Oolite Bulletins

To those Ooliters who are citizens of the United States, and who think Trump very bad (or who at least might be open to argument),

Do please vote - for someone other than Trump, obviously, and preferably, given what is at stake, for H. Clinton.

For: (1) Trump is at least close to being a fascist; (2) he just might get in. Let me expand on those points.

On 1.

Trump:

• - is strongly nationalist;
  - is racist (or at least he is happy to appear so);
  - is bellicose - i.e. a war-monger - despite an avowed isolationism;
  - has contempt for the rule of law (witness the incitement or near incitement to assassination and the equivocation about accepting the election result);
  - is irrationalist (i.e. displays a contempt for reason);
  - is the object of something of a cult of personality.

It seems to me that those characteristics, when combined, are fascistic - and it seems to me that individually each of them is bad. Trump is also an abuser of women, as has become clear enough.

On 2. Polls can be wrong - witness, for instance, the United Kingdom's vote to leave the European Union.

Summary: if you are eligible to vote (against Trump), please do so.

[EDITED: some general tidying up - but I haven't worked out how to indent the first line of paragraphs . .]

Bookies have Clinton at 1/6 and Trump at 4/1 - interesting.

First it was the russians who were interferring in our electoral process... now the Brits?
NO response to the troll bait.... an american first..... No to facists and communists. We do have the constitution party on the ballot... strict adherence to the Constitution as it was written.... not interpreted and watered down........YES!!!~

too late...he won....please retreat to your bomb shelters and await the end of the world as we know it....... lol

Something for future historians to ponder (assuming, of course, that there will be any): what was the influence of teenage Macedonian clickbait trolls on the outcome of the 2016 US election?

On a wider issue, what does this say about the future of the media in general? Especially combined with technologies like Adobe VoCo and Face2Face. Clickbait video, showing people saying … anything you want them to say.

I'm really wondering on how History will look back on 2016. It's got to be the maddest year ever for un-expected election results.

Not so unexpected, methinks!

No, I'd almost expected it.
It was too close to call in the lead-up, and so often in that case the result favours the underdog.
That and the fact this seems to be the year where the World just completely loses the ability to think and make good judgements.
Far Right resurgence in local elections in Germany and France, Brexit, The 'No' vote in the Columbian referendum (the peace deal with FARC), and now this. The World has officially gone mad.

It's a funny old game, Saint! I blame so-called 'social media' - history will look back at Suckface and his ilk with horror!

Every single forum post in relation to this subject matter on the number of forums I frequent is in the process of ending badly.

Sometimes you've just got to stand back and let it all be. We will see where this goes. It's not like anyone has a choice any more.

As election eve progressed to early morning so did my surprise and disgust. Whatever Trump is or becomes I really think his strategy, if you can call it that, was formed during the early stages of his candidacy when he realized how well his off-the-cuff message was being received. A large percentage of his admirers were not even dissuaded by his rude behaviour toward his opponents.

I would like to think he doesn't really believe himself capable of accomplishing any of his preposterous proposals. It was the usual rhetoric to garner votes but on a scale of ridiculousness never seen before. What does this outcome say about the general American public? That I find the most shocking thing of all.

@UK_Eliter: I've taken the liberty of changing the thread title. If you don't approve, feel free to revert it, or change it to one of your choice.

It should be remembered that Trump got fewer votes than Clinton - it was a narrow margin, but Clinton won the popular vote. Trump was elected by the US Electoral College system. This isn't a massive surprise: I think a Republican candidate has only won the popular vote once since 1988.

We can hope that there is a marked difference between Trump the candidate and Trump the president: all questions of morality and legality aside, his promises about building continent-crossing walls and deporting 11 million people are so logistically ludicrous that they will not happen. And he has shifted position on so many issues so often it's more-or-less impossible to work out what, if anything, he actually believes. But even if he just spouted whatever he thought would get him elected - if it was all just wind and noise - what does that say about his integrity? Our best hope is that he's simply a blowhard and a chancer. With nuclear weapons. Oy.

Winning the most Votes but losing an election due to some weird Collegiate Voting system seems most strange to me...

The percentages are:

Clinton: 25.6%
Trump: 25.5%
Johnson (no, me neither): 1.7%
Did not vote: 46.9%

A landslide for "None of the above".

Some other percentages, from opinion polls of Americans (taken from this article on Cracked.com, with links to the respective polls provided):

Gay marriage: 55% in favour, 37% opposed.
Legal abortion: 56% in favour, 41% opposed.
Background checks for gun buyers: up to 90% in favour in some polls.
Universal health care: 58% in favour, 37% opposed.
Worried about global warming: 64% concerned, 36% are not.
Immigration has more positive than negative effects: 59% agree, 33% disagree.