Everyone is ignoring the fact that I think the SCOTUS had something to do with it. Do we want a Constitutionalist on it?Or a Left Winger that will destroy the intent the framers had for us?

I think that had a lot to do with it for the undecided vote.

---

What in the Wide Wide World of Sports is agoin' on here???

Maybe go to college if you don't want to work at McDonalds.

 

 

She lost because she's a woman.

Did you learn that in college?

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

Everyone is ignoring the fact that I think the SCOTUS had something to do with it. Do we want a Constitutionalist on it?Or a Left Winger that will destroy the intent the framers had for us?

 

This was the single greatest outcome of the election.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

Calling people racists and bigots just because they disagree with you politically is like the little boy who cried wolf...It just ain't working anymore.

I think you can add that tactic as another reason she lost as well.

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

HRC lost for 2 reasons:

 

1) For the most part in recent history, the balance of the Presidency swings every 8 years.

 

2) She didn't select Bernie Sanders as Vice President.  This would have secured the millennials vote.

---

She lost because she's a woman.

Completely false.


Someone on NBC (who was most definitely a HRC supporter) just said it perfectly:


"It's not that this country wasn't ready to elect a woman president. It's that this country wasn't ready to elect "THIS" woman as president."


That is so very true. Spot on.

---

HRC lost for 2 reasons:


1) For the most part in recent history, the balance of the Presidency swings every 8 years.


2) She didn't select Bernie Sanders as Vice President. This would have secured the millennials vote.

Agree.


Bernie got hosed in the primaries. How HRC got that superdelegate support was very shady IMO.

---

Maybe go to college if you don't want to work at McDonalds.

 

You do understand that many recent college graduates are actually working at places like McDonalds, Starbucks, and other low wage jobs because that's all that is available to them with their degrees, right?

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

This was the single greatest outcome of the election.

Agreed.  For me, this was THE issue of this election. 

---

Never argue with idiots. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

There's a lot of reasons she lost but I think one reason that the networks won't say is that middle class white america feels alienated. And they responded in the best way possible, used their vote to create real change.


Leading up to this election, white males were told they don't matter as much anymore, our government has made the BLM group legitimate (I sympathize with the message but not their violent tactics), and Hillary was talking amnesty for illegals.


Add to that all the factors already mentioned in this thread and you have a Trump victory.

 

I'm sorry, but you were worried about BLM being legitimized more than the KKK being re-legitimized? 

---

Everyone is ignoring the fact that I think the SCOTUS had something to do with it. Do we want a Constitutionalist on it?Or a Left Winger that will destroy the intent the framers had for us?

 

I'm sorry but Constitutionalism "intent' (idea that we are supposed to view everything with the idea/perspectives of the framers) is so bogus. 

 

If the framers were so correct and right all the time, why did they allow for Amendments? If we could just use their intent about different situations, why include a specific way to change what they wrote. Why didn't they just write their intent into law instead? 

 

In that case that their initial intent was so holy, why did they immediately add 10 amendments to the Constitution? Are Bill of Rights not as important as the rest of the Constitution?

 

Why did we add another 17 Amendments years afterwards? Are those not as important, do they meet the "intent" of the framers? If the Constitution is so perfect, why not go back to only those owning land being able to vote, and the general population not being able to vote for President or Senate as the framers INTENDED for fear of vox populi and the French Revolution.

---

I'm sorry but Constitutionalism "intent' (idea that we are supposed to view everything with the idea/perspectives of the framers) is so bogus.


If the framers were so correct and right all the time, why did they allow for Amendments? If we could just use their intent about different situations, why include a specific way to change what they wrote. Why didn't they just write their intent into law instead?


In that case that their initial intent was so holy, why did they immediately add 10 amendments to the Constitution? Are Bill of Rights not as important as the rest of the Constitution?


Why did we add another 17 Amendments years afterwards? Are those not as important, do they meet the "intent" of the framers? If the Constitution is so perfect, why not go back to only those owning land being able to vote, and the general population not being able to vote for President or Senate as the framers INTENDED for fear of vox populi and the French Revolution.

A republic, means that you have a core set of laws and legal principles. It is recognized that over time conditions may change or situations may arise that require addition or modification. That modification has to be from a diverse majority of the people with the consent of the governed (the amendment process) and not in violation of the foundational moral fabric of society.

---

If you were a good student of the Constitution, you would have already have answered your own questions.

 

The most important things came first.  Improvements were allowed, but provisions put in place so that it didn't become a Christmas list.  That when changes are made, they are well thought out and not frivolous.  Like a ship, it could weather small changes in direction without someone grabbing the wheel and putting the nation head on into a tree or ditch.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

I'm sorry but Constitutionalism "intent' (idea that we are supposed to view everything with the idea/perspectives of the framers) is so bogus. 

 

If the framers were so correct and right all the time, why did they allow for Amendments? If we could just use their intent about different situations, why include a specific way to change what they wrote. Why didn't they just write their intent into law instead? 

 

In that case that their initial intent was so holy, why did they immediately add 10 amendments to the Constitution? Are Bill of Rights not as important as the rest of the Constitution?

 

Why did we add another 17 Amendments years afterwards? Are those not as important, do they meet the "intent" of the framers? If the Constitution is so perfect, why not go back to only those owning land being able to vote, and the general population not being able to vote for President or Senate as the framers INTENDED for fear of vox populi and the French Revolution.

Where to begin? 

 

1st and foremost the supreme court was established to interpret the law, not write it.  That is the job to the congress.  

 

This idea that since liberals cannot get pet policies through the legal process of passing bills or amending the constitution that stacking the courts with friendly justices is a viable solution is just wrong.  Our founding fathers did factor that they may have overlooked something and put a system in place to correct any thing they might have missed.  Bypassing that system is in part of what is dividing us as a nation.

---

Original Season Ticket Holder - Retired  1995 - 2020


At some point you just have to let go of what you thought should happen and live in what is happening.
 

Where to begin? 

 

1st and foremost the supreme court was established to interpret the law, not write it.  That is the job to the congress.  

 

This idea that since liberals cannot get pet policies through the legal process of passing bills or amending the constitution that stacking the courts with friendly justices is a viable solution is just wrong.  Our founding fathers did factor that they may have overlooked something and put a system in place to correct any thing they might have missed.  Bypassing that system is in part of what is dividing us as a nation.

 

It's a shame that if 0bama had studied the Constitution in a way that allowed him to work together to solve issues, rather than to study it the way a thief does a building in planning a score, he could have accomplished something good.  But then, his fatal flaw was that he was trying to "fix" the wrong problems.  If you can't properly identify the problems, there's no way you're going to be able to fix them.  You'll only end up screwing up the wrong issues, which is his unfortunately his legacy.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

Maybe go to college if you don't want to work at McDonalds.

College does not guarantee employment at a higher level. My husband has two Bachelor's degrees in completely different fields that are solid when he started, but when he graduated the economy was not conducive to employment in those fields so he ended up as a local government employee. It has paid the bills for the past 24 years but is not what he had in mind when he paid for his college education out of his own pocket.


It is better than working a job that is not meant to be a career, but the degrees by no means guaranteed anything.

---

Why did she lose? Because she sucks and barely acted like she wanted the job. She is about as inspiring as a Gene Smith draft class.


Trump sucks, but campaigned like someone who wanted it. He may not speak to everyone, but he sure as hell fired up those who resonated with his horrible message. They got out and voted. It cannot be overstated how big a game changer this is as it is the first time I can recall a candidate with a severe disadvantage in campaign funding soundly defeated an opponent. Just another testament to how I unlikable and unrelatable Hillary was as a candidate. She and the DNC hosed the better candidate in the primary and she mailed in this campaign. That's why she is (reality show reference) the biggest loser.

---

Only a chump boos the home team!

I'll tell you why she lost WV and PA, they're coal states, and the policies that Obama put in place were putting the Miners out of jobs. And Hillary would have just continued the loss of jobs in those states.

---

Instead of a sign that says "Do Not Disturb" I need one that says "Already Disturbed Proceed With Caution."

I'll tell you why she lost WV and PA, they're coal states, and the policies that Obama put in place were putting the Miners out of jobs. And Hillary would have just continued the loss of jobs in those states.

 

Agree.

 

That's one of the things that's broken about "clean energy" policy.

 

Yes, alternative energy is a very important investment.

 

But, you don't go "cold turkey" and pull the plug on jobs and revenue out of spite.  You don't punish American jobs and families out of personal political desire as 0bama did.  That's about as out of touch you can get in pursuit of personal political ambition.

---

"You do your own thing in your own time. You should be proud."

The coal industry has been dying for some time. I have in-law relatives that are coal miners. I assure you they would prefer an above ground job that doesn't give them black lung. Investing in solar or other renewable energy and repurposing those jobs to prevent economic depression in those markets would make sense. More coal or pretending it's clean is shortsighted.

---

Only a chump boos the home team!