom 4.1, trump 4.6
        NY Rom 2.5, trump 2.8
        PA Rom 2.6, trump 3.0
        TX Rom 4.6, trump 4.7

        Trump out performed Romney in most states. The 500k vote capture in Florida, and 400k in PA are key factors in why Trump one.

        1. It is entirely a lie that Hillary lost on low Dem turnout and that Trump didn’t perform well. She had solid turnout numbers relative to 2012, and if Trump performed like Romney had, he would have been badly trounced across the country. he would have lost every ‘battleground’ state by high margins.

          Trump had very solid voter turnout across almost the entire country, capturing a majority of the 7 million voter turnout increase from 2012 to 2016.

          Don’t let the Progs feed you lies. The country spoke and preferred Trump. The popular vote difference is meaningless because it all comes down to CA and NY turnout. Take those states away, and Trump solidly beat Hillary on popular vote.

          1. CA and NY turnout. Take those states away, and Trump solidly beat Hillary on popular vote.

            Yeah, but people in Cali and NY are educated and cosmopolitan, so it’s only right that they should lord over the proles in flyover country vis a vis the central government.

          2. Trump had very solid voter turnout across almost the entire country…

            Sort of. There were really four groups: voters who pulled the lever for Clinton, those who voted for Trump, and those who held their noses and voted against Clinton or Trump. IMHO the election came down to #NotHillary hugely outnumbering #NeverTrump.

        2. There was a huge vote flip in Wisconsin, as well, from what I’ve seen.

          1. A lot of True Blue Union Members view the opening of deer season as a high holy day, and Clinton ran with gun control. She also pissed on law enforcement and other “insignificant” groups. Not to speak of screwing over Bernie’s folks. That stuff stacks up.

            Then her Central Committee Election Team ignored what the local yokels kept warning them about.

            Oops.

      3. I voted for Obama in 2008 and Trump in 2016. Pennsylvania, but Ohio roots. Flyover country. Fuck the Coasties.

        Must run in the family. My Iowa mom voted for Carter in ’76 and Reagan in ’80.

    2. I see two reactions from my proggie friends: (1) The Bernie supporters who feel vindicated about Trump winning and are not that upset. (2) The pantsuit cult, mostly women, who are seething with rage and are convinced that this is the End of Days. They think Hillary must cop any deal she can with enough electors for her rightful coronation.

      1. “They think Hillary must cop any deal she can with enough electors for her rightful coronation.”

        America deserves no less.

      2. actually the second is why I came here and made an account finally. I got so sick of my my Clinton cultist “friends” on facebook, saying things like “we’re sorry we failed you, Hillary!” and sharing posts after the election that were such naked hypocrisy from everything they’d said before the election. It’s total whiplash, but not one of them seems to notice, they just mindlessly follow the Salon shepherds.

        1. “. . . they just mindlessly follow the Salon shepherds.”

          And the piper of record.

    3. Turn them on to Dilbert blogs between the cartoons. The cartoonist is anti-objective and cares nothing for facts, so he can speak to pansy left looters in terms they pretend to understand. But he frames arguments for licking the blacking off of The Don’s boots, and makes correct predictions a year in advance.

  17. I am really starting to think that the Boston-DC corridor and California-Pacific Northwest should secede. There are obvious irreconcilable differences between the SJWs and flyover country that are unsolvable. But that is not what the SJWs want, they want to defeat the Trumplodytes and rub their noses in their own shit because the SJWs are narcissists above all else.

    1. DC and that population cluster in the DC suburbs of MD and VA (and to a lesser extent PA and WV) only exists because of US FedGov. Let’s say the states comprising the Boston-DC megapolis secede; they wouldn’t need enough government or generate enough taxes to keep all those current FedGov bureaucrats in DC employed. The DC area would collapse economically.

      That’s why I like the idea someone here came up with a few days ago – start relocating US FedGov agencies to other places. That will cost more in the short term, but make it easier to shrink the thing in the long term and spread the economic impact around. Also, generous early-out packages for those close to retirement who don’t want to relocate as long as those positions are eliminated.

      1. I’m not sure I like the idea of hordes of federal workers moving into jurisdictions in flyover country.

        1. Beat me to it.

        2. Oh, I don’t think that relocation will ever really happen. Yeah, a few thousand new blue voters could well flip the voter dynamics in places like Paducah, Piscataway or Peoria.

          But we can’t destroy the DC economy overnight. That would make permanent enemies of all those drycleaners, landscapers, barbers, butchers, bakers and candlestick makers whose business depends on those government jobs.

      2. “That’s why I like the idea someone here came up with a few days ago – start relocating US FedGov agencies to other places.”

        I’m not pleased with this idea; it begins to spread the gov’t largess to areas not yet infected.

        1. And that is a good point.

          Sen Robert Byrd (KKK, WV) relocated a crap ton of FedGov offices to WV. That state is now almost as bad as MD and VA in terms of economic dependence on the tax dollars of others.

          1. As a WV resident (though non-native) I can attest to this. Your average West Virginian is pretty conservative in many respects but years of being told that their only hope of lifting themselves out of poverty is federal dollars (that and their “salvation” by the mining unions still in living memory), generally gives them zero compunction about embracing any kind of federal welfare program that comes down the pipe. What’s funny is they’ve been going down this road since before the Sheets Byrd days and they are still worse off than most other states by any measure.

        2. I don’t know–it might have the effect of diffusing the lobbyist influence somewhat since they’d have to fly all over the country to various places for face-to-faces.

          And consider that many of the federal worker claque live in a self-imposed social bubble that mainly involves drinking and bitching about Republicans. Most of them have probably never met anyone in their life who doesn’t think exactly like they do. Dropping these assholes in the middle of the North Dakota wilderness to get their government cheddar might be just what they need to start looking at flyover residents as human beings rather than Klan members, and maybe even start empathizing with them.

          1. ^^^ Yes. Echo chambers are largely a result of monolithic social groups. If a person is forced to socialize at bars, shop at stores, date, and every other human interaction with a more diverse group of people, their political thoughts we become far more balanced and centrist.
            The stark raving extremists are stark raving because everyone they know tells them that they are absolutely right to be stark raving and that their viewpoints are not extreme, but ‘normal’.

            1. Exactly. As much as I like to complain about my left-wing friends and relatives, I’d rather associate with people who have a broad spectrum of viewpoints than ensconce myself in a yokeltarian bubble. Hell, even on here a lot of us can’t agree on everything and we enjoy bitching at each other, but that doesn’t mean those perspectives don’t have merit.

            2. Just in my experience living in the Quad Cities with Rock Island Arsenal and all the associated commands it seems like the region heavily influences the people. My wife is senior leadership at ACC Rock Island and just my interaction with many of the people there outside of their jobs shows them to be fairly conservative.

              Hell anymore to get hired as an intern you almost have to have an MBA lol so they do understand economics and incentives to a certain extent. The area generally goes light blue, but the actual political leanings are pretty conservative. I see this especially with 2nd Amendment issues as we have Armalite, Lewis Machine Tools, Rock River Arms and Les Bauer Customs here to bolster it. I think much of the Democratic support is reflexive union voting from all the legacy manufacturers like Deere and Case IH and the JMTC.

      3. ” Let’s say the states comprising the Boston-DC megapolis secede; they wouldn’t need enough government or generate enough taxes to keep all those current FedGov bureaucrats in DC employed.”

        Oh sure they would need more government! That is what progs are all about-micromanaging and planning every aspect of each citizen’s life. As for the taxes, they would just raise them on the 1% to something like 70% of income and print more money if that’s not enough to pay for all their fabulous programs.

      4. That’s why I like the idea someone here came up with a few days ago – start relocating US FedGov agencies to other places

        Those other places should be chosen carefully. I suggest downtown Detroit, northern Nevada, and southeastern California, for starters.

        1. Detroit is ideal – lots of cheap real estate there. And I do like your idea of using places that are remote and unglamorous as possible. Remember Marie Schraeder on Breaking Bad? The wife of DEA agent Hank. Her one goal in life was for Hank to get a job which would take them to DC.

          1. I think it would also make sense to relocate the Dept of Energy bureaucrats to places where they can see green energy in action. The big believers in solar power surely won’t mind living in the middle of the Mojave (eg, Baker, CA). And the wind power folks will love breezy southeastern Colorado.

          2. There actually already are lots of fed employees in flyover country, especially if you count military, USDA, fish and wildlife, and bureau of land management. Its the big cheeses and their assistants/contractors who are in the DC metro area and they would take a substantial pay cut if they were relocated to Omaha or Detroit, so they will never move them.

      5. Sound too much like a cancer metastasizing.

      6. Downside: This would also make it harder for their enemies to take all of them out in a single flash. I don’t like the idea of them holding civilians hostage by scattering among us. Plus East Coast the prevailing winds would carry most of the fallout out over the Atlantic. Do you want smaller government or not?

    2. I can’t see them seriously doing this (whatever noise they may make about it) because the thing that truly pisses the SJWs off is not what the Deplorables are going to do to them; it’s rather the things they want to do to the Deplorables that they will be blocked from doing. The SJWs don’t just want to live in their Socialist Workers’ Utopia. They won’t be happy unless they force us all to live in it. With them in charge.

      1. “They won’t be happy unless they force us all to live in it. With them in charge.”

        That was my point-they are narcissists.

  18. There appears to be a serious movement to protest in state capitols to intimidate R electors into flipping. What the actual f*ck are they thinking?

    1. Either….
      1) No one understands the chaos that would happen if the electors go faithless after such mass lying, fabrication, and intimidation. 62.9 million people voted for Trump. how pissed off are they going to be if their vote gets invalidated?

      2) The ringleaders/agitators are pushing for an honest-to-god civil war. If electors go faithless and this goes to the House, people are going to be screaming about it. If the House dicks around and doesn’t vote in Trump, people will go absolutely ape-shit because it will confirm every single concern about DC and the progs.

      1. Pretty much. I think the list of things that could start an honest-to-God civil war is very short, but overturning the result of a free and fair presidential election via backroom shenanigans in DC could definitely fit the bill.

      2. Waging war with futile temper tantrums, repetitive insults, and incessant whining isn’t much of of a war. Of course it’s also much more likely to result in nothing worse than a severe bitch slapping repeated as necessary until they STFU.

      3. Civil-war? I’ll just repeat this nugget of wisdom:

        “We have all the guns, what are they going to fight us with? Dildos and bongs?

    2. I read it as enormous Chinese investment in putching Misantropomorphic Global Warming taxes, fines and fascism, thereby crippling US power generating capacity. The same thing happened when the commies held Russia. It’s hard to compete with or wage war against someone with lots of nuclear power plants and a good grid and highway system. China is dying, and they have a legitimate gripe against England, France, Germany and more for exploiting them with poppy goo derivatives. Many Africans similarly believe Africa would be a Disneyland ride if their best H.R. hadn’t been sold into slavery by the neighbors. Econazi global warming predictions are translating into measurements about as well as both Millerite predictions of “The Second Coming.” And this election was “The Great Disappointment.”

  19. The CIA claims that the Russians attempted to interfere in the election to assist Trump. This seems wholly plausible, considering Trump’s favorable view of Russia President Vladimir Putin, and it should be fully investigated

    Please don’t use those obfuscatory weasel words. “Interfere” sound like they stuffed ballot boxes or sent armed goons to threaten people. What happened is that they sent a phishing email to a bunch of people, those people were such dopes that they clicked on it, and then they leaked those emails and hit covered by US media.

    The primary cause here is the stupidity and malfeasance of Democrats. And “the Russians” may not even be the Russian government. Whoever did this did us a service.

    And there is nothing for the FBI or CIA to investigate: celebrities, politicians and crooks (there is considerable overlap) simply need to take the time to learn the basics of computer security if they don’t want to get caught with their pants down. Or even better, they should stop lying and defrauding the American public.

    1. Aside from your issue (I agree), there’s the matter that no one working for the CIA has made this claim; we hear about it from various Ds who say they’ve been told.
      Did I tell you about the strange thing that happened to the cousin of my wife’s hair dresser?

    2. If I were Russian freedman I would rather have a strong US way over on the other side of Canada than a strong China and North Korea right next door. Communist Russia constantly harried the republican Chinese border with brushfires in the 1920s and 30s, and detente only arrived with the Red Chinese revolution.

  20. This seems wholly plausible, considering Trump’s favorable view of Russia President Vladimir Putin, and it should be fully investigated.

    I think he has an overall favorable view of the UK, maybe the Queen is interfering in our elections too? Or perhaps Nigel Farage had some hand in this, I heard he said nice things about Trump and he’s a foreigner.

    There’s still debate among U.S. intelligence services about the Russian hacks, but that hasn’t stopped some Democrats from questioning the patriotism of those who refuse to accept the hysterical version of events.

    With those arguing in the affirmative unwilling to actually sign their name and credibility to these allegations for which they offer no evidence. And what are the allegations anyways? To say “they interfered” is pretty damn vague. At worst, it seems like their supposed “interference” was simply to publish truthful information that embarrassed Democrats.

  21. I’ve made $64,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student. Im using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money. It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it. Heres what I do,

    ??????? http://www.Nypost55.com

  22. I think we’re overlooking the one thing that all these absurd conspiracy theories about Hillary’s loss have in common: they absolve her, her campaign, and the DNC from all responsibility for losing to Trump. While the MSM flit from conspiracy theory to conspiracy theory, a simpler and more powerful explanation seems to be staring them in the face: she was so confident of victory that her hubris kept her from campaigning effectively in swing states. If I were a Democrat voter who feared and despised Trump, I would very much want answers to the following questions:

    1. Leaving aside the question of whether Comey acted properly, did it really never enter the imagination of either Hillary or the DNC that an active FBI investigation of the party’s nominee could become a problem?
    2. Why did she make zero campaign visits to Wisconsin after the primary?
    3. Why did she refuse to pay canvassers to get out the vote in PA, WI, and MI? And why did she refuse volunteer canvassing from the SEIU in MI?
    4. Why did she focus her campaign efforts in red states like AZ, NE and GA, and spend a ton on ads in places like CA, while her opponent campaigned much more heavily in WI, MI, PA, NC and FL?

    1. Um… Nixon’s anti-libertarian campaign financing subsidies?

  23. Who’s fault is it that Hillary Clinton lost? Not hers, if you ask Democrats.

    Whose.

    Hits Reason staffer with a rolled-up newspaper. Bad!

    1. Newspaper? Why not a rolled up copy of the magazine?

    2. The Dem platform committee that opted to continue police shootings of kids in the back over weed? And to continue to allow civil asset forfeiture to crash the economy? Aside from needing an abortion or wanting to ban elecricity, what reason did any taxpayer have to vote for that particular wing of the looter Kleptocracy?

  24. I love hearing about fake news from liberals. The biggest fake news story in recent memory is hands down the Rolling Stone rape “story.” The fact that it was easily debunked didnt stop mainstream outlets from ramming the narrative down our throats for several months after.

  25. “The Constitution gets it wrong again: We are now in the midst of widespread anguish over the imaginary popular vote. ”

    The party that uses superdelegates talking about a populate vote makes me laugh. I’ve brought this up with many, many Democrat voters and they are literally unaware that those are even a thing. So, yes, they are stupid is as stupid does.

  26. when i looked at the figure of 14786 dollars .Than I have no other choice but to accept , what i saw .They have been doing this for a year and get rid of their debts.. Yesterday they purchased new Aston Martin ?
    visit This Site.
    +_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+ http://www.homejobs7.com

  27. I would have put it this way…

    Denial: But Hildog won the popular vote!

    Anger: Stupid Russian Hackers, Racists, Misogynists, Third Party Voters, White People, People Who Chose Not To Vote At All, etc. etc. etc.

    Bargaining: Please, the Electoral College must save us! Who is brave enough to become a Hamilton Elector (Faithless Elector)?

    Depression: OMG, he’s totally going to ban gays and Latinos as he puts Muslims and Black people into camps while eliminating suffrage for women and stealing from the poor to give to the rich!

    Acceptance: Identity politics knows no bounds – Three cheers for the first Orange President of the United States!

    1. “Identity politics knows no bounds – Three cheers for the first Orange President of the United States!”

      Actually, Trump is only the second orange president. JFK was the first. I saw him up close in 1960 and I wondered about his unusual, sickly tan, and about why no one in the media was mentioning it.

    2. Look, she lost, and all those Democratic electors’ votes will be wasted unless we make a play for some Atlas Shrugged electors to slip us some of their surplus. With a dozen electoral votes in addition to the one we got a month before Roe v Wade, women and potheads could rest easy and asset-forfeiture crashes would cease. Get over to Youtube and start pacing and leading those poor, disgruntled looters into the peace and freedom fold while relieving them of a few Atlas Shrugged Pot, Peace & Freedom electoral votes.

  28. No its not the 5 stages of grief because they will never stop.

    1. Exactly, we still hear about the 2000 election that was stolen by Bush and/or ruined by Nadar.

  29. Funny, if one ever suggested there was Russian influence into our affairs during the Cold War, he was worse than McCarthy. Funny how times change.

  30. So apparently the DNI is actually blaming the Russian government but refusing to release the evidence until it is reviewed, which smells a little fishy to me. Other parts of the IC seem to be saying that they think Russians were involved, but that’s very vague: are we talking Russian intelligence, some private hackers sponsored by the gov’t, or just random Russian teenagers?

    But let’s stipulate that the Russian government directed a phishing attack against the DNC, retrieved “lost” emails, and forwarded them to Wikileaks. Unless you’re also going to say that they fabricated the contents, which not even the authors of the emails claim, then the Russians basically acted as whistleblowers. Again, to be clear, the DNC isn’t even claiming the contents of the emails are suspect; they’re upset about how they were obtained.

    1. Soooo… Snowden infected the Rooshians with some sort of whistleblower virus and now they’ve all joined Anonymous? I could live with that.

  31. Elizabeth. true that Janice`s comment is unimaginable… last saturday I got a top of the range Mazda MX-5 since I been bringin in $9155 this last 5 weeks and-just over, 10k this past month. it’s certainly the most-financialy rewarding I’ve ever had. I began this 10-months ago and almost straight away got at least $69, per-hr. browse this site

    =======================> http://www.homejobs7.com

  32. Clinton didn’t actually lose the election. It was stolen by
    Republican voter suppression, as Greg Palast has documented. See
    http://us4.campaign-archive1.c…..8283eff9b8

    I did not support Clinton; I don’t support candidates that cozy up to Wall Street. Nonetheless, if the votes had been counted, she would be the winner in the Electoral College.

    1. Lol, stop. Detroit’s recount basically confirmed Democrat ballot-stuffing to the point that tougher voter ID law was passed.

      1. That’s not fake news. Look at the picture on the site. The guy’s wearing a fedora. Guys wearing fedoras are always and everywhere super credible. Have to be, I read it on the internet.

  33. If you have some free time on your hands, why not make some extra cash every week? Follow this link for more information…………………….
    http://www.buzzjob6.com

  34. These really aren’t five “stages.” They are all simply aspects of Stage 1: Denial.

    Stage 2: Anger, is just beginning. And it will be epic. Careers will be self immolated, but hopefully nobody dies.

  35. Excellent essay. By-the-by, Donald Trump caused the extinction of dinosaurs too.

  36. Soooo… Snowden infected the Rooshians with some sort of whistleblower virus and now they’ve all joined Anonymous? I could live with that.
    ——————————
    http://www.worthquotes.com/
    funny quotes about life

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.