ChrisWeigant.com

Please support ChrisWeigant.com this
holiday season!

Friday Talking Points -- No Guardrails

[ Posted Friday, November 8th, 2024 – 17:07 UTC ]

We've all already seen this movie once, so we should kind of know what to expect. And sequels are usually much worse than the original.

Which is why today we're going to devote this column to pondering how bad things could really get in Donald Trump's second term in office (rather than sticking to our normal Friday format). Some things will probably not be as horrifically bad as Democrats now think, some things will indeed be precisely that bad, and some things will be even more horrific than anyone's imagining right now. And my apologies, because this is not an attempt at making a comprehensive list of predictions but rather just free association, what might be called initial thoughts.

As far as he is concerned, Donald Trump now has not only a mandate to do whatever he pleases, but he will also have the power to make it all happen. There will be no guardrails at all. Republicans will control the Senate and most likely the House as well. Democrats will be almost powerless. Mitch McConnell swore this week that the filibuster would remain in place in the Senate, but as he is on his way out as a Senate leader, that will really be up to the next guy to decide. There will be no filibuster on budgetary matters or judge confirmations, and if the filibuster ever gets in the way of Trump and the Republicans doing something they consider a big deal, it will be jettisoned (perhaps just for that issue, or perhaps for everything).

Few, if any, congressional Republicans will stand up to Trump on anything. Most of the anti-Trump GOP senators and representatives are already gone, or will be in January. Those that are left know full well the wrath of Trump will descend on them if they ever defy him, and the wrath of Trump equals political suicide in the Republican Party right now. So Congress is going to pretty much rubber-stamp anything Trump asks for.

The only exception to this might be on the budget. There will be an enormous fight next year on the budget, because all of the original Trump tax cuts will be expiring. So they are going to have to rewrite the tax code in one way or another. The problem is, Trump has promised so many things to so many people that if they implemented them all at once the deficit would explode. Trump has promised (and this is also just from memory, not a comprehensive list): no more income taxes on tips, no taxes on overtime pay, no taxes on Social Security income, being able to write off interest on a new car loan, huge corporate tax cuts, rolling back Biden's tax increases on the wealthiest, and he even flirted briefly with the idea of abolishing the income tax altogether (because, according to him, his tariff scheme would bring in so much money it would no longer be necessary).

Republicans are not likely to abolish the income tax completely, but they may be pressured into (at least partially) doing all the other things Trump has promised. This would blow the biggest hole in the deficit and national debt ever seen though, so perhaps there are enough fiscally-conservative Republicans left to at least rein in Trump's impulsiveness. Because all these promises are breathtakingly expensive, when you consider the effects on the budget for the next ten years.

Trump, however, has answers for any such nay-saying. He's going to slap tariffs on everything he can, which (according to him) will be a bonanza for the U.S. Treasury. He's going to create so much growth that it'll all bring in more money than ever. And he's going to sic Elon Musk on the federal budget, so costs will be slashed (more on this in a moment).

Getting back to the bigger picture, in Trump's White House there will no longer be any "adults in the room" with Trump. Instead, there will only be yes-men and yes-women. They will never tell him he can't do anything, or even that doing something might be a bad idea. They will instead praise their Dear Leader to the skies and facilitate whatever impulse he happens to have.

Trump's team will be a total circus. There will be people in far over their head, there will be total incompetents, there will be nepotism galore, but there will also be some very scary people who have very definite ideas about what they want to achieve (Stephen Miller, Steve Bannon, and R.F.K. Jr. all immediately spring to mind). They will be even worse than Trump, and he will fully approve anything they do as long as it sufficiently annoys liberals. Few of the nutjobs who have surrounded Trump will not be rewarded with choice positions (Rudy Giuliani's the only one that really springs to mind here who would be so crazy even Trump would consider him beyond the pale). The only reason any of them will ever be fired is for not being sufficiently loyal to Trump, or if he happens to need a handy scapegoat to blame for something which went horribly wrong.

Trump's cabinet appointments will likely be rubber-stamped by the Senate, but even if he appoints someone so disastrously unqualified that Senate Republicans balk, Trump has already figured out the loophole that allows him to ignore this -- he will just appoint the person as an "acting secretary" instead (which the Senate cannot block).

The most significant appointment Trump will make will be his attorney general. He certainly learned his lesson last time, and this time around will simply not care what qualifications any candidates have, instead he will be looking for someone who is so loyal to him personally that they will do anything and everything Trump asks. This is scary indeed, because he may then unleash a real wave of "lawfare" against Trump's political opponents. Trump's new attorney general will go along with any and all of it, and will be backed up by Trump's new appointees to lead the F.B.I. and all the other federal law enforcement agencies. Any legal weenies who balk at anything Trump wants to do because it is unconstitutional will be swiftly fired and replaced.

How far Trump will go in exacting the "vengeance" he promised is really an open question. He really didn't seem all that interested in it the first time around -- he never sicced the F.B.I. on Hillary Clinton, for example. This time he explicitly promised it to his followers, but he may decide he's got more important things to do when he gets into office.

Then again, his attorney general might just make it his or her number one priority to wreak this vengeance on Trump's behalf. Who would be at the top of the list for such vengeance? Possibly the prosecutors who went after Trump, both at the state and federal level. Possibly even the judges involved (other than Eileen Cannon, of course).

Others may be at risk as well, but again it seems that Trump wouldn't really be all that interested in looking too far backwards. Journalists are frightened right now, but it's hard to see Trump persecuting them directly, at least at first (unless one journalist in particular somehow manages to get under Trump's skin in a big way). Instead, Trump may decide to attack the media outlets directly. He has already threatened television networks with "losing their license," and it's possible he may attempt something along these lines (although he first might need Congress to pass some wildly unconstitutional law which allows him to do it). He may even get so annoyed by late-night comedians that he somehow tries to rein them in. But Trump will more likely just starve the mainstream media out -- never granting them interviews, perhaps not allowing outlets he doesn't like to have reporters in the White House press pool?

Others on Trump's vengeance list might include all the "never Trump" Republicans who have opposed him over the years, but for the most part all of them have been relegated to the sidelines already. There just aren't many of them left who still hold any kind of office anywhere, so Trump may decide that this is vengeance enough. But any current Republican officeholder who strays in any way should look out, because Trump values personal loyalty to him above all else.

Trump has also threatened ex-generals for their supposed disloyalty to him, but again it is doubtful he'd waste time going after them (which he could -- he could recall them to active duty and court-martial them, if he chose). Instead, he will likely be satisfied with purging the Pentagon of any generals who treat their oath to the Constitution higher than their loyalty to Trump.

This won't just happen over at the Pentagon -- Trump is going to attempt a gigantic purge of federal employees as well. He will reclassify thousands as "political appointees" and then fire those who do not sufficiently bend the knee to Trump. What this will mean is a return to the "spoils system," where the entire executive branch is politically loyal to one man and any new president will have to sweep out all the old toadies and replace them with his or her own people. This will have far-reaching ramifications that can only be imagined, at this juncture.

Just to point out one example, Trump has always been at war with numbers (and reality in general). He strives to gaslight America in the grandest way possible, by telling everyone that everything is going better than it ever has in all of American history. Under Trump, the economy is great, foreign policy is great, life is great in general. There is nothing negative to be worried about -- nothing at all! Life under Trump is such a Utopia it's hard to see how anyone could even compare it to any period in the past.

Unfortunately, at times, those pesky numbers intrude on this fantasy. Be they unemployment figures, inflation figures, economic growth figures, pandemic death figures, whatever -- at some time, some federal department is going to issue some numbers that contradict Trump's "everything is wonderful!" refrain.

Obviously, Trump's not going to put up with that sort of thing any more. There are basically two ways he can change this, neither of them good. Since he will be purging the executive branch of any employees who don't swear absolute fealty to him, he can just install people who will fake the numbers to make them look good. It will be the ultimate triumph of Kellyanne Conway's "alternative facts." Inflation is up? No, no -- Look! Here are the new numbers -- inflation is actually way down now!

This will put America in the same warped space that the Soviet Union was in during the 1970s and 1980s. Rather than admit that their people were starving and the store shelves were empty, they simply adjusted their "five-year plan" to boldly state that harvests were bigger than ever and their factories were humming along. The numbers looked good, so who are you going to believe -- the government, or your own lying eyes? This would be gaslighting on an institutional and international scale, but again it has happened before in world history (and it didn't exactly end well for the governments that tried it).

The other way Trump could solve his problem with numbers would be to just announce that they're not going to put out any numbers anymore. Possibly the scariest thing that Trump has proposed so far is to have Elon Musk take a meat cleaver to the federal budget. Some department issues some statistic Trump's doesn't want to see? Well then, just fire the entire department -- and don't bother replacing them. Problem solved! No more pesky numbers to deal with....

Remember what Musk did to the Twitter workforce? He fired something like three-fourths of them, straight off the bat. That's exactly what he foresees himself doing to the federal workforce if Trump gives him free rein. We may be about to see the perennial conservative dream of shrinking the federal government to the size where it can be "drowned in a bathtub" become reality. And it won't be just abolishing the Department of Education, either. Whole major chunks of the federal government may just disappear. This will have monumental consequences for life in America, but Musk simply doesn't care. Trump may not either -- this remains to be seen.

The courts aren't going to be any help at all -- that guardrail still does exist, but it is on life support (to mix a few metaphors). Oh sure, some liberal judge (or some constitutionally-minded conservative judge, for that matter) may issue some ruling preventing Trump from being able to do exactly as he pleases. Trump will appeal the decision. If the appeals court still disagrees with Trump, then it will head to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court could even decide to rule against Trump, but would that be the end of the matter?

Trump admires Andrew Jackson (and for good reason, the two are very similar in a lot of ways). Jackson was the first president to just flat-out ignore a Supreme Court ruling he didn't like. Jackson may not have actually uttered the words (about the Supreme Court's chief justice at the time): "John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!" but that was indeed his attitude. As far as Jackson was concerned (and as far as Trump will be concerned once a few of his pet lawyers whisper in his ear), the three branches of the federal government were co-equal -- meaning no single one of them could overrule either of the other two. A Supreme Court decision was merely an opinion about what the executive branch should do, but the president was free to ignore it if he so chose.

This is going to happen. Of all the predictions made here, it's the one that seems most likely, in fact. Trump is going to challenge the constitutional order in novel ways, the courts are not going to go along with it, and the Supreme Court will be left with the choice of attempting to uphold the Constitution or just giving Trump everything he wants. Chief Justice Roberts still has an outsize opinion of the court's legitimacy, so he will likely balk at the worst of Trump's impulses. He will then be shocked when Trump completely ignores the Supreme Court and goes ahead and does what he wants anyway. But nothing will save Roberts or his court -- public opinion of them is already at the lowest ebb ever, and as Andy Jackson pointed out, the judicial branch simply has no enforcement powers whatsoever. This will be a true constitutional crisis, but at this point it seems all but inevitable.

Roberts may come to regret his court giving Trump a green light to do anything illegal he wants, as long as he calls it "an official presidential act." Trump will not be held accountable for any of it, and he can always offer pre-emptive pardons to everyone who implements whatever policy is in question, just in case. Roberts and the Supreme Court may be hoist on their own petard, to put this another way.

Since he made it such an enormous part of his campaign, Trump will quite likely tackle immigration first (perhaps even on "Day One," as he promised). He will do anything anyone suggests in order to "close down the border." He may deploy the U.S. military to the border, and their rules for engagement may be awfully lax. With a pliant Congress, his mighty wall will get built (or, at least, more of it than he managed the first time around). He will also rewrite the rules for entry for all immigrants, to shrink their numbers as much as possible.

That's on the border. In the interior, Trump will begin raids and roundups. He may present this as "going after the really bad criminals first," but the real question is what he'll do after the easiest targets (read: "most politically acceptable to the public") have been dealt with.

Trump has promised concentration camps will be built out in the desert, near the southern border. And he's promised to deport not just hardcore criminals but every undocumented immigrant in the entire country. This is an impossible task, really, but the question is how energetically Trump will try to achieve it. Will rounding up thousands and thousands of gang members and criminals be enough for Trump, or will he then move right on to starting workplace raids and sweeps through American neighborhoods that have a high proportion of immigrants living in them?

This will all be very ugly to watch, of course. Trump is going to go after gang members and hardcore criminals first because he knows there will be little sympathy for anything he does to them. But if he then progresses to untargeted raids and just chucking people on a bus if they can't show proper papers and trucking them out to a tent camp in the desert, the public is (hopefully) not going to be as accepting of it all. Families will be torn apart. It will be completely dehumanizing. It will be fascism in full flower. But that's exactly what Trump promised, so he'll likely try to at least make major inroads on this promise.

Immigration won't be the only way Trump tries to make good on his campaign promises, of course. There'll be other scapegoats as well (such as making life miserable for trans students, just to name one). Throughout it all, there will be only one ideological consistency. The theme of Trump's entire second term might well become: "As long as liberals hate it, it's the right thing to do." If liberals cry, it means he is succeeding. Getting back to the most obvious of Trump's new policies, if public reaction to his actions on immigration becomes negative and pronounced, Trump will not care. Not even if it becomes so widespread it starts to include people who actually voted for him, because Trump can essentially say: "This is exactly what you voted for, so what's your problem now?"

Trump will not care about public opinion beyond pleasing his MAGA core supporters. He will not be constrained (as presidents traditionally are in their second terms) by thoughts about his legacy. As far as Trump is concerned, his legacy is already set -- he has already been the greatest president in American history, even better than Abraham Lincoln and George Washington. Nothing is ever going to disabuse him of this notion. The only doubts Trump has about his own legacy is whether there really would be room up on Mount Rushmore for his face to be added, to be blunt about it.

This column is already long enough, so here are a few stray thoughts to end on. One fear Democrats have is probably overblown (but then again who knows?). Donald Trump will likely not attempt to run for a third term in office or otherwise extend his presidency beyond another four-year term. It'd be easy to picture him making this attempt -- explaining to everyone that even though there's a constitutional amendment barring Trump from serving a third term, somehow it doesn't apply. Trump has flirted with the concept before, but it's highly doubtful this would work, so he probably won't even try.

He could declare some national emergency in (perhaps) mid-2027, and decree that because the emergency was so serious America simply couldn't afford the luxury of having another election. This also seems destined to fail, so Trump will likely not make the attempt. Trump will be 82 years old in four years, and it's hard to see him still having the energy to attempt some radical constitutional coup at that age.

Plus, there will be other Republicans champing at the bit (JD Vance first and foremost among them) to take over the reins from Trump. So even if Trump did get some wild notion to just keep being president, he would probably be talked out of it by all the folks waiting in the wings to be next. Hopefully.

Most presidents are faced at some point with some disaster outside their ability to control. Natural disasters, a pandemic, foreign wars, whatever. Trump has already proved what he will do in such a situation -- either ignore it or gaslight everyone into thinking everything is hunky-dory. Hurricanes? He'll toss paper towels at the survivors. Pandemics? There will be no free testing, no mask mandates, no shutdowns, no proactive response whatsoever. The disease will be allowed to run its course unhindered. R.F.K. Jr. will see to that. It's doubtful they'd even launch an effort to create a new vaccine, if R.F.K. Jr. has anything to say about it.

About the only disaster Trump would actually care about is anything that makes the price of gasoline spike. Trump is (obviously) going to give Vladimir Putin anything he wants (including most of if not all of Ukraine), so Russia is not likely to be the culprit in any oil shortage. But Trump's unquestioning backing of Benjamin Netanyahu could indeed lead to such a wider Middle East war that it impacts gasoline shipments from the entire region. If this happens, the price at the pump here will spike, no matter how much oil America is currently extracting. Oil is sold on a worldwide market, and disruptions anywhere have a big impact. And Trump and the Republicans made such a big political deal out of the price of gasoline that it would be a serious blow to them if the price does somehow spike (one of Trump's current campaign promises is to reduce the price of gasoline by half almost immediately, which is not likely to happen either). Now, Trump's supporters may not hold him accountable for not getting the price of gas below two bucks a gallon within a month, but if it shoots back up to five or six bucks a gallon it's going to be impossible for them to ignore.

Of course, as with everything else, no matter what negative things happen under Trump's watch, he will always have a ready explanation for why none of it is his fault in any way. Trump is king of creating scapegoats, after all. He'll always find someone else to point the finger at to deflect blame. It's even possible to see him throwing Netanyahu under the bus if gas prices spike. But whatever happens there will always be some dark nefarious force causing it -- not Trump's actions.

And finally, one final prediction that doesn't have as far-reaching ramifications, but one that seems guaranteed. In a year and a half, America will celebrate its 250th birthday. Trump has already eagerly talked about what a big party he wants to throw. This is one campaign promise that seems certain to become reality. Trump will stage a July 4th celebration extravaganza that will outdo even the celebrations for our bicentennial (which, for those of you not old enough to remember them, were pretty spectacular).

But this time, the celebrations will have a "Dear Leader" theme to them. It will be the most jingoistic display imaginable, with paeans to Trump heavily featured throughout. Not exactly the most cheerful thought to end this on, but it does seem pretty certain.

Donald Trump's second term is going to be worse than his first, that much also seems certain. He will have no guardrails at all -- Democrats will be powerless to stop him, the institutions of government have already proven powerless to stop him, and clinging to "the courts will save us from his excess" is a pretty thin reed to cling to at this point.

Trump's second term will be like his first in one respect -- it will be nonstop chaos and scandal. It will involve lots of social media blasts from Trump, with insults and outrages galore. It will be absolutely exhausting for all concerned. But this time it may not just be scandals about Sharpie lines drawn on a hurricane map, but actual constitutional crises, one after the other.

This is what America voted for, and this is exactly what America is about to get.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

83 Comments on “Friday Talking Points -- No Guardrails”

  1. [1] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    We've all already seen this movie once, so we should kind of know what to expect. And sequels are usually much worse than the original.

    This may be one time when the sequel is much better.

  2. [2] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Democrats will be almost powerless.

    Actually, there is quite a lot Democrats could do if they were so inclined. But, I don't think they are, so ...

  3. [3] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I'll be very surprised if Trump puts RFK Jr. in any key position. In fact, I think RFK Jr. may find that the White House Chief of Staff won't let him anywhere near the oval office!

  4. [4] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Trump's second term will be like his first in one respect -- it will be nonstop chaos and scandal. It will involve lots of social media blasts from Trump, with insults and outrages galore. It will be absolutely exhausting for all concerned. But this time it may not just be scandals about Sharpie lines drawn on a hurricane map, but actual constitutional crises, one after the other.

    You might be right about this. But, geez Louise, why not just give the guy a chance to prove you wrong before you spend too much more time and effort on more predictions.

  5. [5] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    Of course they won't give President ELECT a chance. What with the virulent PTDS and Trump/America hate, these people here would rather see America burned down to ashes rather than see President ELECT Trump succeed.

    Are you really surprised by this??

    And NOW we hear FEMA supervisor told FEMA workers NOT to help victims of hurricane Milton if the had TRUMP signs in front of their homes.

    Again, are you surprised by this???

  6. [6] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Michale,

    Is Trump lying about his first actions? Is he going to spend a estimated trillion dollars to root out and deport or put in camps all illegals aliens in this country? Is he going to levy tariffs from 10% or 20% and 60% specifically for china? Is he going to do extrajudicial vengeance on his enemies? We have audio on all this. You want us to give him chance to prove he was lying? Or do you support these policies?

    The second part I see you are hiding behind a Daily Wire article. Why not link? But in any case, it's one supervisor and 20 homes according to the article. The agency profusely apologized, removed the person responsible and is taking the situation most seriously. Compare that to Trump who refused disaster aid to Washington state after devastating fires and tried the same in California until someone in his administration pointed out that the affected part of California was deeply red...

  7. [7] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    Yep. Hadda show Orange Mussolini how historically deep red Orange County is before he would release forest fire disaster assistance to California.

  8. [8] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    Are you cool with that documented FACT about Trump?

  9. [9] 
    italyrusty wrote:

    Not many bright spots in this week's election results. But a MIDOW award to
    Maryland voters.

    'Angela Alsobrooks, the top elected official in Prince George’s County, Maryland, is projected to beat Republican former Gov. Larry Hogan, becoming the state’s first Black female senator.
    ...
    Democrats are adding two Black women to their ranks in the Senate — Alsobrooks and Delaware’s Lisa Blunt Rochester, who is expected to easily win Tuesday. Only two Black women have ever been elected to the U.S. Senate: Kamala Harris of California and Carol Moseley Braun of Illinois. The chamber currently has zero Black women.'
    https://www.huffpost.com/entry/angela-alsobrooks-defeats-larry-hogan-maryland_n_6727e524e4b0cfb9cc69d68a

  10. [10] 
    italyrusty wrote:

    Delaware voters also were impressive this week.
    'Sarah McBride has made history as the first openly trans person to be elected to Congress, per NBC News and Reuters. The Democrat will now fill Delaware’s lone seat in the U.S. House.'
    https://www.huffpost.com/entry/sarah-mcbride-first-openly-trans-member-of-congress_n_672269fbe4b00c405b1d03db

  11. [11] 
    italyrusty wrote:

    And while it's not a huge surprise, since the GOP candidate was revealed to be a "Black Nazi", let's give a hand to the voters of NC in their new Democratic governor.
    'Democrat Josh Stein is projected to defeat Republican Mark Robinson in Tuesday’s election for North Carolina governor, bringing an end to a race that made national news almost entirely because of Robinson’s years of disgusting and offensive claims coming to light.'
    https://www.huffpost.com/entry/josh-stein-defeats-mark-robinson-north-carolina-governor_n_672a590fe4b0be8c956ad41e

  12. [12] 
    Michale wrote:

    Bashi Troll,

    Do you HEAR YOURSELF!!!???

    But in any case, it's one supervisor and 20 homes according to the article.

    Oh.. It was ONLY 20 families that were denied EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE after the most TRAMAUTIC event a family could go thru and was DENIED this EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE solely because of who they voted for!!!

    ARE YOU FUCKING INSANE!!????

    The fact that you can make such a FUCKING INSANE statement in so blasé a manner about such blatant and heinous bigotry shows how far you and your fellow Trump/American hating Demon'rats have fallen down the abyss of hatred and bigotry..

    You people aren't fit to be called human beings..

  13. [13] 
    Michale wrote:

    Rusty,

    Do you get your "news" from anywhere else besides HuffPoop??? WaPoop doesn't count...

    Just curious. :eyeroll:

    Democrats are adding two Black women to their ranks in the Senate —

    Yunno… In the perfectly colorblind world that you Democrats CLAIM you want, the ONLY logical and rational response to that would be "Yea?? So???"

    How can we live in the completely colorblind world you Democrats CLAIM you want if you Democrats are ALWAYS making things about race??

    Do you know what kind of person ALWAYS makes EVERYTHING about race??

    A racist person..

    Think about it. :eyeroll:

  14. [14] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    But denying an entire state is fine? The hypocrisy is strong with you.

    Your dehumanizing ad hominems are about as un-American as it gets. A patriot you are not...

  15. [15] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Do you get your "news" from anywhere else besides HuffPoop??? WaPoop doesn't count...

    Ye who hides behind where he gets his news has no legitimacy criticizing other's sources...

  16. [16] 
    Michale wrote:

    We've all already seen this movie once, so we should kind of know what to expect. And sequels are usually much worse than the original.

    Not always...

    Oh, don't get me wrong. I am absolutely CERTAIN that THIS sequel is going to be way WAY WAY worse for you Democrats..

    But you know what every patriotic American always says..

    What WORST for Democrats is what's BEST for America and Americans.. :D

    , and if the filibuster ever gets in the way of Trump and the Republicans doing something they consider a big deal, it will be jettisoned (perhaps just for that issue, or perhaps for everything).

    You sound upset about this, CW???

    I thought you Democrats WANTED to get rid of the filibuster!!?? I coulda SWORE that Democrats have been DYING to get rid of the filibuster???

    Wasn't this always the case for the last 4 years or so??

    Hmmmm??? :eyeroll:

    Few, if any, congressional Republicans will stand up to Trump on anything. Most of the anti-Trump GOP senators and representatives are already gone, or will be in January. Those that are left know full well the wrath of Trump will descend on them if they ever defy him, and the wrath of Trump equals political suicide in the Republican Party right now. So Congress is going to pretty much rubber-stamp anything Trump asks for.

    Still waiting for the BAD news here.. I mean, yea, sure.. It's ALL bad BAD news for Democrats...

    But, as we have established, what's BAD for Democrats is GOOD for America and Americans..

    And you DO want what's good for America, even if it is President Trump that brings it..????

    Don't you???

    Trump, however, has answers for any such nay-saying. He's going to slap tariffs on everything he can, which (according to him) will be a bonanza for the U.S. Treasury.

    And Democrats were going to slap any huge taxes on anyone they can to pay for all their goodies and promises...

    So, what is your point here... Exactly??

    Hmmmmm???

    Getting back to the bigger picture, in Trump's White House there will no longer be any "adults in the room" with Trump. Instead, there will only be yes-men and yes-women. They will never tell him he can't do anything, or even that doing something might be a bad idea. They will instead praise their Dear Leader to the skies and facilitate whatever impulse he happens to have.

    Sounds like the Basement Biden administration and the Token DEI Hire Headboard Has Been Hooker Harris campaign..

    Again... What's yer point??

    Hmmmm???

    Trump's team will be a total circus. There will be people in far over their head, there will be total incompetents, there will be nepotism galore, but there will also be some very scary people who have very definite ideas about what they want to achieve

    "And you can PROVE this right!!??? Oh yea, that's right. I forgot! You were absent the day they taught LAW at LAW SCHOOL.
    -Tom Cruise, A FEW GOOD MEN

    All you are doing here is wishcasting. Just like you were when you said Harris was going to win..

    You WANT this country to go down in flames, SOLELY so you can blame it on President Trump..

    I'll ask you the same question I asked 2-Cell Brain Bashi Troll..

    ARE YOU F... oh wait.. Not that question...

    POINT!!

    I am going to make the same POINT to you I made to 2-Cell Brain Bashi Troll..

    The fact that you are hoping for America's destruction SOLELY to be able to blame President Trump shows how far you and your fellow Trump/American hating Democrats have fallen down the abyss of hatred and bigotry..

    Trump's cabinet appointments will likely be rubber-stamped by the Senate, but even if he appoints someone so disastrously unqualified that Senate Republicans balk, Trump has already figured out the loophole that allows him to ignore this -- he will just appoint the person as an "acting secretary" instead (which the Senate cannot block).

    That's what Democrats did.. Are you saying it's a BAD thing??

    Oh no, wait.. What you are saying is that it's GREAT when Democrats do it, but it's BAD when President Trump does it..

    Hmmmmmm I am thinking of a saying.. Something about Democrat programming and bugs vs features... Hmmmmm

    :eyeroll:

    The most significant appointment Trump will make will be his attorney general. He certainly learned his lesson last time, and this time around will simply not care what qualifications any candidates have, instead he will be looking for someone who is so loyal to him personally that they will do anything and everything Trump asks. This is scary indeed, because he may then unleash a real wave of "lawfare" against Trump's political opponents. Trump's new attorney general will go along with any and all of it, and will be backed up by Trump's new appointees to lead the F.B.I. and all the other federal law enforcement agencies. Any legal weenies who balk at anything Trump wants to do because it is unconstitutional will be swiftly fired and replaced.

    Once again, this is all just what you are HOPING will happen.. Not what will REALLY happen..

    How far Trump will go in exacting the "vengeance" he promised is really an open question. He really didn't seem all that interested in it the first time around -- he never sicced the F.B.I. on Hillary Clinton, for example. This time he explicitly promised it to his followers, but he may decide he's got more important things to do when he gets into office.

    The fact that President Trump did NOTHING to Hillary after he kicked her ass in 2016 PROVES what complete and utter felgercarp this statement is...

    But yunno what??..

    I am HOPING you are absolutely factually accurate.. I hope President Trump pursues all the illegal scumbag persecutors who changed the laws and created new laws and simply IGNORED the laws, SOLELY to persecute President Trump and preventing him from returning to the Oval Office where he belongs..

    I HOPE PRESIDENT TRUMP DOES EXACTLY WHAT YOU SAY HERE!!!

    Because if there is ANYONE on the planet who DESERVES to have justice served to them ice cold, it would be those moron Democrats who did this..

    I am going to get to the rest of your DEMOCRAT WET DREAM THAT SEES AMERICA DESTROYED later.. I gotta work again tonight and I owe Liz some comments.. :D

  17. [17] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    This may be one time when the sequel is much better.

    Yes, it will be..

    Because NOW President Trump knows what to expect from Democrats and he won't let them get away with a TENTH of what they got away with before..

    So, yes.. The sequel will be much MUCH better for America.. But CW is right in one way..

    It's going to be much MUCH worse for Democrats. :D

    And I don't have ANY problem with that... :D

    You might be right about this. But, geez Louise, why not just give the guy a chance to prove you wrong before you spend too much more time and effort on more predictions.

    "I know, right!??"
    Felix, WRECK IT RALPH

    CW et al are HOPING that America gets destroyed... They lie awake at night hoping and PRAYING that America gets destroyed...

    So they can blame it on President Trump..

    Sad lot, aren't they...

  18. [18] 
    Michale wrote:

    2-Cell Brain Bashi Troll,

    Shut the fuck up..

    Yer not worth my time anymore so just shut the fuck up, you fucking America Hating bigot...

  19. [19] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Shut the fuck up..

    No.

  20. [20] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Looks like Michale is going full Don Harris...
    hilarious. And we all know how that turned out.

  21. [21] 
    Michale wrote:

    Token DEI Hire Headboard Has Been Hooker Harris had over 1 BILLION dollars to spend.. Her campaign is TWENTY MILLION dollars in debt..

    And she STILL lost against President Trump!!!

    BBBBWWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

    How hilarious is THAT!! :D

  22. [22] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Are all those Gen Z males who voted Trump going to be there in two years after their gaming rigs, consoles and accessories get hit with Trumpflation?

  23. [23] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Trump is Bought and owned by the billionaire class and with Musk running things is it going to be Trump the Chump?

  24. [24] 
    Michale wrote:

    RIP Kurn

  25. [25] 
    Michale wrote:

    There is a theory going round the Internet..

    http://mfccfl.us/SmilinBiden.jpg

    I am calling it:

    IT WAS BIDEN ALL ALONG

    :D

  26. [26] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Trump Holds Up Transition Process Over Ethics Code

    President-elect Donald J. Trump has not submitted a required ethics plan stating he will avoid conflicts of interest.

    Already corrupt and not even in office yet...

  27. [27] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    it's always time for pie.

  28. [28] 
    dsws wrote:

    The TL;DR of my guess on why we lost: Democrats talked about a couple of what are, to typical voters, second-tier issues. That gave the impression that Republicans must be the better option on most voters' top-tier issues.

  29. [29] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    @dan,
    my guess is that Donald Trump is the kind of salesman who can sell ice to the Inuit on christmas. the only reason he lost in 2020 is that the evidence against him was so obvious it literally couldn't be ignored. this year it was ignored, because there were no more morgues filling up with COVID patients, and no one saw fit to remind everyone that four years ago, there were.

  30. [30] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    JL,

    I know you understand that Trumps impressive win this week has very little to do with how voters have forgotten the horrors of the COVID-19 pandemic and how it was managed by Trump.

    Here's hoping that all of us here can engage in a real autopsy of the 2024 presidential election and ignore the official one!

  31. [31] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Why would six million voters in California vote against raising the minimum wage?

  32. [32] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    I have a sneaking suspicion that Trump intentionally tossed in some authoritarian/fascist language in to his rallies to get the left to stop calling him weird. He knows from history his voters don't care/understand/believe the fascist stuff and that the left would go full freak out. I don't think I heard/read "weird" in the last month of the campaign. Which is too bad. I think weird really worked.

    I also think the whole trans thing worked, especially with the gen z men. I got to say though I support trans having rights, the whole pronoun thing got tedious on both sides. I also think the whole issue has been accelerated on both sides from outside agitators. The hate was obvious but what was less so was the the absolute need to stick with doctrine on the other side. Slight disagreement got you labeled transphobic. The JK Rowling trans battle has been interesting to follow and is a good microcosm of the overall movement.

  33. [33] 
    Michale wrote:

    JL,

    my guess is that Donald Trump is the kind of salesman who can sell ice to the Inuit on christmas. the only reason he lost in 2020 is that the evidence against him was so obvious it literally couldn't be ignored. this year it was ignored, because there were no more morgues filling up with COVID patients, and no one saw fit to remind everyone that four years ago, there were.

    That's ONE theory..

    There are NO FACTS to support that theory, but it DOES have the advantage of touching your ideology psyche in all the right places for that feel good feeling, so have a ball with it..

    There is ANOTHER theory that has all the facts in the world to support it..

    And THAT theory is that Americans are simply sick and tired of Democrats and all their Trump/America hate and bullshit..

    THAT theory fits all the facts..

  34. [34] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    Here's hoping that all of us here can engage in a real autopsy of the 2024 presidential election and ignore the official one!

    Com'on, Liz! We're talking about Trump/America hating people who suffer the most virulent form of PTDS...

    Do you HONESTLY think that they will look at ANYTHING that upsets their delusion that TRUMP IS HITLER AND DEMOCRATS CAN DO NO WRONG???

    Why would six million voters in California vote against raising the minimum wage?

    Because they are President Trump supporters and have seen first hand the devastation caused by out of control Progressive policies that are Anti America and Anti Free Market..

    Which leads me to the question of the day.. :D

  35. [35] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Michale-

    Trump was the one calling the country a dumping place for the worlds garbage. If you want America hating and unpatriotic just look in the mirror...

  36. [36] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Com'on, Liz! We're talking about Trump/America hating people who suffer the most virulent form of PTDS...

    Again, you. Mirror...

  37. [37] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    Why would Trump supporters be against raising the minimum wage!?

  38. [38] 
    Michale wrote:

    Actually, the question of the day is a 2-part question..

    #1
    Do ya'all (CW, Liz, JL) feel that this nuclear UBER Shellacking delivered by President Trump upon all Democrats is of sufficient magnitude and severity that it should prompt ANY Democrat with more than 2 brain cells to rub to take a GOOD LONG LOOK in the mirror and seriously consider that President Trump is not the problem but rather it's Democrat Policies that are the problem..

    If the answer to #1 is YES, then yer done...

    If you DON'T believe that this nuclear UBER Shellacking is of sufficient magnitude and severity to force Democrats to take a good long look in the mirror, please describe to me exactly what event or series of events WOULD BE of sufficient magnitude and severity to really force Democrats to take a good long look in the mirror and seriously consider that THEY are the problem.. That DEMOCRAT POLICIES are what keeps dooming Democrats..

    Enquiring minds want to know.. :D

  39. [39] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Because they are President Trump supporters and have seen first hand the devastation caused by out of control Progressive policies that are Anti America and Anti Free Market..

    It must really suck to live in one of the most prosperous powerful economies in the world...

    In reality I think it probably failed due to two factors. The automatic increase past $18 dollars an hour based on cost of living. How are they determining it, et. Also having grown up in California you definitely get initiative fatigue. There are always so many on the ballot that if you don't completely agree with the language of the initiative, it's easy to just vote no. Some other version will appear in the next election or the one after that will likely be better written.

  40. [40] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    Why would Trump supporters be against raising the minimum wage!?

    Because they saw what devastation it caused in the economies that tried it..

    Entire businesses shut down because they had to raise prices to cover the extra expenses and lost their customer base. Min Wage employees lost their jobs by the thousands.. Urban economies totally wrecked..

    Ask yourself ONE question...

    WHERE is the money going to have to come from to cover the extra expense of the sky rocketing minimum wages??

    It doesn't just appear out of thin air.. Not delivered by a fairy godmother.. That money has to come from somewhere.

    Where??

  41. [41] 
    Michale wrote:

    Pushing the minimum wage to unheard of heights is a nice sounding idea...

    Just like decriminalization of all drugs sounds like a good idea...

    The problem with those nice sounding ideas is that the work ONLY in a perfect world.. They completely and utterly FAIL to take into account the reality of human nature..

    As such, they come with catastrophic ends that were completely and utterly predictable when one takes into account human nature..

  42. [42] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    I think the Democrats' problem goes far deeper than just what their policy descriptions are, many of which actually aim to help improve the lives of most Americans.

    What they need to look more deeply at is why they aren't connecting with more voters and why a wide swath of voters saw Trump as the change candidate with the best prescription for moving the country forward.

    I think they will also have to question why it was that so many regular voters decided not to vote this time around. Why aren't Democrats able to field a candidate that voters can trust enough to get behind and vote for?

  43. [43] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    People have to have a living wage. The national miminum wage in the US is a joke ... a very bad joke.

  44. [44] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    I think the Democrats' problem goes far deeper than just what their policy descriptions are, many of which actually aim to help improve the lives of most Americans.

    Oh, I am sure that Democrats believe that their policies will help Americans..

    That's part of their delusion...

    Like the minimum wage and decriminalization ideas, they completely and utterly ignore human nature..

    What they need to look more deeply at is why they aren't connecting with more voters and why a wide swath of voters saw Trump as the change candidate with the best prescription for moving the country forward.

    The HUGELY wide swath of new Trump voters came about because Democrats offered nothing but more of the same Biden failed policies of the past 3.8 years..

    How do we know this?? Because Harris herself SAID as much.. Harris reiterated on three separate occasions that she is nothing but a Biden clone and that she would be a Biden clone if elected POTUS..

    That scared so many MILLIONS Americans that they made a beeline for Camp President Trump...

    I think they will also have to question why it was that so many regular voters decided not to vote this time around. Why aren't Democrats able to field a candidate that voters can trust enough to get behind and vote for?

    Because ANY candidate must kiss the ring of the Hysterical Progressive Elite..

    And THAT deal with the devil is simply a path that ANY reasonable and rational patriotic American will not go down..

  45. [45] 
    Michale wrote:

    People have to have a living wage.

    And THAT right there is the EXACT and ENTIRE problem with the Democrat mindset on the issue of wages..

    Employment doesn't exist to benefit the employees..

    Employment exists to benefits the employers and the businesses that hire the employees...

    You know how we got around the "living wage" issue in MY day??

    We worked 2 jobs...

    Democrat Americans need to find a way to live within their means..

    THAT means that employers and businesses don't pay employees so employees can live..

    Employers and businesses pay employees based on the market and what the employers and businesses can afford...

    If an employee finds themselves in a job that doesn't pay a "living wage"???

    Then it's up to the employee to figure out how to increase his or her pay.. Or figure out how to cut expenses..

    It's called BEING AN ADULT...

  46. [46] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    You are missing quite a bit about the relationship between employers and employees.

    Obviously, you have more than enough money to live on. Most people are not in that boat.

  47. [47] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Employment doesn't exist to benefit the employees..

    That is just deeply stupid.

  48. [48] 
    Michale wrote:

    Carville calls it exactly..

    "I think if this campaign is reducible to one moment, we are in a 65% wrong-track country. The country wants something different. And she’s asked, as is so often the case, in a friendly audience, on 'The View,' 'How would you be different than Biden?' That’s the one question that you exist to answer, alright? That is it. That’s the money question. That's the one you want. That’s the one that everybody wants to know the answer to. And you freeze! You literally freeze and say, ‘Well, I can’t think of anything’..."

    THAT is why Token DEI Hire Headboard Has Been Hooker Harris lost..

    Because she offered ABSOLUTELY NOTHING but a continuation of Biden's and Democrat's disastrous policies..

    Do you know WHY I was absolutely and positively CERTAIN that President Trump would win and win in a virtual landslide!??

    Because of ^^^^^ that....

  49. [49] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    You know how we got around the "living wage" issue in MY day??

    Illicitly modding Xboxes?

  50. [50] 
    Michale wrote:

    Liz,

    You are missing quite a bit about the relationship between employers and employees.

    Actually having BEEN an employee AND an employer of many successful businesses I am intimately familiar with the relationship between employee and employer...

    Obviously, you have more than enough money to live on. Most people are not in that boat.

    Then the people who WANT to live in my boat need to do what I did..

    WORK HARD to EARN BETTER PAY..

    And THAT is the problem with Democrats..

    They want the better pay but they don't want to do the work to EARN the better pay...

    They want the better pay handed to them on a silver platter.. Or, in this case, by the voters.. Or even more accurately, the taxpayers...

  51. [51] 
    Michale wrote:

    OK

    "Pop quiz, hotshot.."
    -Stan, SPEED

    FILL IN THE BLANK

    The ONE most important factor in determining Employee pay is _________________
    A> The needs of the employer or business
    B> The needs of the employee
    C> A combination of the two

    "Choose. But choose wisely. For while to true grail brings the promise of everlasting life, the false grail brings nothing but devastation and death."
    -Knight Of The Round Table, INDIANA JONES AND THE LAST CRUSADE

    :D

  52. [52] 
    Michale wrote:

    What does it tell ya'all that over FORTY PERCENT of Californians voted for President ELECT Trump??

    More than 40% of Californians voted for President-elect Trump this year, making it the most votes for a GOP presidential candidate in the blue state since George W. Bush re-election in 2004.

    Experts say Californians aren't as far left "as Newsom thinks," citing several state ballot measures that swung conservative, followed by the ousting of progressive Soros-backed Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascon.

    Though Trump lost California to Vice President Kamala Harris, his electoral showing in the Golden State increased significantly; he got 31% of the vote in 2016 and 34% in 2020. Even with something of a conservative exodus driving many residents to red states like Florida and Texas, Trump increased his percentage of the state vote by six points.

    WHY are Californians voting for President ELECT Trump??

    Because almost a MAJORITY of Californians know that Democrat policies and Democrats are whacked..

  53. [53] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Though Trump lost California to Vice President Kamala Harris, his electoral showing in the Golden State increased significantly;

    No it didn't. Trump got over 6 million votes in 2020 and about 4.7 million votes in 2024. He improved slightly over 2016...

  54. [54] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Michale,

    They want the better pay but they don't want to do the work to EARN the better pay...

    Well, I am not a Democrat but I do work very hard and always have. That kind of work ethic is in my DNA. But I'm struggling to make ends meet.

    I think you generalize too much and because of that, it isn't easy to have a reasonably cogent discussion with you.

  55. [55] 
    Kick wrote:

    POP QUIZ

    Someone dumped a necessarily scrollable ginormous trollshit mountain but then excoriated another commenter with the obvious self-projection (although not abbreviated): "STFU."

    Name that troll.

  56. [56] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    no facts to support my hypothesis? sure, y'know, except for the million or so corpses with COVID as a contributing factor, two thirds of whom died primarily of COVID, and one third of whom would have survived under a more competent president.

    to address liz, no it is not the only cause of failure this cycle by any stretch, and it might not have worked against Donald, but so far it is the only strategy that ever has, so it seems a pretty massive oversight to not even go there.

  57. [57] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    to address liz, no it is not the only cause of failure this cycle by any stretch, and it might not have worked against Donald, but so far it is the only strategy that ever has, so it seems a pretty massive oversight to not even go there.

    I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here. Are you saying that the only or even primary reason Trump lost in 2020 was because of the criminal way in which he handled the pandemic?

  58. [58] 
    Kick wrote:

    What does it tell ya'all that over FORTY PERCENT of Californians voted for President ELECT Trump??

    It tells us multiple things:

    * You are (still) plagiarizing fake news.
    * You think 38.9 is more than 40 and (still) suck at basic math.

    Obviously, votes are still being counted in California, but 38.9 isn't more than 40.

    CALIFORNIA (currently)
    (D) 7,076,090 (58.2%)
    (R) 4,731,338 (38.9%)

    UNITED STATES (currently)
    (D) 70,892,662 (47.9%)
    (R) 74,563,599 (50.4%)

    Popular vote margin currently at 2.5%... a NOT considerable margin and shrinking.

  59. [59] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Kick,

    Did 10 million voters choose not to vote this time around? I know for certain that some did not but, 10 million!?

  60. [60] 
    Kick wrote:

    Elizabeth Miller
    31

    Why would six million voters in California vote against raising the minimum wage?

    As for Prop. 32 in California, the minimum wage in CA is already tied to inflation so the lowest-paid workers across the state will still get a 50-cent increase to $16.50 beginning in January.

    However, factor in the fact that fast food restaurant employees in CA already make a minimum wage of $20.00 (recently raised in April 2024), and health care workers in CA just recently began making a minimum wage in October 2024 of at least $18 (rural) and some hospital systems in urban areas $23, a schedule that will keep raising their wages over a number of years through 2033 to minimum $25.

    Far from being unheard of heights, millions of workers in California have already begun making much higher minimum wages in 2024 so maybe voters simply decided to pump the brakes on another increase that would apply to all CA workers.

    Just the facts. :)

  61. [61] 
    Kick wrote:

    Elizabeth Miller
    59

    Did 10 million voters choose not to vote this time around? I know for certain that some did not but, 10 million!?

    They'll be counting the votes for weeks, and I suppose we'll know how many when they finish, but, yes, millions of voters were unmotivated to vote.

  62. [62] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    And to expand, that voter apathy seems fairly evenly spread across the country. I've seen a few calls of 10 million votes, there must be cheating (if the situation was reversed Trump would most certainly be crying it) but that cheating would require a good portion of 50 individual and differently run elections to be compromised.

  63. [63] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    Are you saying that the only or even primary reason Trump lost in 2020 was because of the criminal way in which he handled the pandemic?

    @liz,

    again, this preoccupation with absolutes. there's rarely if ever just one reason, but there are reasons that form convincing narratives, and tangible facts that can drive emotions to support those narratives. rows of thousands of coffins is something people can relate to, and which reaches them on a gut level when you explain that donald trump was not very good at being president the first time he tried it.

    "fascism" or "economic failure" are examples of issues that are much harder to get people to understand and feel, because the causes and effects are muddied by thousands of circumstantial or very hard-to-prove factors. ask someone why they're paying twice as much for groceries, and anyone without a doctorate in economics will just believe whoever looks or sounds best. ask if Donald will perhaps be a crook or a fascist and even if they know he's been convicted of something they'll still have a hard time figuring out what you're even talking about. however, ask them how children ended up being separated from their parents and put in cages, or why hundreds of thousands of Americans started dying, and it's a pretty stark contrast. the first 8 months of COVID provided clear and undeniable evidence to anyone voting that president trump wasn't doing a very good job of protecting americans from dying. compare that to this year's rapidly evolving democratic narrative(s), and it is very easy to understand why donald was able to win.

    JL

  64. [64] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    During the entire election campaign, I don't think I heard anyone talk about the pandemic nearly as much as you did and are doing.

    You're missing the overall.

  65. [65] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Kick,

    Why does it take so long to count votes?

  66. [66] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Bashi,

    Just to be clear, I was in no way intending to imply that there has been cheating.

    I'm just a little surprised that so many people would be so unmotivated to vote. But, I guess I shouldn't be, given the choice.

  67. [67] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    i think i have a pretty firm grasp on the overall. that's why i included three additional issues above, to demonstrate my point.

  68. [68] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    furthermore, my point is not unique to me; it is based on the model developed by dr. drew westen, author of The Political Brain: The Role of Emotion in Deciding the Fate of the Nation. look him up.

  69. [69] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Yeah, I've heard of that. Have a great rest of the evening.

  70. [70] 
    Michale wrote:

    Yunno, JL.

    Making the same unfounded and unsupported claim is NOT a fact that supports the original fact-less claim..

    Just sayin'

  71. [71] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    i've been telling you that for years, but at least so far you don't seem able to tell the difference.

  72. [72] 
    Kick wrote:

    Elizabeth Miller
    65

    Why does it take so long to count votes?

    According to the U.S. Constitution, each of the 50 individual states has the right to run their own elections. Not to sound obvious with some of these, but some states:

    * are much more populous than others,

    * vote entirely by mail-in ballots,

    * make it easier to vote and thus have a lot more voters,

    * have laws wherein they aren't legally allowed to begin counting ballots until polls close on "election day,"

    * count mail-in ballots received up to X number of days after the election,

    * allow voters X number of days to "cure" their ballots that are "spoiled,"

    * have lots of issues/initiatives on their ballots with multiple pages,

    * have mandated recounts for small margins,

    * have multiple of the factors listed above combined.

    Probably some I missed, and I didn't list the reasons counting goes faster... but that's the gist of it. :)

  73. [73] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Geez.

  74. [74] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    So, when can we expect California's final tally ... sometime this year, I hope. :)

  75. [75] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    If Trump were to somehow end up losing the popular vote then there could be hell to pay for being so slow in counting votes in the year 2024, for God's sake!

  76. [76] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    If the results were a lot closer, I mean.

    The point being that in the year 2024 one might be excused for thinking that a country that fancies itself the leader of the free democratic world would be able to run an election with more efficiency than it actually does. ;)

  77. [77] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Somebody need to whip California into gear, in other words. Ahem.

  78. [78] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Only 40% of the expected vote has been counted in one of the smallest counties in the state!???

  79. [79] 
    Kick wrote:

    Elizabeth Miller
    78

    Only 40% of the expected vote has been counted in one of the smallest counties in the state!???

    Keep an eye on that, will you? ;)

    https://www.lakecountyca.gov/880/Preliminary-Election-Results

  80. [80] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    I can't ... I'm blocked from accessing that site. ;)

  81. [81] 
    dsws wrote:

    Employment exists to benefit customers. Customers pay for goods and services, and both labor and capital are paid for in that price. Employers' demand for labor is mostly just an indirect aspect of customers' demand for products. But both supply and demand count in determining the wage for a particular type of work. If a particular job doesn't pay enough to be worth it, people will tend to go into some other line of work. Same for return on capital. In the long run, the only way a firm can pay dividends and interest is if customers want what it's selling.

    Did 10 million voters choose not to vote this time around?

    That's roughly what the top-line numbers seem to say. I think it's a bit under 10M, and presumably some votes remain to be reported, but I doubt they'll change the picture.

  82. [82] 
    dsws wrote:

    Of course, a major part of the reason people don't want to work in various jobs is that they feel like bullshit jobs, where you don't seem to actually be providing any value to the customers.

  83. [83] 
    Kick wrote:

    Elizabeth Miller
    80

    I can't ... I'm blocked from accessing that site. ;)

    Oops. :)

Comments for this article are closed.