Some Chicken Soup

It might be a tiny consolation to intelligent college-degreed Americans that tRump did not win decisively the U.S. popular vote Nov. 8th. As of 12:45pm CST today it was 48% to 48%. But that will not change what has begun happening for the next 4-years.

Let me first preface my initial thoughts. I am a political Independent who thoroughly evaluates ALL candidates and their background, experience, and track-record. I pay no attention to public campaigns and even less attention to the media-TV propaganda circus. Using websites like ProCon.org and other non-profit 501(c)(3) nonprofit nonpartisan public charities that provide well-sourced pro, con, and related research enabling what I think are very well-informed decisions. That said…

If you thought Hillary Clinton’s blunders in Washington D.C. were indications of serious character flaws for the Oval Office or how well or poorly to handle affairs in our nation’s capitol, on Capitol Hill, and out in the daunting international arena… we have just elected an immature 70-year old racist-misogynist with 1) a less-than-poised-mouth President, 2) with absolutely NO GOVERNING EXPERIENCE WHATSOEVER running the affairs of one of the world’s biggest, most influential nations in 3) extremely diverse global affairs with 4) a Congress that Constitutionally controls one-third of the total power between the three branches — 5) which is an entirely DIFFERENT beast than the private sector — of which 6) this man also has ZERO EXPERIENCE doing, ever!!! Now riddle me that!?

At least our Constitutional checks and balances are one more consolation for me and most definitely for our foreign allied nations and neutrals that are in as much dumb-founded shock as I am.

colin-powell-hrI like to consider myself a calm, reasonable man with above-average capability for critical-thinking skills, appropriate de-escalation methods — from my years in the Psych/A&D and Crisis treatment field — college-degreed with additional 18-hours graduate studies, and a deep passionate fondness for history and social sciences resulting in 5-years of general and Special Ed public teaching. This is why I have a high respect and admiration for retired 4-star general and former Secretary of State Colin Powell. He is the consummate embodiment of stoic diplomacy coupled with first-hand experience in war and world conflict. What I admire most about the esteemed Colin Powell is how he conducted himself during America’s most polarized tumultuous times:  Vietnam, the invasion of Kuwait & subsequent First Iraqi War, and 9/11. If those three “tests” were any indication and model of how to manage diplomacy, politicians, and the dynamics of crisis, then Powell passes with stellar excellence! Magna Cum Laude, if you will. Two of many of my favorite Colin Powell quotes…

“Experts often possess more data than judgment.”

“Avoid having your ego so close to your position that when your position falls, your ego goes with it.”

What is further mind-boggling to me is that Colin Powell, though technically a Moderate, aligned himself politically with the Republican party — why was the G.O.P. unable to find anyone in 2014-16 resembling or somewhat-resembling the experience and exemplary poise of Powell(?), even someone with just HALF of his Capitol Hill savvy anywhere in this nation of 325-million!? Here is a very good Sept. 2016 New York Times article by Michael Shear about what Powell thinks of our two main Presidential candidates (Click here). I think Powell is spot on, knows what he is saying, and has the experience to back it up. Period.

Finally, what I will never be able to wrap my head around is how an American “democracy” gave tRump enough support (only 48%) to cause our Electoral College to actually put this no-experience-whatsoever man into the White House. Maybe this short video will help explain to the rest of the world how this happened. Click the link below…

http://www.nytimes.com/video/us/politics/100000004757868/the-electoral-college-explained.html

Or maybe that doesn’t help at all and only confuses our allies and neutrals.

I do know this for those of you in foreign countries, those delegates in the Electoral College are our previously elected House Representatives and Senators from our 50 states, who are representative of our state’s two bipartisan parties and lesser extent third parties. But these “delegates” don’t get into office without being first elected by registered voters in their respective state. In other words, some/much of what happens or doesn’t happen on the Federal level hinges on what informed, or less-informed, or ignorant registered voters do and don’t do (i.e. active, inactive, or unregistered voters) on the municipal, county, district or precinct, and state levels FIRST!

Ultimately, there are only six groups to praise or blame for the U.S.A.’s political Electoral College success or failure (e.g. Abraham Lincoln and Richard Nixon, respectively):

  • Well-educated, well-informed registered ACTIVE voters
  • Well-educated, well-informed registered INACTIVE voters
  • Poorly educated, poorly informed registered ACTIVE voters
  • Poorly educated, poorly informed registered INACTIVE voters
  • Well-educated, well-informed unregistered voters
  • Poorly educated, poorly informed unregistered voters

Naturally, the origins and causes of the above six American groups are an entirely different discussion and personal blog-post for which I currently have no desire nor energy to write. But hey, we all now have 4-years to think about and deal with it. This is the bed we’ve made for ourselves, now we must sleep in it.  — says with sad dejection

Chicken soup anyone?

(paragraph break)

Creative Commons License
This work by Professor Taboo is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at www.professortaboo.com/contact-me/.

48 thoughts on “Some Chicken Soup

  1. Reblogged this on Scotties Toy Box and commented:
    I am heart sick. I am worried. Yes for the country as a whole but for myself and my family personally. I worry that the rights I and my husband have gotten after a lifetime of working and wanting could be taken away. I worry laws will be enacted making it legal to treat us unfairly, to deny us everything from healthcare to housing. I worry that if on vacation we will be denied the same things straight couples get without a thought. I am worried that we won’t be able to move forward for protections of rights we need right now and don’t have. So many more things I could name, but basically I see the progressive movement halted and reversed for at least four more years. I like this post. I hope it helps some of my readers. It has in some ways helped me. I did not even want to get up this morning. I am not sure how it happened or how to fight back. But fight back we must. Again this is a great post. Please go to the web site and read the whole thing. Hugs

    Liked by 4 people

  2. I am stunned, heart sick, lost to understand how this could have happened. I am so worried about all the branches of government in the hands of the most radical of the right wing. Thanks for this post. Hugs

    Liked by 4 people

    • Scottie,

      Thank you kindly for the reblog. You are too nice for doing that, and I give my humble appreciation. ❤

      I so really empathize with your personal situation, your husband's, as well as the entire LBGTQ community in America. I have several dear friends in that group that are just as QUALITY law-abiding, hard-working citizens as ANY heterosexual American in this country! PERIOD! Their only “difference” is what they do in their own homes and bedrooms! That’s all. And they too are very worried; understandably and deservedly so! 😦

      My hope is that once tRump gets his rude awakening in federal and diverse international politics, that he’ll begin that inevitable slide backwards and dancing/juggling act with his constituents and followers… that befalls a number of politicians with hyper-polarizing rhetoric.

      Liked by 4 people

    • Hahaha! Indeed there was smarty-pants. 😉

      On a more serious note though Hariod, what much of the world doesn’t hear or read about our voting system are all the elections on the state and lower levels, which only garner mediocre media attention abroad and domestically as well. Americans must go to the CSPAN (paid cable) channel for detailed federal coverage, but on state and lower levels coverage is practically non-existent. And here’s the sad part about state and all lower level candidate elections — who very often work their way UP the governmental tiers — many (most?) American voters can’t even tell you WHO is in a particular state or district office, the official’s background, civil & criminal record, or WHO is running against them or ran against them in the races!

      Hence, if so many voters don’t know this free available information about lower level candidates that over the years have worked their way UP to the Federal level from their own state, why should anyone be too surprised when that Electoral College (Federal Representatives & Senators THEY may have voted in years back) picks THEIR PARTY’S candidate rather than the popular-vote (people’s) candidate? This brings me back to your question:

      Americans, particularly Texans, ALWAYS know when there is a U.S. Presidential election and the state Governor’s election. Duh, right!? Both very POPULAR well-covered campaigns, etc, that pit our two-party system against each other fiercely. But ask them about every lower elections down to their home county and municipality? HAH! They might (probably would?) ask your question… “Has there been an election for that office, or something? I didn’t even know that office existed?” 😮

      Liked by 3 people

      • Thankyou professor, and I must indeed confess to my inadequate familiarity with the labyrinthine detail of it all. That said, I still have been overwhelmed with perspectives on the main game, even from afar here in England. I must apologise for my earlier flippancy, but have been trying to keep up with the blogospheric aftermath. With your permission, I’ll pitch in now with a little more of what I feel about it all upon reflection and with my perfect hindsight:

        I thought it was a shame that Hillary didn’t pick Elizabeth Warren as her running mate, and imagine that may have swayed more women to vote for her. Still, 50 months of chaos and the U.S. citizenry may decide it likes dynasties after all – Michelle will be there, and it’ll be (big) business as usual? In the meantime, bang goes the environment and a balanced High Court – and those effects will far outlast Trump, of course.

        Leaving aside further discussion on the gender issue, which I think RS will cover authoritatively, then it’s the Democrats own stupid fault, in my view. They should’ve chosen Bernie. Or Elizabeth Warren (as I said, at least as VP). Or the public should do what 60% of them say they want, and vote for a 3rd. party. All those tactical votes for Hillary were too clever by half, so it transpired. If they’d gone with Stein instead then the Green’s may have gotten to 5% and received the funding it absolutely must have to stand a chance. And ranked voting needs to come in, as well as the money needing to go out. Until then it’s the same 2-party mess anyway.

        This isn’t such a shock outside the U.S., professor. The pollsters have, in various degrees, gotten it very wrong in the last 2 years: the Israeli election, the Scottish referendum, the Tories taking a majority here in the U.K., Brexit, and now this mess. Their modelling methods are wrong, obviously. Why? Because they can only get single digit levels of respondents. In the thirties it was 90%. Now it’s 9% (Pew Research, Gallup and others). 56% of poor U.S. households have no landline service, and well over 40% of all households have no landline. Pollsters can’t legally autodial cell phones, and it’s too expensive and time-consuming to contact their owners by other means. So, the biasing models for non-responders has to be pretty watertight, and they weren’t. Also, the media treated the aftermath of the ‘08 crash like it was as small a problem for everyone as it was for those of their privilege. Too many were fed all this misinformation and accordingly decided not to vote, thinking the polls and media were right and that Hillary was in come what may.

        The only good news is Hillary won’t be having her Syrian no-fly zone.

        I despair.

        Liked by 3 people

        • Hariod, Hariod, Hariod… my good friend. IF ONLY there were thousands or 1 or 2-million of you we could clone here and make U.S. citizens! And I would INSIST half of those Hariods (minimum!) be Texans!!! 😉 Hehe

          Everything you said is superbly stated and true… at least in my eyes. (laughing)

          gives a gesture of approval & open arms, tipping his hat to H

          Liked by 3 people

        • If there were thousands of me there wouldn’t be enough sherry to go around, professor. The upside is there would be so many more utterly indecipherable posts to metagrobolize the blogosphere! H ❤

          Liked by 3 people

        • I have no intention of discussing the sex/gender issue.

          But the reason the pollsters and everyone under the sun has got it wrong is because every posh liberal person under the sun is so far up themselves they don’t know what the former working classes are going through. Is it that hard? Apparently. For really clever people.

          Must dash. Tofu do pyazi or some such to sort 🙂

          Liked by 1 person

        • Hariod, it is so great to hear/read a point of view that is not American AND, your knowledge on this is quite impressive to me. I must admit that, shoe on the other foot, I would not know nearly as much about your great country as you do mine. Kudos!

          Liked by 2 people

        • Thankyou LSL, ‘though I can’t pretend to be nearly as well-informed on this as the Professor and other Americans (such as yourself) in my blogging circle, of course. That said, I’ve found the whole phenomenon fascinating, almost entertaining, in a frighteningly absurdist way. I read a few months ago that Chomsky had reckoned if Trump should lose, he still would have proven to have been the dress rehearsal for a more frighteningly convincing, charismatic and more ‘honest’ neo-fascist to arise at a later date. I’m clinging to glimmers of good fortune in all this!

          It looks like what we’re seeing (with Brexit, the rise of the Far Right in Europe, and now Trump) is the response to unfettered Capitalism. The answer (if it comes) won’t be protectionism, but regulation which balances free markets’ reification of efficiency over human need. Corporations have exploited global labour arbitrage ruthlessly, as capital inevitably will if allowed to do so. As a result, wages get suppressed, workers’ rights become diminished, and whole swathes of nations become de-industrialised. Trump played this scenario to great effect, and Hillary only offered more of the same.

          In practice, I suspect Trump will be far more inclined to cast around for huge trade deals than to induce the protectionism he’s promised. He may do ‘great business’ with China, for example, and the sweetener could well be the diminution of the U.S.’s military presence in that region. He’s going to want trophy deals to shout about. Unfortunately, civil rights and the environment will be going down the tube as he yells about his deals.

          Liked by 2 people

  3. This one definitely got away from the Republican party. Their establishment politicians really never had a chance. Hell Ben Carson was more popular that most of them, and that guy is a fruitcake…probably needs to perform brain surgery on himself, I don’t know. For much of the people voting for Trump it was never about facts, only feelings, faith, hope, and yes hate too.

    Liked by 4 people

    • I think it is safe to say (obvious, based on the popular vote?) Swarn that tRump supporters & his strict Republican supporters used feelings, faith, hope, and hate to cast their votes. There are several themes and threads in this past campaign, election, and now this President-elect’s public & private character that are reminiscent of Richard Nixon and his character. I could draw some other parallels to other historical “leaders”, but for the sake of time and simplicity I will leave it to anyone’s intrigue and effort to pin-point them. 🙂

      In light of what you pointed out, do you think Americans would benefit from a strong third-party, maybe a fourth too?

      Liked by 4 people

      • I do think they would benefit from a 3rd party, but I think it’s very hard to do. Especially until we take the money out of politics. I think donations should come from individuals only, or if we do allow it from groups it should be very small amounts. When the Koch brothers or Soros can just bury an opponent, especially in state level battles it’s not good. I mean I think we see how effective Bernie was on the national stage by using social media and getting some TV time under the democratic ticket, but 3rd parties need to start from the ground up to build a base of voters that have some confidence in their ability to legislate successfully. Now maybe the easiest way for a 3rd party to work is to pick off known politicians from established parties to form your own. That’s sort of what Lincoln did to form the Republican party. It has to be organized and it has to be big.

        Liked by 2 people

        • If it were not so serious, I’d laugh like we all do with every single President elected — they are ALL laughing-stock to someone and the brunt of much satire, right? But this is much more serious based on the hateful campaign tRump spouted. I cannot laugh anymore like I did at the beginning of the year. 😦

          Liked by 1 person

  4. Apols. Long.

    I am a political Independent who thoroughly evaluates ALL candidates and their background, experience, and track-record. I pay no attention to public campaigns and even less attention to the media-TV propaganda circus.

    Likewise, although obviously our voting is different to yours, but broadly you and I operate the same way (on this). Although my ‘independence’ veers somewhat left as a rule.

    If you thought Hillary Clinton’s blunders in Washington D.C. were indications of serious character flaws for the Oval Office or how well or poorly to handle affairs in our nation’s capitol, on Capitol Hill, and out in the daunting international arena… we have just elected an immature 70-year old racist-misogynist with 1) a less-than-poised-mouth President, 2) with absolutely NO GOVERNING EXPERIENCE WHATSOEVER running the affairs of one of the world’s biggest, most influential nations in 3) extremely diverse global affairs with 4) a Congress that Constitutionally controls one-third of the total power between the three branches — 5) which is an entirely DIFFERENT beast than the private sector — of which 6) this man also has ZERO EXPERIENCE doing, ever!!! Now riddle me that!?

    Nice summary. You forgot his bankruptcies. And the fact he was handed a successful business from daddy. Don’t forget the two impending court cases.

    At least our Constitutional checks and balances are one more consolation for me and most definitely for our foreign allied nations and neutrals

    You think? When there will be a Republican supreme court in power as well? Roe v Wade overturned?

    that are in as much dumb-founded shock as I am.

    Yes. And as an aside. The biggest shock I have seen on blogs is on those of American women. Wonder why. I read one comment where an evangelical said she is considering leaving the church! (There could be a bonus in this after all.)

    In other words, some/much of what happens or doesn’t happen on the Federal level hinges on what informed, or less-informed, or ignorant registered voters do and don’t do (i.e. active, inactive, or unregistered voters) on the municipal, county, district or precinct, and state levels FIRST!

    OK, now we get to it. This sounds extremely like the criticism levelled at Brexit voters: ignorant, ill-educated, racist, lower classes. While I know of working class people who voted for Brexit – construction workers, bus drivers, shop assistants, I also know an Oxford don, a lawyer, and other people with one or two degrees. Not everyone who is anti-establishment is racist/xenophobic /uneducated.

    Ultimately, there are only six groups to praise or blame for the U.S.A.’s political Electoral College success or failure:

    Well-educated, well-informed registered ACTIVE voters
    Well-educated, well-informed registered INACTIVE voters
    Poorly educated, poorly informed registered ACTIVE voters
    Poorly educated, poorly informed registered INACTIVE voters
    Well-educated, well-informed unregistered voters
    Poorly educated, poorly informed unregistered voters
    Naturally, the origins and causes of the above six American groups are an entirely different discussion and personal blog-post for which I currently have no desire nor energy to write. But hey, we all now have 4-years to think about and deal with it.

    Unless America is hugely different – and it may well be – what about the well educated, poorly informed, and the poorly educated, well informed voters?

    This is my gripe. Why are all poorly educated people poorly informed? Similarly why are all well educated people well informed? If they were that well informed overall, the smartypants would have predicted Brexit and Trumpit.

    It is demeaning to assume that people without degrees, or even without 14 years of school education are poorly informed. That is exactly the sort of attitude that makes people vote for Trump. And Brexit. It is patronising and supercilious. Especially when lots of white male college (I think that’s what you call university) graduates voted for Trump. They probably come under the category of well educated, thick-as-pig-shit, totally ill-informed. Whereas hispanics and blacks, usually poorer, and poorly educated, voted for Clinton, because clearly they aren’t sufficiently thick-as-pig-shit and worked out that Trump is a racist bigot.

    I do hope you aren’t going down the road of suggesting thick stupid people shouldn’t have the vote?

    FWIW I would have voted for Clinton. But then, I would have done eight years ago too. Yet, the world hates a smart woman. (There was a good article in the Grauniad that I am too lazy to look up on exactly those lines.)

    Liked by 1 person

    • Regarding our federal checks & balances…

      You think? When there will be a Republican supreme court in power as well? Roe v Wade overturned?

      Excellent questions RS. As the Republican party grows wealthier, passes legislation or manipulates those passes via wealth and high-level, complex legal verbage (that results from an exceptionally educated expensive University and/or law school) from lobbying groups full of such well-educated lobbyist who understand much better how all three branches work independently or as a whole than the average American voter — and this can apply on the state levels too — then yes, it is more “possible” that a Republican President along with a confirmation & appointment from a Republican-controlled Senate, could overturn historically non-Republican Supreme Court decisions or modify/ammend them.

      OK, now we get to it. [and following comments]

      RS, I know how much you hate going to watch videos, but my 2-min clip on “The Electoral College Explained” along with my simplified explanation on how some/many Representatives & Senators (who can become delegates in the federal electoral college!) were FIRST elected in their home state’s county, district, and/or HoR or Senate in that capitol! And THOSE officials were voted in by registered citizens/voters who may or may not fully understand how the federal Electoral College superceeds the American popular vote… of which Hillary won. Understanding WHY the electoral college has more power than the American people/voters (when it was established in 1787) gets into complex manipulation preventions that often require a degree-of-education and cognition-critical-thinking skills by common Americans. Here’s one explanation of the Electoral College’s purpose. Apologies for the length 😉 …

      The Constitutional Convention of 1787 considered several methods of electing the President, including selection by Congress, by the governors of the states, by the state legislatures, by a special group of Members of Congress chosen by lot, and by direct popular election. Late in the convention, the matter was referred to the Committee of Eleven on Postponed Matters, which devised the electoral college system in its original form. This plan, which met with widespread approval by the delegates, was incorporated into the final document with only minor changes. It sought to reconcile differing state and federal interests, provide a degree of popular participation in the election, give the less populous states some additional leverage in the process by providing “senatorial” electors, preserve the presidency as independent of Congress, and generally insulate the election process from political manipulation.

      And let’s go further down the labyrinth of rabbit-holes on this College. From the same source above…

      Notwithstanding the founders’ efforts, the electoral college system almost never functioned as they intended, but, as with so many constitutional provisions, the document prescribed only the system’s basic elements, leaving ample room for development. As the republic evolved, so did the electoral college system, and, by the late 19th century, the following range of constitutional, federal and state legal, and political elements of the contemporary system were in place.

      How Electors and Electoral votes are Allocated in the College:

      The Constitution gives each state a number of electors equal to the combined total of its Senate membership (two for each state) and House of Representatives delegation (currently ranging from one to 52, depending on population). The 23rd Amendment provides an additional three electors to the District of Columbia. The number of electoral votes per state thus currently ranges from three (for seven states and D.C.) to 54 for California, the most populous state.

      The total number of electors each state gets are adjusted following each decennial census in a process called reapportionment, which reallocates the number of Members of the House of Representatives to reflect changing rates of population growth (or decline) among the states. Thus, a state may gain or lose electors following reapportionment, but it always retains its two “senatorial” electors, and at least one more reflecting its House delegation. Popular Election of Electors

      Today, all presidential electors are chosen by the voters, but, in the early republic, more than half the states chose electors in their legislatures, thus eliminating any direct involvement by the voting public in the election. This practice changed rapidly after the turn of the nineteenth century, however, as the right to vote was extended to an ever-wider segment of the population. As the electorate continued to expand, so did the number of persons able to vote for presidential electors, to its present limit of all eligible citizens age 18 or older. The tradition that the voters choose the presidential electors thus became an early and permanent feature of the electoral college system, and, while it should be noted that states still theoretically retain the constitutional right to choose some other method, this is extremely unlikely.

      The existence of the presidential electors and the duties of the electoral college are so little noted in contemporary society that most American voters believe that they are voting directly for a President and Vice President on election day. Although candidates for elector may be well known persons, such as governors, state legislators, or other state and local officials, they generally do not receive public recognition as electors. In fact, in most states, the names of individual electors do not appear anywhere on the ballot; instead only those of the various candidates for President and Vice President appear, usually prefaced by the words “electors for.” Moreover, electoral votes are commonly referred to as having “been awarded” to the winning candidate, as if no human beings were involved in the process.

      Now RS, you tell me honestly, does the average educated informed American thoroughly understand how and why THEIR VOTES effect or don’t effect the candidate selection, election races, etc, from municipal/county levels up to the Federal levels both immediately and in the next 2, 4, 6, and 8 years… directly AND indirectly? Why or why not? 🙂

      And after you consider that question(s), would you want to “revise” your final paragraphs in your last comment? ❤

      Like

      • No. Would you expect me to?
        But the point remains, why are you denigrating so-called poorly educated, poorly informed people?
        Why does the somewhat bizarre electoral system affect their choice of vote for a misogynist racist or a woman president?
        Surely they cast their vote regardless of the strange system?

        Like

        • Haha… no I wouldn’t expect you to. You redefine antagonistic stubborness RS. 😉

          Despite what I wrote in my very last paragraph in this post, I will indulge you this one time and give a BRIEF glimpse into the complex nuances of American (especially Texas) social and political sciences and why America as a whole/average (especially Texans vs the U.S.) ranks “average” or below global rankings and standards in economic, social, happiness, and governance challenges.

          By going to the OECD website you can examine any number of statistical charts & their data to see where the United States ranks in comparison to the rest of the world. Other than GNP and GDP (and perhaps in military manufacturing & spending, and 1 or 2 other OECD categories), why does the USA rank average or lower than many other (100 to 140) nations? What is it in those higher ranked countries that the U.S. doesn’t have? And then I’d also ask what type of data-interpretation models must be understood (taught?) to compare & contrast American economic, social, happiness, and governance charts & data, their sources, their degrees of influence within specific contexts to other countries, and finally how to articulate those results to … oh, an audience that can UNDERSTAND correctly what is being reported? I’ll tell you right now RS, in the United States (esp Texas) it cannot be comprehensively understood with a high-school diploma or less.

          As an aside, my 2014 blog-post “Influences Upon the Majority” goes deeper into explaining why the average moderate majority in Texas — now a hispanic state — has not been able to balance our state Congress back to a two-partied House & Senate, much less a more Democratic-party Congress. On the Federal level the same sort of political balancing or unbalancing in Texas can also be applied in Washington D.C., just with several more frequent sways and moves than Texas. Therefore, just because I’m blogging about social, political, economic distinctions (some quite stark) in Texas or the U.S., doesn’t necessarily equate to “denigration”… or denigration that I have or am causing. I’d prefer to say that anyone reading this post be CHALLENGED to always continue upward their education-level and by default cognitive & critical-thinking skills to be able to better decipher what state and federal politicians & their constituencies are peddling. Is that a big ask for a vastly Conservative or Puritan state such as Texas and less so United States? Yes and maybe. Yet again, what I am touching on here and in my posts cannot sufficiently cover all dynamics & factors contributing to how tRump was elected U.S. President, much less how he even got nominated by the RNC. Those blog-posts would be a minimum 8 or 10,000 words just to cover the main points! Hah! 😛

          Why does the somewhat bizarre electoral system affect their choice of vote for a misogynist racist or a woman president? Surely they cast their vote regardless of the strange system?

          I can answer both those questions easily and simply like this:

          Hillary Clinton WON the Popular vote Nov. 8th by 233,404 American votes — 99% of all state polls reporting as of today. The misogynist racist man won only the electoral college votes, not the peoples.

          Thanks RS for your feedback, POV, and opinions. They are appreciated. ❤

          Liked by 4 people

  5. I do hope you aren’t going down the road of suggesting thick stupid people shouldn’t have the vote?

    Do you honestly believe that ”thick stupid people” are confined to the non-degreed, flat cap e’ by gum Tetley Tea Drinkers of the world?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ark, are you familiar with the popular A&E reality TV show “Duck Dynasty” here in the states? It generates about $480-million in revenues. And I also say popular as in popular with the rural downhome (townhall-ish Tea Party) audiences as well as many Conservatives in the U.S. that appreciate simple “Christian fundamentals” mixed with the old-fashioned American entrepreneurial Gung-ho spirit that defines “The American Dream.” The patriarch of that family, Phil Robertson, is outspoken about his religious Xian beliefs in and with politics. As a (multi?) millionairre and political-religious activist, Phil Robertson always endorses Conservative or ultra-Conservative causes and candidates — he first endorsed Ted Cruz this past summer, then Donald Trump. But he has gone further. In 2013 in GQ Magazine he made some Trumpish-like interview remarks about what sin was and looked like. Are you getting the picture of this man and many many other white Southern men like him? Now my point…

      He graduated from Louisiana Tech University (Ruston, LA) with a bachelor’s then master’s degree in Education, which he uses in his church bible-classes and public-political speeches. Some analysts and journalists consider his ideas and comments to be supportive of an American theocracy with the money (and political contacts) to make it progress.

      Do you honestly believe that ”thick stupid people” are confined to the non-degreed…?

      Not in the least. But Phil Robertson, fortunately, isn’t the majority of Americans, at this point. :/

      Liked by 1 person

      • And don’t forget, Ben Carson is an M.D. and a neurosurgeon. He also believes the earth is only 6000 years old and the pyramids were built by Joseph as grain storage containers. Oh, he’ll also most likely be on Donald Trump’s cabinet and influence the well being of Americans and citizens of every other country on earth, too. Yeah, education and being a friggin’ raging dumb f*^k aren’t mutually exclusive to each other.

        Liked by 3 people

        • Another good example Jeff. There are many Ben Carsons and Phil Robertsons in the U.S., obviously. But my additional implied point in response to the original hair-splitting knit-picky dissecting challenge of where, who, what, how, and why American voters allow or endorse someone into the White House is more a reflection of the majority of Americans which are on the unfortunate sides of our growing inequalities, e.g. economic, social, educational, occupationally, etc, and that the Ben Carsons, Phil Robertsons, Ted Cruz’s, Donald Trumps, Mitt Romneys… are all the exceptions (currently), the 1% – 10% to America’s 99% or 90% as they are sometimes referred. And a significant chunk of that percentage are not educated (well?) beyond a high-school diploma, and hence generally vulnerable(?) to clever schemes and/or paradigms by the more educated.

          I like dealing with probabilities, plausabilities, high and low in degrees, to highly unlikely-ies. “Certainties” in many areas of human nature, existence, sciences, etc… as a whole and comparatively speaking, rarely or infrequently exist in my opinion. But try to convince a Xian Fundamentalist and/or political ultra-Conservative of that! 😳 😉

          Hope that clears up some confusion.

          Liked by 3 people

        • Well, all of this will improve as Carson is rumored to be Secretary of Education. Can you think of anyone better? I agree with all you say on this topic, BTW. However, I was born confused, and by Jeebus, I likes it! 🙂

          Liked by 2 people

        • Ugh, and the never-ending talk here in the small towns of the Texas Hill Country from Republican fanatics and supporters has been ‘Though tRump has no federal governing or foreign policy experience whatsoever, he’ll surround himself with advisors and a cabinet that are experienced.‘ Hah. Ben Carson? I’m embarrassed to admit it, but my 22-yr old daughter supported him this past spring. 🙄

          I agree with all you say on this topic, BTW. However, I was born confused, and by Jeebus, I likes it! 🙂

          Thank you Jeff, but I also know that your “agreement” — now and in the future — should be in degrees. I am by no means an expert; PBS Frontline nor CNN are blowing up my phone to hire me. No, my reference was to RS’s original challenge. She sometimes comes in here with her laser-scoped sniper-rifle scanning for targets and movement. 😉 Hence, I had to do more of exactly what I said originally in my post’s last paragraph that I didn’t have the energy or desire to do. Eh, oh well. I am fond of RS nonetheless. ❤

          Liked by 1 person

        • Haha! Great idea. Staunch Republicans would probably offer the same advice too. 😉 After all, didn’t President Obama do the same thing? (chuckling) According to them, winning a Nobel Peace Prize is as easy as getting a draw in tick-tack-toe. But I guess the Nobel Committee sees things quite differently than Republicans, huh? 😛

          Liked by 2 people

      • The question was actually directed at RS.

        I am sure you realise that absolute Nobs frequent both ends of the educational and economic scale.

        Oh, and no, I have never heard of Duck Dynasty.

        Like

        • Yes Ark, I realize the question was for RS. I wanted to express that their are sometimes/often exceptions to the rules, as I’m sure you also realize. Both the atomic microscope and the kaleidoscope have their uses.

          Phil Robertson was raised by his family at one end of that economic-educational scale, then himself moved to the other end. However, he is not the median of the 219-million registered American voters.

          That said, thanks for your comments Ark. Please feel free to visit again and share, Sir. 🙂

          Like

  6. THIS is the reality I cannot get around, get past, get over, ever come to terms with. I just cannot settle after this shit-storm. Good post. Aloha.

    …we have just elected an immature 70-year old racist-misogynist with 1) a less-than-poised-mouth President, 2) with absolutely NO GOVERNING EXPERIENCE WHATSOEVER running the affairs of one of the world’s biggest, most influential nations in 3) extremely diverse global affairs with 4) a Congress that Constitutionally controls one-third of the total power between the three branches — 5) which is an entirely DIFFERENT beast than the private sector — of which 6) this man also has ZERO EXPERIENCE doing, ever!!! Now riddle me that!?

    Liked by 2 people

  7. I am still astounded and what’s worrisome is the inclusion of his children still, even though they are supposedly taking over his business. His picks for cabinets positions is a disaster, that can only lead to no good. He was going to do away with the establishment and shake things up. Now it has become a business, essentially a money grab.

    Like

Go Ahead, Start the Discussion!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s