Your thoughts about trump winning the presidency

I'm not the biggest Trump supporter (I'm much more on the I sure as hell didn't want Hillary as president). To me Trump is a bigger change to Washington DC politics than any candidate ever - the kind of change Obama wishes he was in 2008 when he was all about change which was his mantra going in. I see hypocritically but rightfully so attacking Trump on his views toward women and minorities but ignore Clinton's past in doing so. To be honest the reaction and the hateful vitriol spewed by liberals on social media and the like behind their protests has actually turned me to lean Republican when I have been a political agnostic / independent / undecided. More on this later but when it comes to civics and law it is usually the liberals who really seem uneducated in these matters. To be honest I found Hillary WORSE for women than Trump - if you do even a little digging you'll come across a plethora of information suggesting that Hillary actively suppressed women coming forward of rape/sexual assault toward her husband but I dare you to find a liberal who was offended by that (albeit she never was found guilty in a court but neither has Trump but every one and their mothers is going on about that). As far as the woman issue goes while Trump has said a lot of unsavory things his track record of DOING unsavory things pails to that of Hillary's if we use the same standard of "guilt" (being we aren't waiting for a guilty verdict in court to pin the consequences of action on them). Could you imagine the reaction had Trump done anything like suppressing women coming forward which already is a problem in our society as Hillary has a record of doing. (I'll admit a lot of the information I found what limited research I've done is hearsay but there is way too much smoke around her on this issue for there not to be a fire plus there is a tape of her laughing about getting a rapist off the hook). While on the sexism issue using Hillary's status as a woman as a "qualification" for why she should be president is so fucking asinine - having a vagina should have NO bearing on her fitness to be president NONE ! Yeah I get the whole young women should be able to envision themselves being president if they want too (does her being nominated (more on that later) count toward that at all?!) I found people using her status as a woman as a qualification are equally as sexist as the people they claim to be bigoted Trump supporters but through this election I have found liberals to be irony impaired. She's not much better racially either being on record as calling black people "super predators" - just imagine if Trump had said that. As much as liberals want to write off the e-mails as "bullshit" it really isn't - what Comey essentially said in July about not recommending pressing charges on her despite being "extremely reckless" about matters of NATIONAL SECURITY - which in my opinion is IMPORTANT (ergo making it not a "bullshit" issue). So at minimum she has shown to be extremely reckless which our national security and because of her clout we'll never know for certain whether she was criminally reckless. Hillary literally embodies what is wrong with our current state of politics perfectly. Scandal and signs of wrongdoing are never far from the Clinton name. She is the ultimate pay-to-play and she would be 100% controlled by the moneyed interest and the "progressives" (much more on these people later). She embodies the flawed logic (if you can even call it that sometimes) of the radical left and with at minimum one Supreme Court nomination that has to be done (but there is a good chance between 1-3 more could be needed in the next 4 years) I cannot and America should not trust Hillary with that. I've read some decisions of a liberal Supreme Court (more recent ones anyway) and the way they apply arguments to the Constitution is just appalling and a great disservice to America even if I sometimes agree with the overall outcome the result does NOT justify the means. A great example of this is the case that got gay rights universally across the USA legalized. While I'm more than okay with gays being able to get married the way it happened was an absolute travesty and an abhorrent disgrace to our legal system. The way they applied the 14th Amendment was an absolute disgrace and the arguments stated for gay marriage being applicable by the 14th amendment were almost non existent and asinine. It was 100% pure judicial activism - this should have happened in Congress not the Supreme Court especially since their sham of an argument had hardly any reference to law, precedent (which is pretty important in our legal system), or arguing why the 14th should apply - it was like 95% talk of "gays love each other the same as straight people" and that kind of mantra talk which although great, viable and logically sound is NOT RELEVANT IN A COURT ARGUMENT but because the liberals in the court plus one swinging over that way gay marriage is legal (again I wan't to emphasize again - the RESULT I agree with the WAY the HOW I adamantly disagree with). As much as I disagree with Citizens United and most Republican / Conservative economics the amount of questionable rulings would skyrocket for decades if Hillary was picking the Supreme Court Justices. Before I got to Trump I had to share my views on Clinton since well she was the one against him and realistically the only other option. I'll split this up into two posts for mostly organizational purposes but a "why Trump" post is incoming.

@Napalm What you say about the Supreme Court's decision on gay marriage is terribly ironic because the Supreme Court did something very similar to make interracial marriage legal and now it's an accepted part of society (for the most part) when at the time congress and many state governments would never have otherwise accepted interracial marriage. The Court even referred directly to the 14th amendment in that case as well. This is one of the very reasons the 14th amendment exists, to protect minority rights against a majority who would otherwise always reject them. And interestingly, if the Supreme Court didn't make that ruling we'd be looking at several generations of outlawed gay marriage pending on Trump's appointees.

Unbelievably Happy!! 8years of Hell! Finally!!! I can't wait for America to be Great Again soon very soon! Goodbye Obama worst president we have every had of all time. Thank you God! Everyday I'm partying everyday is a celebration now We Won! The left is dead!

I'm actually going to lay out exactly why Trump won since most people can't really seem to grasp it and its actually pretty simple - and no its not because we as America hate women and minorities. I'll start off with a list and elaborate on it. 1. He's not an establishment politician - he's truly different (how different is arguable) 2. "Progressives" have created an equally large counter movement 3. It was a "whitelash" as you'll see the media / leftists call it but not the way you'd think it was 4. After a party has the President for 8 years it is difficult for the same party to win again 5. Hillary was just that bad of a candidate (I'll keep this to a minimum since my last post went into that) 6. After 8 years of mantra going one way it is just natural for the pendulum to swing the other way - for theoretical check and balance (point 2 and 3 are similar so it could be 2 and 2a but that's kind of semantics) 1. He's not an establishment politician For years DC has been cultivating a political climate where our politicians were greatly separate in voice and priorities than the people. Both sides are guilty of this so I'm not going to write this off as just Democrats since that would just be plain wrong. His lack of experience would usually be a hindrance (although citing a lack of experience is a legitimate point so I won't completely call this one irrelevant) but the fact that he isn't "one of them" is very appealing and was among the biggest reasons I voted Trump and why I bothered to vote at all. There was a backlash against Trump by both Democrats and Republicans but why? The reason is that they fear his shake up to their system that he will drain the swamp of their garbage that has been going on for decades (the unsavory things he has said and done are also a relevant factor - yes but considering there is always scandal and wrongdoing among politicians its not like they're all clean and moral figures - but some visuals of Trump only amplify it). He has his own money and therefore the lobbyists and moneyed interests won't have nearly the influence on him as any other president and that scares DC politicians. There is definitely an element of "fuck the system" that has been created over decades and he appeals to that he has a legitimate chance at being truly different and that is refreshing. He appealed to a sizable group of people who politics have forgotten out for decades so they finally decided to vote. Rural and middle class blue collar Americans have been at the wayside for decades and he appeals to them in a way that a politician hasn't in a very long time. To say that they are all bigots, racists, and sexists is plain ignorant (or even a majority of them). He actually wants to put America first and patriots and nationalists who have been ignored or bashed for years have come out. Does this mean that he will do more good than harm or the reverse - this is a great unknown to me to be honest and legitimate arguments can be made either way. We have to at least give him an open-minded(ish) chance since he is going to be our President barring a dramatic and by far unprecedented shift in the Electoral College (more on this later). 2. Progressives have created an equally large counter movement I tend to put "progressives" in the quotations because I have seen many so called progressives argue and act in such a manner that isn't progressive at all. What started as an honest and well meaning movement to bring attention and action to legitimate issues such as the treatment and rights of minorities, the LGBT community and environmental matters has turned ugly (especially with respect to the first two things I just stated). On its face to most people everyone being treated equally regardless of racial and sexual identity is an agreeable point. If that is the case why is the discourse so broken? It is because of the "progressives" themselves. They preach tolerance and open-mindedness and to not be a closed minded bigot but they're far more bigoted and closed-minded than the people they are "preaching" to. As soon as you even somewhat disagree with a "progressive" over an issue you are automatically a sexist, homophobe, islamophobe, xenophobe etcetc. They automatically will brand someone these strong things based off of mere disagreement without even bothering to hear them out. Most "progressives" by how they seem to act and put their logic together can't seem to handle a rational back and forth argument without resorting to call someone an "ist" or "phobe" without clearly and specifically saying why - beyond simple disagreement. Progressives have a way - in my opinion of taking a generally agreeable and legitimate issue and then by how they handle and strive for it make it unpalatable. These are the people who are all about the First Amendment's free speech but create safe zones which they designed to .... LIMIT FREE SPEECH - THAT THEY DISAGREE WITH. Which to a lot of people is just so bluntly hypocritical and the irony of it all. Speaking of the First Amendment (a great one in fact) I will ask (particularly Americans) what protects the First Amendment and all of the lovely and necessary rights it grants us (take a pause here before reading on)? The Amendment right after it you (progressives / liberals) hate so much - the Second Amendment. Which brings me to another point progressives/liberals love to make which on its face is agreeable but then it just goes horribly wrong. "Common sense gun laws" - there are actually a deal of these common sense gun regulations that the gun community will actually agree on but the reason it hasn't happened is because progressives will then lump some just asinine things in under the guise of being a "common sense gun law". Most pro-gun NRA members would actually be okay with a background check, a test similar to a driving test, and expanded mental health measures. Where it goes horribly wrong - and fast is when you try to limit "clip" sizes (which are mostly magazines which then shows a lack of education and understanding of a matter - which then causes a legitimate backlash) and that is far from common sense. Who are you (progressives) to say my magazine should only hold 10 rounds or 7 or 4? Who are you to say nobody "needs" a "high capacity" (by what definition is high capacity anyway?) magazine - who are you to assess the infinitely possible threats. Sure a 10 round magazine might work against one or two home invaders but what if there are 5+ of them - a 15+ round magazine sure would sound lovely then. This is just one example of how "progressives" will take an issue that would otherwise have a great deal of agreement but due to the nature of their discourse and how far they want to go for that issue make it unpalatable. Progressives seem to love especially over the last 8 years of demonizing white people as a whole (especially if they are straight and especially so if they are Christian) which brings me to my next point.... 3. "The Whitelash" Over the past few days of observing news / social media I have come across something known as the Whitelash that occurred at the polls. Progressives are chalking the whitelash to mean that all of the racists and sexists who have been hiding for 8 years have come out because its safe for them now and that it is because white men can't seem to handle minorities or women in power. They fail to take into account so much and make sweeping and harsh generalizations which they don't see the irony of since they "champion" against generalizing minorities or women but doing so against white (men in particular) is okay. I found this one post someone had on Facebook that perfectly sums it up so I will paraphrase it and maybe upload the picture later if I can find it again. Basically it goes something like (the following will not be my original idea or words but I agree with them 100000%) What happens when non-sexist, non-islamophobic, non-homophobic, non-misogynist, non bigoted (and all the other "ist" and "phobic word they love to throw around) every day (white) people are told for 8 years straight they are oppressors and that they are all of these things and you demonize them and they vote against your candidate because they are so sick of you do you... A. Reevaluate your personal conduct, your arguments, and strategy of convincing those who don't agree with you to agree with you or B. Call them racists, sexists, homophobes, bigots (and all those other buzzwords) and yell at them even more

According to social media, the regular liberal media and the protests progressives and liberals have chosen "B" which is EXACTLY WHY TRUMP WON THE ELECTION - not to mention these "progressives" are actively campaigning for Trump's second term. Honestly when I saw this and applied it to what I was seeing I felt so validated that I voted Trump in part to give these politically correct "progressives" a dose of humility and let them deal with the mess they created hoping they would be smart enough to realize what really happened. A lot of "progressive" protests have been happening particularly with the Black Lives Matter movement but you know where a more effective protest is held - AT THE POLLS which is exactly where us demonized white people protested. Yes I am aware that Hillary won the popular vote (not by very much percentage wise) ergo more people actually voted for Hillary but due to our Electoral College system (more on this later) our protest against the demonizing "progressives" was ultimately successful. This result should be a wake up call for a great deal of Americans particularly my generation but it hasn't been and because of that you're giving more fuel for a 2020 Trump reelection. If I had more time I would go on about my other points and impart some desperately needed civics and I will do so at some point to further elaborate on my point(s) but to touch on it briefly. Essentially the Electoral College system was created to do two main things - be a check on America electing an obnoxiously and egregiously bad candidate and to ensure that the voices of smaller rural states aren't swallowed up by the more populated states and that the concerns of those people are still heard and still matter. The fact that progressives don't see that and are willing to just push their concerns under the rug without even a second thought and not even understand is appalling. In most cases (in 45 elections this is only the 4th or 5th time a candidate won presidency without the popular vote and in this case it isn't like it was any great of a margin.... about 400,000 people of a total 120,000,000 which comes out to .00333333333 or .3%) it was simply a matter of how geographically these votes were cast. I understand that the Electoral College isn't a perfect system and it has a notable argument against it being not exactly direct democracy.

Drmario - you literally missed my entire point ... I knew someone would. I'm not anti-gay marriage I'm just anti how it happened. It should have happened in Congress not the Supreme Court so I see no irony. I never mentioned anything about whether gay marriage was right or wrong or that it is unacceptable. I'm aware that judicial activism from time to time has happened and good has come from it but you're missing my point that the result doesn't always justify the means. A liberal SCOTUS isn't consistent in how the apply the 14th Amendment it allows for gays and interracials the right to marry but DOES NOT guarantee a fair unbiased chance to getting into college (I forget the name of the case but there was a young woman applying for a college in Texas who was denied acceptance in favor of who was likely a less qualified black person due to Affirmative Action policies in which it was argued that the young woman's 14th Amend rights were violated) Also a liberal SCOTUS will sometimes but not always treat "Congress shall make no law" in the 14th Amendment as gold and gospel but "shall not be infringed" in the Second Amendment as "who gives a fuck"