Trump’s Promise to be America’s Most Dangerous, Divisive President

Today, both President Obama and President-Elect Trump have urged America to keep calm and united. But despite these overtures, many Americans are experiencing a sensation akin to shock following one of the nastiest, most vitriolic elections in American history. One in which Trump repeatedly scape-goated women and minorities in a bald attempt to pander to some of the most harmful social undercurrents existing in our country.

Given the ugly tone of Trump’s campaign and his loss in the popular vote by 200,000 and growing despite apparent wins in the electoral college, Americans and people abroad alike now feel a very valid sense of deep concern for the future of a fractured Nation and an increasingly threatened world. For what Trump has pledged and promised to do during his Presidential campaign represents a very real risk of severe political, climatalogical, physical, and economic harm for this country, her people, and to the people and living creatures of this world.

(Berkley students chant ‘not my President!’ in protest walk out on November 9th. Across America and the world, similar protests were underway. Michael Moore, meanwhile, was urging continuous acts of civil disobedience in opposition to Trump’s election. Currently, over 100,000 people are protesting in New York City alone.)

Disturbing Threats to Jail Political Opponents

Threatened with incarceration for presumed crimes no-one has convicted her of, Hillary Clinton must be among those feeling the shock. Trump threatened to jail her if he was elected President. And many of his followers took up the cry — posting ‘jail Hillary’ signs on the sides of roads or demanding unjust incarceration of a political opponent loudly on twitter.

Unfortunately, if Trump’s current diplomatic demeanor spoils, these election campaign threats could very easily turn real. Trump has the power to appoint a special prosecutor. The power to appoint an Attorney General who agrees with his views. The power to, in effect, ‘rig’ the judicial and prosecutorial system to favor his opinion that Hillary should be jailed.

Trump’s uttering of these words during the campaign has already been deeply damaging. Never before in modern memory has one U.S. Presidential opponent publicly threatened to jail another. But carrying out such an action would be as unprecedented as it would have a terribly chilling effect on U.S. democracy.

An Angry Finger on the Nuclear Button

As Clinton reflects on Trump’s threats to haul her off to trial, others around the world are looking fearfully back at the rage-filled rhetoric of a man who is soon to be equipped with the full might of America’s considerable arsenal. During the campaign, Trump claimed to ‘love war,’ asked, multiple times, during security briefings why the U.S. doesn’t use nuclear weapons, and pledged to ‘bomb the shit’ out of Isis and steal their oil. He’s expressed a desire to turn NATO into a protection racket meant to extort fees from allies. And he’s shown a disturbing affinity toward other aggressive leaders like Vladimir Putin.

If Trump’s belligerence and seeming lack of sense continues post-campaign, there’s a valid concern that he might order a nuclear strike with little in the way of provocation. The President does hold the nuclear codes. And though aides, advisers and a substantial military chain of command provide a buffer between a bad decision and disaster, the fact that a hot-headed Trump ignorant to the devastating consequences of the use of such weapons is the final say in the matter is a serious worry.

Killing Climate Treaties, Promoting Fossil Fuels

As nations around the world look to the U.S. with fear and concern, a number of climate bad actors stand to be empowered by a Trump Presidency. Trump has effectively pledged to cut all funding to climate science and renewable energy research and development. In one fell swoop, this action would remove NASA and NOAA’s ability to track climate change even as the main competitors to fossil fuels — wind, solar, and vehicle battery technology — are effectively stymied. It’s a 1-2 punch that would dramatically harm this nation’s already flagging resilience to a rapidly worsening global climate crisis.

Meanwhile, his board of energy advisers are hand-picked from these bad actor fossil fuel companies and include a long list of climate change deniers. Trump has pledged to bring back coal while heightening U.S. oil and gas production and consumption. He has also promised to kill Obama’s Clean Power Plan, de-fund the EPA, and back out of the Paris Climate Treaty.

earth-under-fire

(Trump, according to Joe Romm over at Climate Progress, appears likely to go down in history as the man who single-handedly pulled the plug on the potential for a livable climate. I agree with Joe’s lucid but stark assessment — without some kind of significant outside action, we are in a very tough spot now due to this set-back by Trump. We really have been given no rational cause to hope otherwise. Image source: Ring of Fire Network.)

Combined, these actions would have a devastating effect on the currently building but still not sufficient global response to climate change. Backsliding by the U.S. will likely also cost reduced commitments by such varied states as India and China even as other countries like the UK, Australia, and Canada are likely to take U.S. climate inaction as their own excuse to renege on past emissions reduction goals.

Overall, a Trump Presidency that follows through on its anti-stable-climate agenda could cost the world as much as 1-2 C in additional warming this Century (on top of what’s already locked in) by keeping the U.S. and other nations on a business as usual emissions path longer and essentially dismantling much of the progress that was achieved under the Obama Administration. To be very clear, current bad climate outcomes are occurring under just 1 C above 1880s level warming. Meanwhile, greenhouse gas reduction commitments under Paris are setting the world on a path to about 3 C warming by the end of this Century. Trump’s policies, when all is said and done, could easily push that to 4 C or more — which would be utterly devastating.

Prospects for escalating climate policies to achieve a less than 2 C warming this Century are now also pretty bleak as Trump rolls in. In my opinion, it would take a wholesale rebellion by energy investors through the necessary act of divestment in fossil fuel industries and reinvestment in renewables to achieve this goal — first by sapping the political power of the agencies that keep putting people like Trump into office and also by removing capital for current and future projects.

David Roberts over at Vox is rather less sanguine:

The truth is, hitting the 2-degree target (much less 1.5 degrees) was always a long shot. It would require all the world’s countries to effectively turn on a dime and send their emissions plunging at never-before-seen rates.

It was implausible, but at least there was a story to tell. That story began with strong US leadership, which brought China to the table, which in turn cleared the way for Paris. The election of Hillary Clinton would have signaled to the world a determination to meet or exceed the targets the US promised in Paris, along with four years of efforts to create bilateral or multilateral partnerships that pushed progress faster…

 That story is gone now. Dead. The US will not provide leadership — it will be an active, and very powerful, impediment. Under unified Republican leadership, progress on lowering emissions in the US will halt and reverse and US participation in international efforts to combat climate change will cease.

Deregulation + Trickle-Down Isolationism is Bad Economic Policy

Following the Great Recession, Obama and a number of effective economic leaders managed to save the world from complete financial disaster. Helpful polices by Obama and the democrats, including the maintenance of Wall Street oversight, now serve as a thin veil protecting the U.S. and the world from another financial collapse. However, Trump’s pledges to bring back pretty much all of the failed republican economic policies promoted by the Bush Administration that were so destructive while adding still more of his own trouble to the brew risks severe economic consequences.

Trump has pledged to deregulate Wall Street — enabling economic bad actors to have the same free reign that set up conditions for the financial crash back during 2008. He has threatened trade wars with China and other partners — a policy that would have a chilling impact on global markets. He and his republican allies have promoted policies that would hobble the Federal Reserve in ways that would deeply undermine the national economy. And he has promised to produce a massive tax cut for the wealthy while slashing supports for the faltering middle class and poor in this country — further worsening the systemic inequality that has already so deeply harmed and divided our nation.

Economist Paul Krugman is not optimistic — warning of a global recession arising from a Trump Presidency:

Under any circumstances, putting an irresponsible, ignorant man who takes his advice from all the wrong people in charge of the nation with the world’s most important economy would be very bad news. What makes it especially bad right now, however, is the fundamentally fragile state much of the world is still in, eight years after the great financial crisis… So we are very probably looking at a global recession, with no end in sight. I suppose we could get lucky somehow. But on economics, as on everything else, a terrible thing has just happened.

While the threat of a new global recession may not be immediately imminent, Trump’s overall economic stance doesn’t provide much in the way of benefit to anyone but the super-rich while adding to the risk that bad actor financial agencies will again crash the markets at some near or long term future date.

Building the Wall

Related to this likely damaging set of economic views is Trump’s continued pledge to deport millions of Hispanics while erecting a physical barrier between the U.S. and Mexico. Following through with the promise would turn the U.S. into a closed society for the first time in its history as a nation even as it risks the economic collapse of a country along our southern border. And just the expectation of fallout after Trump’s election today has already sent the Peso into free-fall.

Historically welcoming to immigrants, U.S. innovation and competitiveness has been driven by a constant influx of new people, new cultures, new ideas. Trump, like the rest of us, hails from immigrant roots. Following through with such a walling off of our neighbors and the creation of a ‘fortress America’ would steer away from a policy of openness to neighbors that has lasted for the better part of two Centuries. And while trade agreements with Mexico should certainly be managed to keep the needs of the American people (and not international corporations) firmly in mind, a wholesale shutting off of our relationship with that large and developing neighbor would ultimately be harmful to U.S. interests.

No Electoral Mandate

In the spirit of unity, I’ve done my best to strike a conciliatory tone. But this is difficult when there is so much at stake and when so many greedy corporate hands are now ready to manipulate majority republican congressmen, senators, and the President. To be very clear, Trump lost the popular vote to Hillary. So this country didn’t elect Trump. As with Bush in 2000, the electoral college did the deed. This means that more people in this country wanted Hillary’s presidency and policies than those who wanted Trump’s agenda. As a result, Trump can claim no solid electoral mandate.

Overall, despite a pause in the hostilities coming from Trump, severe underlying policy dangers present themselves from a Trump Presidency. An enabling majority in Congress amplifies the risk that these dangerous policies will emerge and that an electorate that has been at least somewhat disenfranchised by Gerrymandering, voter suppression on the part of republicans, and overall intimidation and abuse, will continue to generate harmful and worsening fractures in American society. As with everything else, a worsening climate crisis further threatens to exacerbate these problems even as it generates serious issues all on its own. And the ushering in of yet one more climate change denier into office only serves to create more of a disconnect with public desires for renewable energy access and climate change related action.

Overall, this is a tragic day for America and the world. One with ever-more threatening clouds on the horizon.

Links:

Donald Trump Could Jail Hillary Clinton

Exxon Concedes it May Need to Declare Lower Value for Oil in the Ground

Economic Fallout From a Trump Presidency

Trump Lost the Popular Vote

Trump Already Having a Damaging Effect on Mexico

Hat tip to Colorado Bob

Hat tip to Climate Hawk

(Note this is RS post #1000. One that will live in infamy.)

Leave a comment

288 Comments

  1. Following the UK vote and the US vote, Brexit and Trump were both unexpected wins for the right. Hopefully he will be a one term president, he is rather old. His anti science views are certainly an existential risk to the entire planet. He can not stop the rising seas, (already happening in Florida with every king tide) any more than King Canute could stop the tide from coming in one thousand years ago.
    After listening to some of his acceptance speech, obviously he will be the most “handled” president ever, no off the cuff remarks there.Who his handlers and advisers will be is the worry, so is Trump’s racism, xenophobia, misogyny, and climate denial.

    Reply
    • Dave Person

       /  November 10, 2016

      Hi Karin,
      Trump will not be easily “handled” to avoid outlandish and dangerous remarks and reactions, but he can be manipulated because of his thin skin and adolescent level of maturity. Putin will have him wrapped around his finger. My brother has friends in some major New York banks and they tell him how much they hate to do business with Trump. His negotiating style, used over and over again, is to subject his target to a Gish gallop of total BS that simply wears down the negotiator. They deal just to get out of the room and away from him. He demonstrated that strategy throughout the election but did you notice how easily Clinton manipulated Trump to lose his cool and all pretense to reason during the debates? His staff will manipulate him by making him angry at some one or some thing and then letting him go act on it. The problem for them and us is that they may get him riled for their purposes but they are unlikely to control how he responds.

      dave

      Reply
    • Morning After To-Do List:
      1. Take over the Democratic Party and return it to the people. They have failed us miserably.
      2. Fire all pundits, predictors, pollsters and anyone else in the media who had a narrative they wouldn’t let go of and refused to listen to or acknowledge what was really going on. Those same bloviators will now tell us we must “heal the divide” and “come together.” They will pull more hooey like that out of their ass in the days to come. Turn them off.
      3. Any Democratic member of Congress who didn’t wake up this morning ready to fight, resist and obstruct in the way Republicans did against President Obama every day for eight full years must step out of the way and let those of us who know the score lead the way in stopping the meanness and the madness that’s about to begin.
      4. Everyone must stop saying they are “stunned” and “shocked”. What you mean to say is that you were in a bubble and weren’t paying attention to your fellow Americans and their despair. YEARS of being neglected by both parties, the anger and the need for revenge against the system only grew. Along came a TV star they liked whose plan was to destroy both parties and tell them all “You’re fired!” Trump’s victory is no surprise. He was never a joke. Treating him as one only strengthened him. He is both a creature and a creation of the media and the media will never own that.
      5. You must say this sentence to everyone you meet today: “HILLARY CLINTON WON THE POPULAR VOTE!” The MAJORITY of our fellow Americans preferred Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump. Period. Fact. If you woke up this morning thinking you live in an effed-up country, you don’t. The majority of your fellow Americans wanted Hillary, not Trump. The only reason he’s president is because of an arcane, insane 18th-century idea called the Electoral College. Until we change that, we’ll continue to have presidents we didn’t elect and didn’t want. You live in a country where a majority of its citizens have said they believe there’s climate change, they believe women should be paid the same as men, they want a debt-free college education, they don’t want us invading countries, they want a raise in the minimum wage and they want a single-payer true universal health care system. None of that has changed. We live in a country where the majority agree with the “liberal” position. We just lack the liberal leadership to make that happen (see: #1 above).
      Let’s try to get this all done by noon today.
      — Michael Moore

      So this is what Michael Moore was saying earlier today. I wholeheartedly agree with this sentiment. We have to be willing to fight and obstruct for 4-8 years running. Trump’s agenda is not legitimate, it is not something that is compatable with a living planet. It is not compatable with a healthy America. We must refuse this. We should throw him in the harbor with the rest of the republicans and tea party members who have done so much harm over the past 8 years. Who sought to treat Obama like an outsider. And who, during this election resurrected the old demons of racism, mysogyny, and voter suppression to gain power. There is nothing less legitimate than this current republican win. We should not cooperate or seek unity. Our planet is dying and no one is listening. It is time to fight.

      https://www.facebook.com/mmflint/

      Reply
  2. climatehawk1

     /  November 9, 2016

    David Roberts at Vox on the election outcome and its climate implications:

    Trump’s election marks end of any serious hope of limiting #climate change to 2C http://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2016/11/9/13575684/trump-2-degrees #divest

    Reply
    • He’s right about that. Thanks for this.

      Reply
      • mikkel

         /  November 9, 2016

        I left the US when I became disillusioned with Obama’s failure to galvanize his mandate into true change because I knew that it would create a chain reaction in which a demagogue had a strong chance at being elected. While I believed it wouldn’t happen until 2020, I always had 2016 as the date in which I needed to make sure I had permanent residency elsewhere, just to be safe.

        Americans talk about leaving the country like it’s so easy, but the reality is that immigration is very difficult in most places. I anticipate a flood of Americans fleeing will cause immigration to quickly get cut off.

        If there is one thing I’ve learned since leaving, it’s that the most dangerous idea on the planet is that the US is the world’s leader. I cannot count the number of times that I have listened to clear eyed Europeans and Australasians use the US as an excuse for their inaction. This is true not only of the populace, but the leaders in those countries who clearly have the ability to implement reform. They surrender their responsibilities by projecting that whatever the US does is the only thing that matters.

        The above article is only “right” in the sense that it has the exact same attachment. The faster that American hegemony collapses, the more chance we have at a liveable world.

        The international community believes it has gone over a precipice, but that is only in their minds. If they wake up, they’ll see they can walk away and leave the US in its nightmare. That action alone will not only change the course of world history, but help America accept a new beginning.

        Reply
        • mark ó dochartaigh

           /  November 10, 2016

          Those of us in America who have benefited from living in the empire, by way of goods and services sourced from sweatshops and by slave labor,by way of a horrendous carbon footprint, by way of suppression of the democratic processes in dozens of countries have, I believe a responsibility to stay in the United States and try to repair the damage that we have done and from which we have benefited.

        • I agree. I’m staying here and fighting because I feel I can affect the greatest impact here if successful.

        • Steven Blaisdell

           /  November 10, 2016

          I think a Trump presidency and complete Republican control of the federal government will make it crystal clear to the international community exactly what actions must be taken. There is and will be no impediment to Republican implementation of their entire wish list of policy. Noone to blame, noone to hide behind. This is, as many including myself have been saying for some time now, our authoritarian moment; we have our Franco, or perhaps more accurately our Berlusconi and there is no curtain, none at all.

        • We had that with Bush as well. Better to not have it than to have it. But if you do have it, you might as well make the best of it going into opposition.

        • lesliegraham1

           /  November 10, 2016

          “immigration is very difficult”.
          Tell me about it. It always provokes a wry chuckle within me when I hear some Americans say they are going to ‘leave’ and ‘move to New Zealand’ or some such fantasy.
          I was lucky enough to see the writing on the wall nearly two decades ago and decided to leave the UK while the going was still good. It took me and my partner seven years – yes, seven years, to accumulate sufficient points via earning University degrees (both of us) and enough relevant employment in the right field in order to qualify for entry into New Zealand and another three years (now a minimum of five) to qualify for citzenship and an NZ passport.
          Even then we only just scraped in by half a point and it cost us thousands of pounds.
          I’ve got news for these fantasists. New Zealand doesn’t want you and you won’t get in. Not a hope chum – unless you are in a VERY sought after profession or you’re a multi-millionaire of course. But if you are then you have nothing to fear in the US anyway.
          Even worse news – climate change is having a big effect here too.

        • mulga mumblebrain

           /  November 10, 2016

          Mikkel, here in Australia, in the grip of a Trumpesque denialist, anti-renewables, pro-coal hard Right regime, backside-kissing sycophancy to the USA is ABSOLUTELY compulsory in politics and the MSM. Any hint of criticism of any US actions is denounced as ‘anti-Americanism’, and gets the Thought Criminal banned from public life. It used to make you a ‘Commo’, but today the lexicon is more vared-‘Left luvvie’, ‘do-gooder’, ‘politically correct’, etc. Oh-‘friend of Putin’ is growing in popularity recently. It is odd living in a society entirely run by ignorant, soulless, buffoons. Our climate destabilisation deniers, led by the Murdoch machine, are crowing their delight at Trump’s win already.

    • George W. Hayduke

       /  November 10, 2016

      I have friends that work within the Department of Environmental Quality and the emails coming out of Washington are terrifying. The DEQ and EPA will be gutted, they are already preparing to let people go. This has the potential to be devastating to our future. Michael Moore’s to do list is a good place to start, but we will all need to hold people’s feet to the fire for the next 4 years, no complacency, no apathy.

      Reply
      • What’s important to remember here is that it is so much easier to tear down than to build up. If they are able to get this anti-EPA stuff passed then it will take years for anyone acting as president to reform the EPA. There is a very real risk that we lose any environmental protection whatsoever whole-cloth. That’s what’s at stake.

        Reply
  3. Robert, perhaps you have already seen the new study out in Science Advances, but if not, this somber study is referenced here: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/climate-change-game-over-global-warming-climate-sensitivity-seven-degrees-a7407881.html

    Thank you, as always, for your work.

    Reply
    • coloradobob

       /  November 9, 2016

      Hell of a report, everyone look at this one folks.

      Reply
    • OK. Sometimes I love my Trump trolls. I just had this one guy who was claiming he voted for Trump because Putin was saying he’d turn the Northern Hemisphere into molten glass if Hillary was elected. So nuclear intimidation by a foreign power is a legit reason to vote for Trump? I almost wanted to let him post just so I could say he let Putin paint a big fat yellow stripe down his back.

      And another Trump troll is claiming that, somehow, Trump is better than Hillary on climate change. In what universe? I mean what other than pandering to fossil fuel interests have we seen from the guy thus far? I’d love to see Trump defect and go full out climate response. And I’d be the first to praise him if he actually did such a thing in a genuine manner (by promoting rapid growth renewables and efficiencies and not through some pie in the sky nonsense CCS scheme). But so far it’s the worst proposed policies on climate that I’ve ever seen. And as long as he acts that way, he’s going to get heat from me and his supporters had better learn to deal with it because this issue is too important to say ‘well, yeah, maybe he doesn’t mean everything he says and I’ll just wait and see…’ We don’t have time to wait and see.

      Reply
  4. Joe Romm’s take:

    Will Trump go down in history as the man who pulled the plug on a livable climate? https://thinkprogress.org/trump-victory-climate-a0c595572299#.ydui5r6vz

    Reply
  5. Spike

     /  November 9, 2016

    The Age of Stupid indeed. Let us hope the rest of the world instead ramps up action on climate, the declining cost profiles of new energy sources trumping political antipathy. He shall receive plenty of reality checks over coming years for sure. The response of the French president and German chancellor today indicate that Europe is prepared to argue for sanity and decency as it seems are the good folk stateside. All power to y’all.

    Reply
  6. mikkel

     /  November 9, 2016

    Regardless of what Trump wants to do, he can’t change much without Congress — other than rescind Obama’s executive orders, which is bad enough but not catastrophic.

    And even though Trump was elected, it certainly wasn’t for his “policies”

    Gay marriage has overwhelming support nationwide — 55 percent to 37 percent against.

    Legal abortion is favored by 56 percent, with 41 percent opposed.

    The vast majority of the population supports background checks for gun buyers — up to 90 percent in some polls.

    A majority of Americans support some kind of universal health care, 58 percent to 37 percent.

    64 percent of Americans are worried about global warming. Only 36 percent are not.

    And — get this — Americans overwhelmingly agree that immigration helps the country more than it hurts, by a 59 percent to 33 percent margin.

    We all know that iterative climate policies still spelled destruction. We all know neoliberalism is smothering the world. And we all know that Clinton was going to do little to change those trends.

    The only question is whether the forces for life across the world finally wake up, band together and replace the system with one described in Robert’s Growth Shock. Anything less than that was always suicidal. At least we now have the opportunity to convince millions of people that would have been on the fence otherwise.

    Reply
    • Trump as a protest vote is about as effective as shooting the climate in the head and calling it a solution.

      Reply
    • Trump and the Republican congress will not be timid about passing their political legislation in the first 100 days.

      Reply
      • Which is why we need to push hard to obstruct it.

        Reply
        • what are you proposing? If the republican congress passes a bill and sends it to President Trump to sign, what do you think we can do about that? We can and no doubt will express our dismay, but then what?

          I have proposed that we blockade shipment of fracking proppants through ports in the NW for the past decade and I have gotten no takers. I broke down on the rails once when a train was leaving the port with fracking proppants. The port and train workers helped me push the broken door car off the tracks. That was the end of that. Those proppants can from China, moved through the NW and headed off to be used in the Bakken. The Bakken oil reserves could only be accessed through very destructive practice and we should not allowed that to happen, but with a dem congress and president, we got an all of the above energy policy. All of the above means, sure, let’s frack the Bakken shale formation. The political leaders who were committed to not allowing this kind of energy policy got nowhere with either major party, but we should all look the other way and vote for the dems because at least they don’t deny that climate change is happening, they just won’t challenge the moneyed interests who benefit from our current economic model and who are the primary funders of the elections.

        • Go for it.

          Look, the republicans had a minority for 2 years of Obama’s presidency and they ran out the clock on a load of the legislation that Obama wanted signed. We can absolutely do the same thing.

        • wait and see. What I am telling you is that the Republicans will be ruthless about moving their legislation. Obama frittered his two years of unified government playing nice with the republican minority, entertaining “grand bargains” that would change the toxic partisan paralysis of our government. It did not work. Obama was played like a sucker. Single payer was off the table. Obama’s fight to retain a public option in the Romney Care fiasco was completely ineffective. Obama sat on his hands since Scalia died and let a critical supreme court nomination be held hostage. He had a bully pulpit, he should have been talking about this nomination and his other jammed court nominees every day. Did not happen. I am tellling you that he republican congress and Pres Trump will not bother with working for the appearance of bipartisan action, they will just act.

          When Obama took office, he was asked about the hundred days goals and he said he did not want to engage in this kind of legislative practice.

          By all means, try to obstruct the Rs and Trump. I would love to see that work. I do not believe it can or will with these people. I support your effort. I wish you great success. We can revisit how that works in the first six months of the Trump presidency.

        • Screw them. Of course they’ll try. They’ve acted like bastards this whole time so what could we expect otherwise.

    • csnavywx

       /  November 11, 2016

      Being worried about global warming certainly doesn’t translate into wanting to do something about it. I mean, just look at the Washington ballot initiative for an emissions tax. It failed and I guarantee a higher proportion of that state worries about AGW than the national average.

      Reply
      • I think you are right about WA State and general concern about global warming, but I am not absolutely sure about that. I worked on the carbon tax initiative off and on over the past few years and it was a bitter thing to see it fail. It did not fail close, I think it was in the low 40s. I have been drinking pretty much nonstop since the resulte starting coming in and feeling a little woozy today, so need to stop and get a little sleep. FWIW, alcohol does not appear to be the complete solution to the problems posed by this election. It helps, but when it wears off, the problems return.

        Reply
      • News of that ballot that filtered far enough to get here (I´m from another country, afterall) mostly emphatized the clash between different ecologist groups, some in favor and some against this tax. I can´t imagine that proposing a new tax is an easy task anywhere. If those who should be in favor of said tax are fighting among themselves, how could it be voted for, even if the general populace is worried about AGW?

        Reply
        • Umbrios – you are correct about the infighting within the green community. It is not clear if the green folks who opposed the imperfect carbon tax initiative are operating in good faith or if they are being funded to delay and dilute climate action that would hurt the energy industry. I was emailing with some of those folks yesterday to ask when their perfect carbon tax initiative would be ready, the immediate response was maybe 2018. I really wanted this initiative to pass. It would have funded the working family income program that the legislature passed many years ago, but has never been funded. So this imperfect carbon tax would have helped with income inequality. There was also a reduction in taxes to the business community in the imperfect initiative. The authors of the initiative were trying to tax carbon and spread the benefits in ways that right and left could support. It did not work, but it was worth a try. This initiative group had the carbon tax ready to go a few election cycles ago, but pulled it at the last minute to fix things and improve chances of passage. The perfect carbon initiative for WA State is supposed to use the proceeds for green energy and/or dividends, etc. The benefits of perfect or imperfect are just a hard work bog and mirage if we can’t/won’t get them on the ballot and finally pass one. State legislatrue will not do this work for the usual reasons, initiatives are the best bet. This one bit the dust.

        • I agree, Mike. It was sad to see this initiative fail. It was imperfect. But an imperfect carbon tax was better than no carbon tax.

        • mulga mumblebrain

           /  November 12, 2016

          mike, we had a similar experience under Rudd, the Labor (the lesser Rightwing party) PM in 2008 or 2009. He tried to introduce carbon trading, an imperfect mechanism designed to appease the Free Market fundamentalist cargo cultists. The Greens refused to go along in our Senate, and the Liberals (the further Right party), whose then leader, Turnbull, is now PM, joined in the fiasco, and the whole thing failed. Consequently Rudd was deposed as PM, for this and other reasons, succeeded by Gillard, our Hillary Clinton, and Turnbull was overthrown, by one vote, by Abbott, who campaigned vociferously against the carbon tax( that Gillard introduced in 2011 under pressure from the Greens whose votes she required), aided and abetted by the Murdoch machine and most of the rest of the entirely Rightwing ‘Free Press’.
          Abbott then presided over a vicious, hard Right regime, whose greatest ‘success’ was repealing the carbon tax, but who was such a gargantuan liar and ideological thug that he was overthrown, by Turnbull, who had to pledge, to the Liberal’s dominant hard Right faction, that he would keep all Abbott’s ‘climate change is crap’, and ‘coal is good for humanity’ policies. Turnbull went to an election in July this year, on a union-bashing platform, and got back by one seat, so is mortally wounded, has moved even further Right, but will probably be replaced, possibly by a resurgent Abbott.
          So our system has produced tragedy then farce, then further calamity followed by yet lower farce, followed by mass lunacy ad nauseam for ten bitter years as the climate destabilised, the Great Barrier Reef and the kelp forests died and as mega-fires raged across the land. And further depths beckon. I think if you study our experience since 2007, of lack of principle, political and moral cowardice, opportunism, mass imbecility and rule by moronic zealots, you may see the USA’s future under Trump.
          Meanwhile, in China, where the leaders can read and understand science, they just get on with the job. The hopeless and often puerile adversarialism of ‘democratic capitalist’ politics, exacerbated by the low character and intellect of the ruling elites, is so very plainly a dead end that it is almost, but not quite, funny, that the inmates of the asylum so heatedly insist they are the envy of the world, and that every other society MUST imitate them.

    • mulga mumblebrain

       /  November 11, 2016

      Mikkel, if you read the Gilens and Page study you will see that what the US populace desires has NO impact on the Congress critters, who, instead, attend to the desires of the rich owners of society, almost entirely ie c. 97% of the time. Democrat and Republican.

      Reply
  7. webej

     /  November 9, 2016

    I sincerely hope that there will be structural reforms to the political and voting system. I thought that would happen in 2000 in the wake of the Bush/Gore travesty, but I was wrong. The system with the winner take all electoral college electors, the party duopoly, the role of big money (and the hodge podge system of voter registration, etc) are all crying for a major reform. After 240 years it’s high time — no systems are so sacrosanct that they never need an update. The system as it is is no longer serving the ideals for which it was instituted in the first place.

    Reply
  8. Suzanne

     /  November 9, 2016

    Thank you for the great but at the same time devastating succinct analysis. I feel like I am living in some kind of Twilight Zone episode as I naively believed “decency would prevail”…and that there was no way that Americans could elect such an unqualified, unfit and unstable man to the most powerful position in the world. I take some comfort that he lost the popular vote, however, when I look at the post election stats and see how many high income people helped him win…it comes down…again…to GREED. This wasn’t just about the angry blue collar worker…this was about angry racist whites reaction to an Black man in the White House….and again….GREED.

    I see this in my own affluent South Florida town Jupiter…where you see a lot more expensive cars and boats than you see minorities or the poor. And trust me….many of these affluent..college educated individuals are not going to give up one more dime on taxes if they can avoid it…because you know…you can never have too many “things”….So screw the climate. (can’t do anything about the weather) ..screw the poor (they are just lazy)…and
    “eat drink and be merry” for we are White, Privileged and Entitled to everything we have because…you know we DESERVE IT.

    Sorry…still in shock and not feeling particularly charitable today…

    Reply
    • I absolutely agree with you here. And I appreciate your passion. For me, when I get upset, I kind of settle into a cold rationality. That’s my coping mechanism. But it helps me to vent vicariously and to feel what you guys are feeling by reading these posts. I assure you, I am very upset in the most profound of ways.

      Reply
    • mulga mumblebrain

       /  November 11, 2016

      Suzanne, this is simply how capitalism works. It makes greed the highest virtue. It defies science by demanding infinite growth, forever, on a finite planet, becoming cancerous in all its manifestations. It sanctifies axioms so ludicrous eg ‘the Invisible Hand’, Market infallibility, the omnipotence of ‘price signals’, pollution a mere ‘externality’ to simply be ignored etc, as to be ludicrous to a clever twelve year old. It demands a greater return on capital than economic growth, year after year, thereby consolidating the ever increasing wealth and power of the owners of capital, in contrast to the ever diminishing wealth and power of those who merely sell their labor and expertise in a ‘market’ rigged in every way against their interests.
      Moreover, because capitalism is simply psychopathy in action, it empowers and preferences those without human empathy and compassion. If there is some pristine forest or other biosphere that one or more capitalist refuses to destroy, for whatever reason, there will ALWAYS be another, or more, for whom the profit to be gouged from its destruction will be too tempting, and away it will go, to be replaced by a row of figures on a bank account in the Cayman Islands. And, of course, as poor old Trump of Doom so pitifully illustrates, your bona fide capitalist is nearly always afflicted by gargantuan, and often comic, egomania.

      Reply
  9. Greg

     /  November 9, 2016

    Robert,

    Thank you for this. I don’t know how you wrote today and kept your cool. On the way to work there was a pick-up truck on the highway overpass with someone waving a flag and a holding a giant Trump-pence sign for all of us bleary-eyed to see over us. That did it for me and my stomach has been in knots since. Many of my co-workers are immigrants, and
    minorities. One told me ” Trump just grabbed us all by the p___y. Time to protest and pressure harder than we did against war, and nukes, and for the equal rights movement, etc. Time to buckle up

    Reply
    • I think the protest movement is going to have to be more powerful and pervasive than the anti-nuke/anti war movement combined. And it will have to be global. Trump has put us in a corner. We basically have no other way out.

      As for keeping a level head… Hey, I’m used to taking fire and being in the *hit. It kinda happens every day here. The bad news part was rough. But I was anxious reading the tea leaves on this election all along. I think a lot of us were. And Trump’s statement about the election being rigged really is insidious in retrospect. Classic deflection (deny, deny, counteraccuse) for republican Gerrrymandering and voter suppression.

      Reply
      • coloradobob

         /  November 10, 2016

        Lie, deny, rinse repeat
        Lie, deny, rinse repeat
        Lie, deny, rinse repeat

        Reply
      • wili

         /  November 10, 2016

        Good points. The ‘rigging’ was in voter suppression through various means but especially extra long lines in minority areas–up to an hour longer than in white areas, according to one report. And then there is the idiocy of the electoral college that can award the presidency to someone who failed to win the popular vote. That is mostly, as I understand, because electors in states like North Dakota represent a fraction of the number of voters per elector as do those in states like California. (And of course two senators per state, no matter what the population, favors conservative rural populations enormously, too.)

        Reply
        • we have known about the issues with our electoral system since 2000 with Bush winning at Supreme Court and Gore wining elsewhere. We have a very weak democracy. The solution to the electoral college mess in in the National Popular Vote. WA passed this legislation in 2009. Red states are not interested in a level playing field. Why would they be interested in giving up the advantage they have with the electoral college issue?
          http://www.nationalpopularvote.com/

  10. Cate

     /  November 9, 2016

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/09/rise-of-the-davos-class-sealed-americas-fate

    Naomi Klein explains why Trump won and explains how we must now turn our energies to building a “bold, transformative” coalition to further the people’s agenda.

    Can it be done? Yes, of course.

    Will it? God, I hope so. “Something that is right is worth fighting for…..”

    “People have a right to be angry, and a powerful, intersectional left agenda can direct that anger where it belongs, while fighting for holistic solutions that will bring a frayed society together.”

    PS “Davos class” : Perfect or what.

    Reply
    • Well, if Trump’s done anything, he’s certainly energized us. Too bad it took this terrible defeat to happen.

      Reply
    • mulga mumblebrain

       /  November 11, 2016

      Cate, this is the fight for Life on Earth. The hard Right leadership are the emissaries of Universal Death. They are NOT just sadly mistaken, ignorant, buffoons. They are something deeply malevolent, that has afflicted humanity since we came down from the trees. The lumpen fools who voted for these ‘cannibals’ (ie ‘Wetiko’ as Native Americans called the Europeans in the thrall of malignant greed)we must attempt to make see sense, somehow, because they are not irretrievably lost, but the top dogs, in politics, the MSM and ‘business’ are our mortal foes.

      Reply
  11. Cate

     /  November 9, 2016

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/climate-change-game-over-global-warming-climate-sensitivity-seven-degrees-a7407881.html

    New paper out:
    “Climate change may be escalating so fast it could be ‘game over’, scientists warn.New research suggests the Earth’s climate could be more sensitive to greenhouse gases than thought, raising the spectre of an ‘apocalyptic side of bad’ temperature rise of more than 7C within a lifetime.
    Dr Andrey Ganopolski, who was involved in the research and on the IPCC’s latest report, admitted their work was controversial with some scientists disagreeing and others agreeing with their findings.”

    In this article, Michael Mann and Greenpeace weigh in on the paper’s findings.

    Reply
      • So the paper is projecting a range of 4-7 C by 2100 under BAU end 900 ppm CO2 atmospheric. This is well within current climate sensitivity estimates but on the high side for IPCC. In my opinion 900 ppm gets us to approx 6 C which is in that target range. It’s a good paper.

        As for 2 C. Yeah. Unless we see something magically significant or are able to put together a protest movement that rapidly shuts down fossil fuel infrastructure, then Trump, if he sticks to his current stated policies, is going to push the world to blow through 2 C in very short order. And, yes, it is his fault because he’s basically the most powerful person in the world in a couple of months and if he supports fossil fuels he’s basically screwing everyone and everything on the planet. I don’t know how you can say it any clearer. But there’s no gray area here.

        Reply
    • OK. Will take a look. 7 C is high. But, yeah, if real could completely bust possible response timeframes.

      Reply
  12. Cate

     /  November 9, 2016

    His first 100 days: that Gettysburg address, for the record.

    http://www.npr.org/2016/11/09/501451368/here-is-what-donald-trump-wants-to-do-in-his-first-100-days

    “……* FIFTH, I will lift the restrictions on the production of $50 trillion dollars’ worth of job-producing American energy reserves, including shale, oil, natural gas and clean coal.

    * SIXTH, lift the Obama-Clinton roadblocks and allow vital energy infrastructure projects, like the Keystone Pipeline, to move forward

    * SEVENTH, cancel billions in payments to U.N. climate change programs and use the money to fix America’s water and environmental infrastructure…

    3.American Energy & Infrastructure Act. Leverages public-private partnerships, and private investments through tax incentives, to spur $1 trillion in infrastructure investment over 10 years. It is revenue neutral….”

    Not much else in there on climate change action though, so not very high priority….which might make for some wiggle room, over time…..You never know. Worms do turn. This one seems to blow with the wind.

    Reply
    • wili

       /  November 10, 2016

      I think you have it backwards. These are the real main priorities–the ‘medicine’–the rest is just the populist sugar to help it go down/distract people from the real goals and his ilk have been planning for.

      Reply
    • coloradobob

       /  November 10, 2016

      Well there’s the meat of the matter, Cate as always zeroed in on it. That speech was widely reported for his comments on suing the women who had just come forward. Not how he planned to give the sheep herd to the wolves.

      Reply
  13. Matt

     /  November 10, 2016

    Just finished catching up here in OZ, and I must admit to waking up feeling great until I remembered what had just happened to the world!
    Sorry this might not go down well but…I must say I am bewildered at some of the comments in the previous thread blaming the 3rd party vote! What are you on about? some points
    1. You do not know that these votes were potential Democratic votes (could assume Stein’s were, but their must have been a huge proportion of republicans who could not bring themselves to vote Trump)
    2. The best way to scare the establishment is to introduce a third (or more) party.
    3. The fact that the US couldn’t get the Green party to 15% of the popular vote given the climate change induced disasters happening all the time there now is appalling.
    4. Your Democrat party is not doing enough to help out with the problems of climate change either. Just stating that they are better than the other lot is not good enough.

    This is very similar to what is going on here right now, Far right Nut jobs running the country (even though they are a minority), with the left split between our Labor (yes they do spell it like that :)) and Green parties. Labor pretends to be concerned by climate change, but do nothing to stop support for the fossil fuel industry (Adani coal mine is a case in point), and continue the green wash of society who actually think that they are acting on the issue.

    Reply
    • Sorry, this is not the case in the US. Here 3rd party candidates only serve as a spoiler. Stein’s approx 1.5 percent would have tipped multiple swing states into the margin of error for example. This is different in a parliamentary system where votes determine representative share. In the US it’s winner take all.

      As for Johnson, I am more than happy for a libertarian to syphon off Trump votes…

      In the end, it’s not clear if Clinton would have won without Stein. But her chances would have been higher. In 2000, it’s very clear that Gore would have won Florida without Nadar. In addition, spoiler candidates in the US serve to as a wedge between traditional party supporters. In my opinion, the parliamentary system is more inclusive. Our system is a bit of a relic.

      Reply
      • wili

         /  November 10, 2016

        I did not vote third party, nor encourage anyone else to. But I think it is both tactically an error to blame Stein supporters for Clinton’s loss, and also not quite technically always true that “3rd party candidates only serve as a spoiler.”

        The Dems, if they are going to survive, are going to need a strong coalition that includes as many people who have environmental consciences as possible. Dumping ridicule on them for voting their consciences is just not a wise or winning strategy in my opinion. Any more than it would be to rail against Blacks for not coming out in as large numbers as they did in previous elections, or against Latinos, women, gays or any other group that Dems think ‘should’ have come out in even bigger numbers than they did.

        The second point applies in a narrower range. If you were in MA or CA or another solid state Clinton (or a solidly red one, for that matter), one could argue that NOT placing a vote for the Green Party would be wasting your vote, especially where, if they get 5%, the party gets official status (assuming that is what you want in your state). The problem is that the polling is so monumentally bad, as we have seen, it is becoming difficult to figure out which states are secure and which aren’t.

        The main thing now is to organize, organize, organize, after we’ve had a proper bout of depression and despair, of course! ‘-)

        Reply
        • wili

           /  November 10, 2016

          Of course, we also don’t know how many people just wouldn’t have voted at all, if they didn’t vote Stein. That’s my impression of many of her supporters that I know. You can chastise them for that as well, of course. But, as I noted, it’s not likely to win them into your camp. Turning the Dems back into a real pro-Union and pro-Working People party that is also deep green would be the surest way of wiping out Green Party candidates and winning back what used to be the backbone of the party.

        • Yep. It’s organise from here on out.

        • Matt

           /  November 10, 2016

          So true Wili, As a full member of our green party in Oz, I would be more than happy for my party to not even exist if our Labor party was to get real on environmental issues. My party exists because of the major parties philosophy that the environment is there to be plundered for human greed forever.
          Lucky for us, that our minority voices get representation and have the ability to grow from this.

      • Matt

         /  November 10, 2016

        Possible, but this is the dilemma when the party that is “supposedly” taking the reins of environmental stewardship, is only paying lip service. the Democrat Party needs to send a clear bold message, show some courage and make clear its party policy. If it were to have as their policy…
        Carbon Tax
        No new FF mines or exploration
        No supportive pipelines for tar sands
        Full support and incentives for renewables
        and the list goes on, then there would not be a need for a Stein to even run and those votes go directly to them. Stein didn’t act as the spoiler, she was the result of policy void within the Democrat party. The people who voted for her want hard decisions to be made.

        Reply
        • Sorry Matt. The Dems don’t just pay lip service. They’ve been pushing environmental stewardship laws for years now and these have mostly been obstructed by republicans. And to be very clear there is also a progressive/green caucus within the democratic party that champions these views.

        • Matt

           /  November 10, 2016

          True, and I agree that they are a vast improvement on the Republican party…
          but you are seriously not telling me that Obama’s emission targets in Paris are high enough, his dilly dallying over the tar sands pipelines, just to name a couple are even remotely good enough? Where has been leadership, for example over oil exploration in the Arctic?

        • Emissions standards are through the roof. Rapidly escalating CAFE. LEDs. The Clean Power Plan. The Sunshot initiative. Yes, COP 21. Numerous emissions deals with China. And, yes, even a green would still have built pipelines in current day US (see various greens around the world). I could go on and on.

          Governing is not going to generate the most ideal options. It’s the trend lines that matter most. And, yes, we are absolutely right to criticise Obama and prod him not to build the Keystone XL and others — because that is our job!

          Look, if you’ve got a green running the primary for a winnable slot, then I would absolutely vote for them. But it is counter-productive to vote for a candidate that doesn’t have a chance in hell of winning. That’s pretty simple and I don’t understand why people keep wanting to quibble over it. If you’re looking at it from a purely idealistic perspective then that’s one thing. But if you actually want to get things done by holding real political power then you don’t want to split your votes up. Pretty simple math.

          I’m going to end this discussion here. I think everyone has said what has needed to be said and we’re getting into a bit of circular arguments here. Sure, if you’re a member of the green party in Australia, that’s great. And I’d love to see more greens in winnable races here. But in the presidential it hurts us unless the candidate is able to command a majority vote.

        • wili

           /  November 10, 2016

          Smart major parties don’t chastise third parties. If third party is that much of a threat, they out maneuver them by taking in parts of their platform as their own. In my state, our Democratic Party is actually called Democratic Farmer Labor Party (more usually just DFL), because it resulted in an agreed union of the Democrats with a Labor Party and a Farmer’s Party. Nationally, dems have to do the same thing again with labor and greens. I’m hoping that, after the electoral defeat, they will listen even more to the populists in their midst, Sanders and Warren, and craft a platform that is even more appealing to both.

          The most damaging thing would be for the Dems to lay all the blame on anyone who is to the left of them (that they for some reason think they properly ‘own’). Avoiding circular firing squads is the first lesson in building a successful movement.

        • So that’s what Hillary did, in part, with Bernie. And, yes, I agree. That’s smart.

        • mulga mumblebrain

           /  November 11, 2016

          Matt, fossil fuels represent tens of trillions in ‘assets’. They are the greatest repository of the Right’s true God, money, on Earth. That ‘value’ under-pins the entire capitalist Moloch, and the capitalists will destroy humanity, happily, rather than surrender that wealth and power. From the ubiquity of assertions one sees that it is the poor and over-population that is causing the disaster, I suspect that the Right intend to make the global poor pay for the ecological collapse, while continuing their reedy excessive consumption as long as possible.

      • really way past time to let that nader story go. 300,000 registered dems in Fl voted for Bush in 2000 election. Why not demonize those folks instead of Nader? Anybody complaining about Perot siphoning votes from Bush and helping Bill Clinton get elected? You want to win elections? do what it takes to capture enough votes in all the right places so that your candidate takes office. Push a bad candidate and blame others is not the way we make progress. You want folks to understand the issue of climate change? Make sure that Jill Stein is in the debates. Play it safe and skew the primaries so an insider has the best chance of being the nominee? Sometimes that will come back and bite you in the butt.

        Reply
        • Just hard to let that Nader stuff go when folks continue to refuse to learn from it, and the same lesson has to be taught over and over again. If you live in a swing state and did not vote for Hillary, Trump’s election is on you and everyone else who failed to vote for the one candidate with a chance to defeat him. No alibis, no excuses.

  14. coloradobob

     /  November 10, 2016

    The 1,000th post here. What a lick. What a site this is. I can’t express how great is to see all these global players here. These first person accounts. mean so much in knitting together a picture of our world. This move to morons around the world is truly depressing. But history teaches that after we kill off enough people , we come back to our senses.

    This why I posted the “Battle of Britain” clip the our day. The world was in a much darker place in September 1940. And music in this clip is so up lifting.

    it really happened like this

    Reply
    • coloradobob

       /  November 10, 2016

      And these guys were after them as well , things my seem dark , but not as dark as this.

      Reply
      • coloradobob

         /  November 10, 2016

        We have no idea what dark is .

        Reply
        • coloradobob

           /  November 10, 2016

          The highest mortality rate in the Second World War were the German submariners. They died because we turned the tide. This why our nuclear submarines prowl the oceans today.

          I am full of history to night. Trust me, we are deep shit, but things can change on a dime.

    • Spike

       /  November 10, 2016

      Music by William Walton. It’s a great film score, and you’d enjoy his 2 symphonies I think, and his viola concerto. Music reaches me in the depths of despair and pulls me up to breath.

      Reply
      • mulga mumblebrain

         /  November 11, 2016

        Don’t forget his garden La Mortella, on Ischia in Italy. His wife, and numerous gardeners of course, created it over many years from 1950, and it is a treat.

        Reply
  15. Matt

     /  November 10, 2016

    So Bloody mad at the moment!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    The greed of us as a race is deplorable.

    We all blame the white middle aged population who don’t want to give up anything that cheap FF’s have given them… true and I agree.

    But I blame more than that…..

    We used to vote in a government to make hard decisions, ones that force us to adjust our way of life for the betterment of society as a whole…. when did we loose this mindset?

    We constantly shake our heads at populist decisions and greed of people unwilling to adapt if they were to loose their jobs during transition, and yet we have this magnificent group of scientists who have been doing the very same thing.

    Where have their morals been? But for a few who have had the intestinal fortitude to speak out and say it how it is, to risk the ridicule and inform the people, instead of pandering to Government to ensure they keep their funding up.

    I salute Michael Mann, James Hansen, Jason Box, Kevin Anderson and the others who risk funding, ridicule, and prosecution to warn the people how it is (and of course there are others), but unfortunately there are so many more who sit on the fence. They sit on the fence in the full knowledge that they are leaving a very dangerous and harsh life ahead for their children and grand children.

    Where were they at Paris to say “this agreement is BS and will not achieve the stated outcomes”? How have they allowed the general populace to not understand that the targets in Paris are set based on an assumption that we can get massive net reductions in emissions, when the technology doesn’t even exist?

    There is one thing you can say about coal miners, they have the guts to strike when they are down and out fighting for a cause. Look at them during your current campaign and the impact they had. Where have the scientists been? Seriously, what do they class as a major issue? the fate of humanity perhaps? they have the collective power to bring any government to its knees and never use it.
    The same happened here in OZ when the Libs cut the climate division of the CSIRO… their response was to basically cower off into the night, barely a whimper.

    Reply
    • Cate

       /  November 10, 2016

      Matt, are you blaming scientists themselves for the lack of accurate public messaging about the climate crisis?

      I can only dream of a world in which scientists had the level of “collective power” you ascribe to them. It seems to me that this world’s scientists—in increasing numbers—have been jumping up and down for decades about this.

      Scientists cannot force or “allow” people to understand. Understanding begins with listening. Perhaps the general population is not understanding the urgency of the climate crisis because they simply aren’t listening. They don’t want to hear.

      And if scientists have to “pander” to governments to ensure funding, that is not their fault. That is a serious flaw in the system that cannot be fixed simply by their falling like martyrs on their swords.

      Reply
      • My favorite one-liner about this is, “I can explain it to you, but I can’t understand it for you.” Much truth in a few words.

        This is why the problem of false balance in media is so important, and why the Kochs have done such a great job in creating phony think tanks (“crank tanks”) populated with folks like Myron Ebell who, IMHO, just lie for pay, all day long, and provide the science-free views the media needs. At their very best, the scientists can only provide half of the story until the media grow up and assume some responsibility for providing factual coverage. (And if you think this problem sounds like the problem with the media during the political campaign just concluded, you’re exactly right.)

        The time for fact checking is before the bogus info is propagated, not after. After is a day late and a dollar short.

        Reply
  16. Suzanne

     /  November 10, 2016

    In my crucial swing state Florida third party votes did play a role. Had all the Stein votes gone to Clinton, as they would be left leaning voters…and a fair share of the Johnson vote..which this cycle did take from the Democrat side (I know of at least two progressives in my small Universe who did vote Johnson)….It may very well have been a game changer.
    And it was done to us….(Florida and the Nation)… in Gore v.s Bush 2000. So not buying your explanation.

    I have lived this now two times..and both times with catastrophic results. And really, really not feeling friendly towards third party spoilers today….nor their apologists. Sorry. And BTW…for good or for bad… our form of government is set up as a binary political system. So until that changes…third parties and their “sweeping” in every four years trying to win the impossible….is annoying at best…and downright destructive at worst.

    Reply
    • Have to agree with you here. You have to be really practical when dealing with essential issues like these. We’ve just basically lost a good chunk of Obama’s legacy plus all the progress Clinton would have added to that and including all the extra considerable damage that’s likely to be inflicted by Trump. It’s not about recriminations so much as it is about lessons learned. Some of us have learned from experience and have suffered bitterly through difficult years because of it. Those scars are tough to remove.

      Reply
    • How does that work in practice – do we have to choose between a D and R every time?

      Reply
      • I’d definitely vote for any green that has a strong chance of winning. And you can absolutely work to put greens on local, state and even into congressional seats. It’s just the presidential races that tend to smart the most for me. Climate Hawk has some good anecdotes for experiences with spoilers at the legislative level, though.

        Reply
      • coloradobob

         /  November 10, 2016

        Yes for 240 years A or B.

        Reply
        • wili

           /  November 10, 2016

          Well, not quite that long. There was a third party candidate who ended up getting…lucky as a candidate from a recent upstart third party–Abe. I think our current need is at least as intense as the deep moral imperative to end slavery (which Abe wasn’t even espousing at first).

        • wili

           /  November 10, 2016

          I was actually quite impressed that no significant number of Sanders supporters seem to have gone over to the Greens. Steins numbers stayed pretty much stuck at about 1 – 2% throughout, and that was what she had before the primaries were over. So it’s not clear that any Democrats went over to the greens in any large numbers.

          And, just sayin’–it is no more logical to expect devoted members of the Green Party to support a candidate in a party they oppose, the Dems, than it would be to expect large numbers of Republicans to support a Democratic candidate. Of course, it’s lovely if it happens. But the fact that Dems get deeply bitter about one and not the other suggests that Dems fundamentally don’t respect Green Party members. But maybe I’m missing something.

        • Greens and dems have good relations, however. There’s a bit of a spoiler/wedge issue if you’re saying that there’s a big split between dems and greens on issues. That’s really not the case. It’s more just shades of green.

      • Ok, I hear you, and I think I understand. Spoilers do exist, no doubt. Not to argue, but I’m not sure I’m convinced about 3rd parties being responsible for HRC’s loss, though. For example:

        There was also voter suppression, rigged congressional redistricting and other nasty tricks. Plus HRC was not a perfect candidate – certainly a different universe from Trump, but she lost many Sanders supporters outright. In any case, and whatever the cause, some D’s didn’t vote this time, as the above chart shows. I think that could explain the loss too.

        Reply
  17. wili

     /  November 10, 2016

    I do wonder what happens when Trump inevitably fails to bring any kind of help or ‘great’ness back to the lives of the vast numbers of un-colleged white men who really put him over the edge. Will they stop voting altogether? Will they switch to a newly radicalized Democratic party? Will they split of into an (even more) openly racist party? Will they start a violent revolt?

    Automation seems to be coming to the trucking and other automotive industries, which will un-employ probably millions more of the (relatively) ‘unskilled.’ And the recession that Trump will inevitably send us into will devastate yet more lives. How will they react to these new insults and crises?

    Reply
    • coloradobob

       /  November 10, 2016

      wili
      You touch the heart of the matter of Pandora’s tech no Box. How a hand full of people can kill millions of jobs.

      Reply
    • The protest feeling of Euphoria is going to wear off pretty quick I think.

      Reply
      • coloradobob

         /  November 10, 2016

        They just drove a beer truck from the Bud factory in Ft, Collins to Colorado Springs. With out a diver.

        What does is mean ?

        Reply
        • wili

           /  November 10, 2016

          “What does is mean ?”

          Beer will find it’s way to market no matter what?? ‘-)

          I still think that there are going to be some kinks to work out, and the first really bad ‘accident’ will raise some eyebrows, at least. But Business sees a gold mine here, so it will almost certainly go forward.

          “The protest feeling of Euphoria is going to wear off pretty quick” Indeed. Indeed.

    • Dave Person

       /  November 10, 2016

      Hi Wili,
      For a time, I believe Trump will try to divert their attention toward scapegoats such as non-white people, immigrants, and liberal elites much as Hitler and Mussolini did with selected minorities. Scientists and particularly environmental and climate scientists are going to take a beating not just in funding support but as targets of ridicule and abuse and as members of a hated liberal intellectual elite. Trumps minions will hang their Cassandras from their Trojan walls. In their minds, the failure of “expert” polls and pundits to predict the election is just more ammunition for them to dismiss experts, professionals, and intellectuals. Say goodbye to evidence, data, and legitimate inference in the process of policy making.

      dave

      Reply
      • June

         /  November 10, 2016

        I absolutely agree with you, Dave. Scapegoating is a tool Trump will wield freely. And in this new fact-free society, he can make up whatever scenario that fills the bill for him, and his followers will oblige.

        Reply
      • Cate

         /  November 10, 2016

        Dave and June, agreed. And this is the prospect that scares the bejesus out of me—-that science will be gutted to the point of becoming useless, creating huge gaps in knowledge that will be quickly filled with made-up denialist climate data and accompanying narratives. Ignorance will prevail and the truth about what is happening to the planet will be obscured and replaced with lies.

        Any attempt by this administration to suppress science must be met with massive resistance and rejection

        Reply
    • Spike

       /  November 10, 2016

      I somehow doubt a citizens’ income will be on the menu.

      Reply
    • mulga mumblebrain

       /  November 11, 2016

      Yes, Trump’s inevitable failure will be quite a test of US society. He has NO intention of doing much of the crazy stuff he used to get elected, although, insanely, he does seem as anti-science and anti-rationality in regard to the environmental collapse as he made out. That is catastrophic. But when the economy implodes, when poverty, inequality and elite wealth continue to grow, and when weather and climate disasters pile up, the capitalist elite WILL move to protect their wealth and power, and fascism, in one form or another, is their perennial preference. In the past that meant a descent into madness, but one could live through it, even through the wars that fascism always causes, and hope for a better future, but this time only Universal Death beckons in the future if we do not end the parasite, cancer, system of Free Market capitalism, once and for all. As Thatcher said, ‘There Is No Alternative’.

      Reply
  18. coloradobob

     /  November 10, 2016

    Humans have always loved the “strong man”. This how we. conquered we the Earth. One day a young man stood up and said, “I am leaving” , a part of the tribe followed him.
    This is very very old meme.

    Shortly after that, lions ate the whole group. But we never stopped spewing out this idea. Some made it to today.

    A strong man and bumper sticker.
    This is very very old meme

    Reply
  19. Protests are erupting in the streets all over the country, in NYC, Texas, and CA, and it’s only Day 1:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/protests-donald-trump-election_us_58238e95e4b0d9ce6fc09d18

    We need to use this crisis as an opportunity to affect actual change. There is hope.

    Reply
  20. Griffin

     /  November 10, 2016

    This guy ain’t no badass. He cannot hold back the tide of the people that are waking up to the effects of climate change all around us. This blog is real power. Reaching out to thousands and thousands that are learning every day. Trump is powerless against a revolution of change that will rise from Americans at the local and state levels to demand action on emissions. Yes, we took a punch to the face. That happens when you get into a fight sometimes. But it’s not how many times we get knocked down, it is how many times we get up. We keep fighting. We keep communicating. Only ignorance can motivate the people to ignore climate. We fight ignorance in every post and every link. With every post and every link, the movement grows. We must keep the movement going and pray for critical mass to be achieved and political change to follow. Republicans for renewable energy is not an impossible dream. If the people want it, it will happen. Unity is the way. Embrace those trumpets around you and educate them. Hate and disgust are the emotions of darkness and will only serve to seal our fate. Keep working for what you know to be our only chance of holding off catastrophic consequences. We don’t have time to get despondent and we have no time for talk of sealed fates for they wil become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Let’s keep fighting. I have been reading this blog long enough to know that this will continue. I love you all. You represent the very best of humanity. Let your light shine through these dark times.

    Reply
    • With Rs — I pursue a strategy of tough love. If they shift on climate change they are absolutely worthy of our praise. But, right now the party as a whole at the Congressional level is not helping at all.

      If you are an R, and are concerned about climate change, then I emplore you to contact your representative and express your concerns. If you are a Trump supporter and are concerned about climate change, then I emplore you to write to Trump. Based on his rhetoric, I’m not sure that he can be swayed. But perhaps you can help make a difference.

      But I also should be very clear that Trump and republicans in the US Congress have been absolutely terrible on climate change so far. Terrible as terrible can be. So if you’re concerned about climate change as a major issue then you may want to consider switching to a party that supports climate responses more readily. If you are considering switching away from your party due to its noted failure to deal with climate change, then I would call your Congressman/woman rep and tell them that you are considering switching.

      But once again, it is very clear that the republican party has not been a friend on climate change. Democratic policy is much stronger on climate change and they actively support transitioning to renewables and reducing fossil fuel burning. Clinton was for positive climate policy measures. Trump was against. Dems in congress support positive climate policy measures. Republicans by a vast majority are against. Fully half of the republican party in congress are climate change deniers. There are 0 climate change denier dems in congress. Trump is a climate change denier. I don’t think I can be any more clear. And though a small handful of individual r’a at the national level have tried to do something, occasionally, the party as a whole has been terrible and has whipped its members to support anti-climate response policies. This is a little more nuanced at the state level. But the anti-climate./anti-environment bent from Rs at the national level is vicious.

      Reply
      • wili

         /  November 10, 2016

        For some reason, I still hang out at PONews and Forums even though there are lots of Repubs there. I flatter myself to think that I have drawn some of them over from being total denialists into accepting at least the basic science (and some have even given me credit for that). But even these guys who ‘get it’ were mostly for Trump, with some supporting neither candidate. And there was a rabid denialist who was one of the most avid Clinton supporters.

        It still boggles my mind what kind of extreme contradictions can rest between the ears in some human skulls. But then, of course, it’s much easier to see contradictions in others’ views than in our own.

        Reply
        • My experience with Rs is that they are very slow to wake up. And when they do it’s kind of a secondary issue to most of them. Those that are aware of what’s happening in the policy tend to either switch to independent or D once they realize what’s happening on the national level. Otherwise, the move tends to be from denial to, I don’t care if I’m voting for a climate change denier.

          D’s that are climate change deniers are very rare. But, yeah, I get one or two now and then.

        • Bless you for taking the time.

        • mulga mumblebrain

           /  November 11, 2016

          I think that farmers and others who are living in the climate day after day, and not cocooned in cities, air-conditioned and removed from reality, are a possible useful body of potential allies. I see and hear many farmers these days stating flat out how the rapidly changing climate is affecting their production, and how they see the effects every day, and more so over years and decades. Unfortunately they still vote for a party, the ‘Nationals’ who are dominated by hard Right denialists totally in thrall to coal and gas interests.

  21. Greg

     /  November 10, 2016

    Michael Moore, whose dire prediction I posted some time ago, who got it right and had said the rust belt and elsewhere would raise their voices loud and clear, now speaks on his way to Trump Tower:

    Reply
  22. coloradobob

     /  November 10, 2016

    We all miss DTL tonight. Where ever he is.

    Reply
  23. wili

     /  November 10, 2016

    My wife just called from Chicago where she and the people she was with stumbled onto an anti-Trump rally. Lots of loud ‘F Trump’ chants and declarations by gays and others that they will not be made to feel afraid. They joined in a marched with the group, though the crowd was mostly a few decades younger than they were. Very cathartic to march and chant together, if nothing else. All peaceful, of course. I don’t watch TV news much, so I’m not sure how much these protests, marches and walk outs are being covered, even though they seem to be going on just about everywhere.

    Reply
  24. wili

     /  November 10, 2016

    Since it’s been part of the discussion, here are maps of third party results in individual states. It looks like Stein had less than 1% showing in the main big swing states of Florida, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. She had better showing in WI and MI, but voters there were lead by nearly all polls to assume that they were ‘safe,’ so you could blame the polsters there at least as much as the voters, it seems to me.

    Reply
    • In FL, and Penn, it would have flipped into the 0.2 percent range. In WI and MI it appears it would have flipped those states. It’s not really about assigning blame. It’s about how best to get your policies represented. Voting 3rd party in a presidential race is all too often one of the better ways to lose.

      Reply
      • Matt

         /  November 10, 2016

        I do have to point out to my earlier comments, it is a lot easier for us folk here in Oz to vote for the third party as we have a preferential voting system, so if I were to vote green and they came last, my vote then would go to my second preference (which would be Labor – your Democrats).
        Maybe if your system was preferential, more people would turn up to vote? As you said Robert, reform in this space definitely needed.
        Obviously when our forefathers set up the democratic systems employed around various nations back in the day, they never knew of the massive fortunes that would be amassed by individuals and the powers that would give those individuals over the electoral systems. Just as Lenin and the Bolsheviks never factored in what would occur in the event of a dictator being the head of the Communist party.
        Democracy is not going to survive into the future if the issue of political donation and influence continues, and I feel that this is the continuation of the early signs of its demise as seen after the Brexit vote.

        Reply
        • The founding fathers knew what they were doing with the structure of this republic. They were not anxious to share power with the riffraff. Voting was reserved for white men who owned property. They did not want a king, but they did want power to remain in the hands of a landed aristocracy. Big money is now the form that is in vogue with the aristocracy that runs this country.

        • I think our system could use a serious overhaul. Seems to me like what you guys have is more inclusive and more rational. But I guess all systems have their flaws. I’d honestly prefer a popular vote system here as well. The electoral college is subject to elitism and flaws. Reps are only subject to a 1,000 dollar fine if they don’t vote according to the state tally. It’s actually pretty ridiculous. I’m here in America, the most powerful country in the world, but it’s pretty clear that our democracy has some kinks in it.

        • wili

           /  November 10, 2016

          “I think our system could use a serious overhaul. ” You can say that again!

        • Matt

           /  November 10, 2016

          Yes RS we use the Hare-Clark system for our Senate and Preferential for our House, but we are still subject to political donation influence as much as the US unfortunately.
          No one else gets a voice.

      • Looking at raw numbers from Florida and I see this:
        Trump 49.1% 4,605,515
        Clinton 47.8% 4,485,745
        Johnson 2.2% 206,007
        Stein 0.7% 64,019

        Even if you give all the Stein votes to Clinton and none of the Johnson votes to Trump, the outcome is the same. I don’t mind if folks want to beat a dead horse, but if they say the horse had 8 legs, I have to take a look.

        Reply
        • Yep. It’s a dead horse. And we had a better shot without Stein in a critical race that is now, since we lost it, putting us in a position where we could lose everything.

        • Bernie fought hard and then he came home to support Clinton in the end. I think those that are most to blame are those who keep pretending that Bernie didn’t support Clinton or those who think that the rational notion of rallying behind Clinton is somehow placing blame on greens. To be very clear, these are wedge issues and they distract from the real huge glaring problem that is Trump now sitting in the White House.

        • Vote for no candidate at 100K? Are these write-ins? Otherwise it’s a suspiciously high number. In any case, if it’s not a purge, this basically has the same effect as 3rd party voters.

  25. kay

     /  November 10, 2016

    If Republicans do not get in this fight to win the war on climate change, our grandkids are toast. Stein should have done what Bernie did. The environmental stakes were/are too high to play with. I wonder if Trump’s kids can be reached being parents themselves. Someone within his circle must understand the stakes, no? Are they dancing blindly on the Titanic or have they consciously chosen their kids’ deaths? Surely they can’t all be psychopaths?

    Reply
    • Good points, Kay.

      Reply
    • Dave Person

       /  November 10, 2016

      Hi Kay,
      Not that I am an apologist for Stein, but most everybody believed based on polls that Clinton was well ahead at least in the electoral college, so I think we can forgive Stein if she was not concerned that she would be a spoiler for Clinton.

      dave

      Reply
    • mulga mumblebrain

       /  November 11, 2016

      Yes, kay, they can all be psychopaths. It’s a question of degree, and even the maddest lunatic can wake up, but to be rich in a capitalist economy is to be either an hereditary psychopath, or an actively exploitative and parasitical one.

      Reply
  26. coloradobob

     /  November 10, 2016

    What , Hell comes to breakfast means. Reason is dead.

    Reply
  27. coloradobob

     /  November 10, 2016

    RS
    All this street stuff gets 20 seconds. This so dead . We need a new way.

    Reply
    • I disagree Bob.

      Reply
    • We can’t roll over, Bob. And doing it online just doesn’t cut it. We do it online every day and we get swarmed by bots and misinformation. Street protests and pipeline protests also have a physical impact that states and cities can’t just ignore. Online is helpful for organisation and community building. But I think in this case that Moore is doing the right thing. Doesn’t degrade what we’re doing here in the least. But sometimes feet need to beat the streets. It’s especially important for getting youth involved.

      Reply
      • The young people need to be given less responsibility for putting feet on the street. These young folks get to live with the bad situation that we have given them. Old folks need to step off the sidewalks and get in the street. Old folks are more responsible than young folks for the situation we are in. This old guy feels very guilty and despondent about the failure of my generation to step up and make sure our grandchildren inherit a livable planet. I was up at 4 am texting back and forth with my youngest daughter last night. She is 30 and is a natural optimist, but this election really shook her up. She and I are both pretty distressed about the future for her lovely children. It does not feel right for me to ask my children and their peers to “do their part.”

        Reply
        • They are fighting for their future and they know it.

        • mulga mumblebrain

           /  November 11, 2016

          Young people are the preferred foot-soldiers for ‘regime change’ Colour Revolutions, and have been mobilised and trained for years by groups like Otpor and CANVAS, on the US pay-roll, and using the theories of Gene Sharp and the ‘Albert Einstein Institution’, to install pro-US, Free Market capitalist, Rightwing regimes. Regimes that are almost invariably antipathetic to environmentalism. Why cannot these theories and practises be put to work in the service of good, and human survival, for once?

  28. Greg

     /  November 10, 2016

    If you want to throw a snowball with your rage, head to Siberia. Even elderly folks there have never seen this. Likely an oddity of unique shifting local conditions:

    Reply
  29. Greg

     /  November 10, 2016

    Follow up to comments from earlier. Michael Moore’s rapidly viral 5 point to do list:

    Morning After To-Do List:

    1. Take over the Democratic Party and return it to the people. They have failed us miserably.

    2. Fire all pundits, predictors, pollsters and anyone else in the media who had a narrative they wouldn’t let go of and refused to listen to or acknowledge what was really going on. Those same bloviators will now tell us we must “heal the divide” and “come together.” They will pull more hooey like that out of their ass in the days to come. Turn them off.

    3. Any Democratic member of Congress who didn’t wake up this morning ready to fight, resist and obstruct in the way Republicans did against President Obama every day for eight full years must step out of the way and let those of us who know the score lead the way in stopping the meanness and the madness that’s about to begin.

    4. Everyone must stop saying they are “stunned” and “shocked.” What you mean to say is that you were in a bubble and weren’t paying attention to your fellow Americans and their despair. YEARS of being neglected by both parties, the anger and the need for revenge against the system only grew. Along came a TV star they liked whose plan was to destroy both parties and tell them all “You’re fired!” Trump’s victory is no surprise. He was never a joke. Treating him as one only strengthened him. He is both a creature and a creation of the media and the media will never own that.

    5. You must say this sentence to everyone you meet today: “HILLARY CLINTON WON THE POPULAR VOTE!” The MAJORITY of our fellow Americans preferred Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump. Period. Fact. If you woke up this morning thinking you live in an effed-up country, you don’t. The majority of your fellow Americans wanted Hillary, not Trump. The only reason he’s president is because of an arcane, insane 18th-century idea called the Electoral College. Until we change that, we’ll continue to have presidents we didn’t elect and didn’t want. You live in a country where a majority of its citizens have said they believe there’s climate change, they believe women should be paid the same as men, they want a debt-free college education, they don’t want us invading countries, they want a raise in the minimum wage and they want a single-payer true universal health care system. None of that has changed. We live in a country where the majority agree with the “liberal” position. We just lack the liberal leadership to make that happen (see: #1 above).

    Reply
    • I agree with what Moore’s doing here with the protests. The dems could definitely use some reinvigorating. But the biggest point is that we have to get out and fight this with fire in the belly for 4-8 years. Republicans spent years trying to say that Obama was illegitimate even though he won by massive margins. Now we have a very real illegitimate president in the form of Trump who didn’t even win the popular vote. We should take him and the Tea Party he road in on and throw them back into the harbor.

      Reply
      • Greg

         /  November 10, 2016

        Got a strong feeling it won’t be 4-8 years, much less. He didn’t really want this job and the confines and stress of it will wear him out fast. His ego needs to be fed and he’s never experienced millions of rejections out in the streets and in front of his doors day in and day out. It will be a very lonely place in that little white house.

        Reply
  30. Greg

     /  November 10, 2016

    The fires in the flash drought of Georgia don’t stop for elections:

    Reply
      • Matt

         /  November 10, 2016

        I must be confused, isn’t it almost winter in the NH right now?:/

        Reply
        • Winter is dying.

        • Matt

           /  November 10, 2016

          Its just so hard to imagine these condition variations being somewhat shielded so far in the SH… For now we have had extremes and unheard of events but not to the severity of the NH. I just don’t get how anyone in the US is not thinking and panicking about climate change every day of their lives????

        • Almost everybody likes nice weather. It’s been 60 degrees and sunny in the Pac NW for several days. Yes, we should be scared, but hey, it’s picnic weather. What is coming is picnic from hell. Hell comes to breakfast as Colorado Bob would have it.

        • The smokies are burning in November… They should be scared out of their wits.

    • June

       /  November 10, 2016

      Hmm…let’s see if the map shows up.

      image1.jpeg

      Reply
      • June

         /  November 10, 2016

        sigh. It is a map of the voting results for 18-25 year olds…a sea of mostly blue.

        Reply
        • mulga mumblebrain

           /  November 11, 2016

          The self-centred old care less for what happens in thirty years, because they will be safely returned to the carbon cycle themselves.

    • True. Though there was even greater turnout in that same demo in past years:

      We saw significantly lower Millennial voter turnout in 2016 than we did for Obama in 2012. That means that the largest and most influential generation — a generation which is certainly larger now than it was four years ago — collectively dropped the ball.

      https://www.bustle.com/articles/194296-the-millennial-electoral-maps-might-give-you-hope-but-our-generation-has-a-lot-of-work

      Reply
      • Cate

         /  November 10, 2016

        How could kids not vote? How could they care so little? This is the thing that drives me nuts. I never get this. I couldn’t wait to be old enough to vote and I have always voted, even when holding my nose sometimes. It’s the key act and duty of democracy. There are no excuses. None.

        Reply
  31. It’s the authoritarianism, stupid:
    http://bit.ly/usauthoritarianism

    Reply
  32. Read into the first bunch but there are too many posts to read them all so I hope this hasn’t been posted. It’s a damned good read about just who REALLY gave us Trump.

    Notice that raising the minimum wage passed, that many very progressive candidates won, that four more states were added to the fight for the end of Prohibition and the West Coast is now united in telling the neoliberal drug warriors to piss off.

    If the DNC wouldn’t have cheated Bernie (read the Podesta emails from Wikileaks in their OWN words), he beat Trump by double digits in EVERY POLL. But no, the wealthy elite neoliberals that took over the Democratic Party during Reagan refused to see beyond their greedy for wealth and power and wanted the war hawk Wall Street queen to continue the neoliberal policies. People are SICK of neoliberal policies and the wealthy telling them they are stupid and go get a job when those same wealthy sent the jobs overseas to increase their profit margins.

    Personally, I think this may be the best result that could have happened. Trump may be the ‘Pearl Harbor’ that people in this country need to come together for REAL CHANGE. Or maybe not because we are a fat, stupid, drooling in front of the tv sports channels while fighter jets roar overhead population of pizza eaters with little education and zero critical thinking skills ever being learned (don’t really need them in $7.25 an hour jobs anyway).

    Big sigh. This sucks.

    On Weather Here:

    It was 70’F, honeybees were climbing all over the flowers that bloomed on a weed at the edge of the parking lot in town today. Yesterday I cleaned my chimney and a ladybug landed on my chest. In November in the mountains next to the Canadian border. Excuse me, Mr. Trump? Ain’t no such thing as climate collapse? Moron.

    The Hubris of Democratic Elites, Clinton Campaign Gave Us President Trump

    FireDogLake

    Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, her network of super political action committees, and the liberal establishment relished a matchup against Donald Trump. However, her campaign failed to put forward an alternative for voters that would combat a candidate that tapped into the vast amount of disillusionment among citizens. Tsunamis of voters unaccounted for in state polls, who do not identify with either the Democratic or Republican Parties, made President Trump a reality.

    Clinton’s concession speech indicated the campaign and many of its supporters are unwilling to confront the hubris of her presidential run. Yet, citizens, especially those on the left, must in order to find the clarity to move onward with fights for social, economic, racial, and environmental justice.

    The Democratic Party rigged parts of the party’s primary for Clinton, and it helped stave off a decisive challenge from Senator Bernie Sanders. The senator addressed the material conditions of the working class, including people of color. He warned the Democrats of wealth inequality, destructive free trade agreements, and some of the negative effects of global capitalism on the common man or woman. He connected with disaffected people who the Clinton campaign effectively wrote-off and performed well in states that Clinton lost in the general election.

    However, the Democratic Party elites survived and coerced Sanders and his supporters into falling in line at their national convention. The party leadership enforced unity in Philadelphia to make it appear as if all was well when that was not the case.

    Most progressive groups, like all presidential elections, demobilized or essentially became mechanisms for the Clinton campaign to mobilize voters from August to Election Day. This allowed the message of “Never Trump” to dominate as the only challenge to Trump, and without a real vision for lifting up the many Americans enticed by Trump’s campaign, the nation ended up with an end result similar to Senator John Kerry’s campaign, which ran primarily on the fact that he was not President George W. Bush.

    It did not help the Clinton campaign that she had a reputation for supporting regime change wars, which have greatly destabilized parts of the world. Her fingerprints were all over the Libya disaster. She voted for the Iraq War, which created the conditions for the rise of the Islamic State. And, although it is questionable whether Trump really ever opposed the Iraq invasion, he insisted he was against the Iraq War during debates to undermine Clinton and fueled the perception that Clinton was somehow responsible for ISIS. Trump held himself out as someone who would not plunge the country into reckless military engagements.

    Clinton’s closing argument included the following, “Is America dark and divisive or helpful and inclusive? Our core values are being tested in this election, but everywhere I go, people are refusing to be defined by fear and division. Look, we all know we’ve come through some hard economic times, and we’ve seen some pretty big changes. But I believe in our people. I love this country, and I’m convinced our best days are ahead of us if we reach for them together.”

    That may have sounded good in the office of a campaign’s headquarters, but there was nothing specific in this buzzword-laden pablum. Multiculturalism does not help anyone pay their mortgage or find a job. As wrong as it is for millions of white Americans to take out their frustrations on people of color, the system failed them and keeps failing them. Additionally, establishment politicians like Clinton wrote off many of these people, believing if they focused on emphasizing diversity they would overcome the painful intertwined realities of class and race in the U.S. They were wrong.

    Let us go back to the belief that a candidate like Trump would be perfect for Hillary Clinton. In April 2015, a strategy memo for the DNC was drafted by the campaign two months before Trump announced his candidacy. The goal was to “make whomever the Republicans nominate unpalatable to a majority of the electorate.”

    “Force all Republican candidates to lock themselves into extreme conservative positions that will hurt them in a general election,” the campaign recommended. “Undermine any credibility/trust Republican presidential candidates have to make inroads to our coalition or independents.”

    It advocated against marginalizing “more extreme candidates.” The campaign wanted to make “Pied Piper candidates,” like Trump, Senator Ted Cruz, and Ben Carson, into representatives of the Republican Party. “We need to be elevating the Pied Piper candidates so that they are leaders of the pack and tell the press to [take] them seriously.” (The memo was attached to an email published by WikiLeaks.)

    In the same month, Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook pushed for a primary schedule, where the red states held their primaries early. It would increase “the likelihood the Rs nominate someone extreme.”

    Essentially, the Clinton campaign engaged in steps that would help ensure Trump was the Republican presidential nominee. Their acts enabled the rise of Trump, and they lost to the opponent they wanted to face because they made the same mistakes Democrats make time and time again. They clung to failed corporate Democratic policies that have devastated this country for the past two decades, and in some ways, this election can be viewed as a referendum on those policies. And they treated the candidate who had answers for Americans as “unrealistic,” a “hapless legislator,” an “Obama betrayer,” and a socialist independent who was not a real Democrat. As in, he was not one of them, and they did not want him in their club.

    * * *

    On June 26, Sanders warned Democrats what happened with Brexit in Britain could happen. He shared what he saw on the campaign trail. He noted the tens of thousands factories closed over the past 15 years. “More than 4.8 million well-paid manufacturing jobs have disappeared” as a result of trade agreements. Forty-seven million Americans live in poverty. Millions have no health insurance or are underinsured. Just as many struggle with student debt. “Frighteningly, millions of poorly educated Americans will have a shorter life span than the previous generation as they succumb to despair, drugs and alcohol.”

    “Meanwhile, in our country the top one-tenth of 1 percent now owns almost as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent. Fifty-eight percent of all new income is going to the top 1 percent. Wall Street and billionaires, through their “super PACs,” are able to buy elections,” Sanders added.

    “On my campaign, I’ve talked to workers unable to make it on $8 or $9 an hour; retirees struggling to purchase the medicine they need on $9,000 a year of Social Security; young people unable to afford college,” Sanders shared. “I also visited the American citizens of Puerto Rico, where some 58 percent of the children live in poverty and only a little more than 40 percent of the adult population has a job or is seeking one.”

    It is important to note the Clinton campaign engaged in a calculated act of deception by supporting the Service Employees International Union’s “Fight for 15” while refusing to support a $15 minimum wage. All the states with minimum wage ballot initiatives passed wage increases yesterday. The campaign could have mobilized so more states had this sort of thing on the ballot. The possibility of more economic security may have increased enthusiasm. But the Clinton campaign did no such thing.

    “The notion that Donald Trump could benefit from the same forces that gave the Leave proponents a majority in Britain should sound an alarm for the Democratic Party in the United States,” Sanders concluded. “Millions of American voters, like the Leave supporters, are understandably angry and frustrated by the economic forces that are destroying the middle class.”

    “In this pivotal moment, the Democratic Party and a new Democratic president need to make clear that we stand with those who are struggling and who have been left behind. We must create national and global economies that work for all, not just a handful of billionaires.”

    Efforts to process what unfolded on Election Day must recognize the warning of Sanders and millions of his supporters went unheeded. Clinton practically ran as an avatar of the billionaire class, albeit a potentially benevolent caretaker of the masses if they just stood with her. Had more in the establishment media and institutions of power taken the time to reflect on what transpired in the Democratic primary, they would have feared the worst and taken more steps to prevent a Trump primary by trying to shift the dynamic of her campaign.

    Lest one forget, the Clintons are New Democrats. They aligned with business forces in the early 1990s. They stood with conservative Democrats, who broke with labor, civil rights, and other liberal causes. They pushed the North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). They backed welfare repeal, bills which fueled the rise of mass incarceration, and signed a 1997 budget that slashed millions for social programs like Medicare and Medicaid. They put corporate interests over environmental protections. They encouraged the deregulation of industry, which greatly boosted Wall Street. Altogether, the Clintons enabled the right as it decimated the liberal class and expanded unfettered capitalism. (For more, read Lance Selfa’s book, “The Democrats: A Critical History.”)

    Finally, the outcome confirms what many expressed months ago. The Democratic Party was willing to do whatever it took to nominate Hillary Clinton, even if it meant working against the very forces behind Bernie Sanders, which could help them succeed against Donald Trump, because the last thing they wanted was a major shift toward more socially democratic policies. Also, Clinton was next in line. Whether voters viewed her as a weak candidate or a dishonest and untrustworthy politician did not matter. They would go to battle for her and gladly lose this war.

    © 2014 FireDogLake

    Reply
    • OK.

      I think what’s more fair to say is that moderates on the issue of trade and defense were seen as neoliberal war hawks by some on the hard left. This fed into a constant stream of misinformation coming from the right and from sources like Wikileaks and the Russian government who pursued an active info wars campaign to discredit Clinton and who basically turned this group into a source of agitation against Clinton from within.

      It absolutely didn’t help that some of the criticisms were true. Clinton did support fracking, did support aspects of trade policies that were not helpful, and was a hawk on some issues. But these facts seemed to completely obviate in the minds of some the various positive choices that Clinton had made. The smaller, but still important, issues with Clinton allowed for many people to basically let the perfect be the enemy of the good. To be very clear, it was enough to probably cost Clinton the electoral college and that’s what makes a person President in America. What it wasn’t enough to do is actually defeat her in the hearts and minds of America — where she won the popular vote.

      But to say that a Trump presidency is the best result we could hope for is absolute bullshit and a validation, in part, of the hateful zeitgeist he has tapped into. We do not deserve Trump. Trump is terrible and far, far worse than Hillary would have ever been. Bernie knew this. That’s why he stumped for her. And if you think Trump is going to remove the harms generated by neoliberalism simply by being protectionist, then I think you’re failing to see the bigger picture. His tax cut policies alone are one gigantic neo-liberal giveaway. Killing the EPA — neo-liberal giveaway. Killing regulations wholesale — neoliberal giveaway. With Trump, the republicans will now attempt to drown the proverbial baby in the bathwater.

      What’s happened and what many are failing to realize is that some on the right have taken the anti-trade sentiment (some of it valid for complex reasons, but some of it invalid because some of these international treaties and policies are helpful like COP 21), added racism and fear of immigrants, and then left everything else that’s bad and harmful about their policies whole cloth. Because it’s ‘new’ and because it’s easy and because it actually is supported by a big chunk of the so-called establishment (Brietbart, businessmen who support Trump, a big chunk of the hard right, systemic racists, corporate prisons, oil companies, petro states etc) which have given it a great deal of media lee-way, it has made it into the tent. That’s the real story of Brexit. That’s the real story of Trump — exploiting the sentiment of workers disenfranchised by a hundred things (to include treaties that have favored corps over people for too long) to scape goat immigrants and international treaties in general. But if anyone here thinks that Trump is the thing that’s going to save workers, then they’ve been duped and misinformed.

      Reply
    • Now. Was Hillary the best candidate to combat Trump? Maybe not. But to be very clear, democrats in this election were fighting against a candidate that rallied the right by pandering to racist and sexist undercurrents in America. And that dark communication did bring out a boatload of people who seem to revel in the exploitation of others. And more than anything, this is the sentiment that we should be most concerned about. That stuff will wreck us.

      In addition, others who supported Trump were likely falling prey to his message of ‘fear others, fear anyone not like you.’

      Trump’s play was a big play to white tribalism and it worked enough to win the electoral college, but not enough to unite the country. Still worse, it has more deeply inflamed already strong racial and sexual divisions in this country, generating the spark for social unrest because these people are being disenfranchised by Trump as well.

      Reply
    • Also, according to Bernie Sanders himself, the primary WAS NOT RIGGED:

      On Friday afternoon, Donald Trump’s campaign officially announced the presumptive Republican nominee will not debate Bernie Sanders, despite what Trump had said earlier, because it would be “inappropriate” for the GOP candidate to “debate the second place finisher.”

      And if there’s one thing Donald Trump is concerned about, it’s avoiding anything that might be perceived as “inappropriate.”

      But in issuing the candidate’s position on the matter, Trump also said what many of the Vermont senator’s most ardent supporters fervently believe: the Democratic nominating process is “totally rigged” against Sanders.

      Does the senator himself believe this? CBS’s John Dickerson asked Sanders for his perspective on “Face the Nation” aired on Sunday, and the candidate’s answer seemed quite fair.

      “What has upset me, and what I think is – I wouldn’t use the word rigged, because we knew what the words were – but what is really dumb is that you have closed primaries, like in New York state, where three million people who are Democrats or Republicans could not participate, where you have situation where over 400 superdelegates came on board Clinton’s campaign before anybody else was in the race, eight months before the first vote was cast.

      That’s not rigged. I think it’s just a dumb process which has certainly disadvantaged our campaign.”

      http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/bernie-sanders-agrees-democratic-process-not-rigged

      ******

      Continuing to perpetuate the notion that the primary was rigged is to basically tell a lie. A lie that Trump fed into and perpetuated in order to sew discord among us. One that actively foments discontent and division on the left. Is that what you are trying to do, Seal? Do you want us to be divided so that the things we all care about — climate, workers rights, equality etc never see the light of day because we decided that a perfect idea was better than actually working together to get these things done in practice? I say this because that’s what will happen time and time again if we cling to ill formed notions of a so called perfect world that does not exist. Magical thinking gets you no-where.

      Reply
      • wili

         /  November 10, 2016

        Trump is likely to be a kind of monstrous negative image of FDR: He is in essence proposing a New Deal, except in this ‘deal,’ he and his cronies end up getting to keep all the cards, crashing the country and the planet along the way.

        Reply
        • Well said.

          It’s the Raw Deal.

        • wili

           /  November 10, 2016

          I do think, though, that one of the biggest battles going forward will be around voter suppression. No matter how much Trump and the Repubs continue to alienate minorities even as they become the majority, they will still be able to win if they just keep shutting down nearly all the places where they can vote, which the Supreme court has given them carte blanche to do. We also have most states controlled by the same party as well. And maybe taking back control of most state houses and governorships may need to be the first struggle.

        • That would be very helpful. But Gerrymandering does make this an uphill climb. We need to challenge Gerrymandering in the courts, challenge voter suppression in the courts. To be very clear, America is sliding into darkness and we have a moral obligation to fight that decline and seek a way out each step of the way.

      • Certainly there are systemic problems with the voting system to be fixed. And there’s racism, misogyny, xenophobia, misdirected scapegoating, and so forth at play. But it seems to me that, rightly or wrongly, some people genuinely hurting from the past 3+ decades of policy simply saw a choice between the status quo and something different. They chose something different. Not saying they thought it through or chose wisely. But that’s essentially what happened.

        http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/10/us/politics/donald-trump-voters.html

        Reply
  33. Abel Adamski

     /  November 10, 2016

    Food for thought.
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/climate-change-game-over-global-warming-climate-sensitivity-seven-degrees-a7407881.html

    Climate change may be escalating so fast it could be ‘game over’, scientists warn

    New research suggests the Earth’s climate could be more sensitive to greenhouse gases than thought, raising the spectre of an ‘apocalyptic side of bad’ temperature rise of more than 7C within a lifetime

    However new research by an international team of experts who looked into how the Earth’s climate has reacted over nearly 800,000 years warns this could be a major under-estimate.

    Because, they believe, the climate is more sensitive to greenhouse gases when it is warmer.

    In a paper in the journal Science Advances, they said the actual range could be between 4.78C to 7.36C by 2100, based on one set of calculations.

    Some have dismissed the idea that the world would continue to burn fossil fuels despite obvious global warming, but emissions are still increasing despite a 1C rise in average thermometer readings since the 1880s.

    And US President-elect Donald Trump has said he will rip up America’s commitments to the fight against climate change.

    Professor Michael Mann, of Penn State University in the US, who led research that produced the famous “hockey stick” graph showing how humans were dramatically increasing the Earth’s temperature, told The Independent the new paper appeared “sound and the conclusions quite defensible”.

    “And it does indeed provide support for the notion that a Donald Trump presidency could be game over for the climate,” he wrote in an email.

    Reply
  34. Abel Adamski

     /  November 10, 2016

    An interesting article
    http://www.afr.com/news/world/us-election/donald-trumps-climate-change-stance-a-chance-for-china-20161110-gsmgm8

    Donald Trump has called climate change a “Chinese hoax”, which suggests a landmark clean energy deal between Washington and Beijing may collapse during his Presidency.

    But this is not the view from China.

    Indeed, Beijing sees it as an opportunity.

    “If Trump stalls on climate change it gives China the opportunity to assume global leadership,” said Zhang Haibin, a professor at Peking University who has advised the Chinese government on its climate change policy.

    “We don’t want to compete with the US for leadership but if it gives up we will have no choice.”

    The view of Professor Zhang and others is that China’s action on climate change is not tied to the US, as it incorporates broader goals around clean air, energy efficiency and upgrading the country’s outdated industrial base.

    “It is in China’s self interest to do these things,” said Prof Zhang.

    “I am 100 per cent sure that China will continue on its course in this regard.”

    Note how many Chinese names are on cutting edge major papers, coming from Anglo institutions esp US as well as increasingly top class work out of China.

    I can see many top researchers in renewables, storage and climate and environmental scoience looking to escape a Trump/GOP pogrom, China and India (many Indian names also) would welcome them and their families with open arms

    Reply
    • Syd Bridges

       /  November 10, 2016

      Abel, I, too, follow research on clean energy, and I have noticed both the increase in Chinese and Indian researchers, and also the decline in English-type names. I think that China is much more keenly aware than the Anglophone countries of the dangers of global warming. I also hope that China will take over the US’ now vacated role as world leader in the fight for a livable climate.

      Reply
    • mulga mumblebrain

       /  November 11, 2016

      It will be good for China, good for humanity and good for the USA if China takes this opportunity to take over global leadership in the most vital cause ever. Good for China because they will grow in global esteem, and make a bundle of money. Good for humanity because only Chinese production can create the infrastructure needed for de-carbonisation, and because the majority world is sick and tired of Western ‘Exceptionalist’ dominance and the fraudulent ‘Western Moral values’. And lastly, good for the US populace, whose society has been hollowed out and brutalised by the drive to create and maintain a global Empire of ‘Full Spectrum Dominance’ forever. Imagine what good could be done in the USA if several hundred billion of its insanely overgrown military Budget was used at home, instead, for creating a decent society for all.

      Reply
  35. Suzanne

     /  November 10, 2016

    My personal plan for moving forward:
    1. Not just sending money to CC causes…but also taking to the streets (I also agree protesting on social media only…is not as effective as feet on the ground…we need both IMO).
    2. I will not be persecuted as I am a protected class..so I will speak out for those who are not a protected class.
    3. I will not look away…hoping things change. I am already in touch with like minded friends who live close..and trying to get a 350 event planned for our area.
    http://act.350.org/cms/thanks/trump-win-strategy-call?action_id=12363986&akid=.2256300.pgFpC4&ar=1&rd=1
    4. I will grieve…but I will move forward. I am not a religious person, but I am a spiritual person who has tried to live my life by the Golden rule. A friend sent this to me yesterday written by a Progressive preacher on why we all are grieving. Some of you might like to check it out:
    http://act.350.org/cms/thanks/trump-win-strategy-call?action_id=12363986&akid=.2256300.pgFpC4&ar=1&rd=1
    5. I will not wait for the next election to work to get my candidate into office. I started yesterday..and will work everyday to stop this insanity.
    A progressive from KS wrote a worthwhile piece at the DailyKos on what he and others have been actively doing since Sam Brownbeck…and it is working. Check it out if you wish:
    http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2016/11/9/1594721/-Hello-America-From-Kansas-You-re-Like-Us-Now-Let-s-Talk-About-What-s-Next
    6. I will never forget…or let anyone else forget…that the Lunatic did not get a majority of the votes..and did not get a mandate.

    Reply
  36. Vernon Hamilton

     /  November 10, 2016

    Oh the irony. :S
    Promises a trade war to bring back 19th century industry, simultaneously drives promising 21st century industry offshore.

    Reply
  37. kay

     /  November 10, 2016

    Disheartening and depressing there are enough ignorant people in this country to vote for death and the end of civilization for a tax break and a wall. But I agree, Robert, we have to organize and fight if they don’t come around on climate change. They literally are holding a gun up to our children’s heads and if more people understood this, Trump would never have happened. It is the ignorance out there and the news media ignoring the subject that has gotten us to this point. Too many Americans are simply ignorant of the subject. The movie Before the Flood should be on airing on every network and the media should be discussing the movie.

    Reply
  38. Spike

     /  November 10, 2016

    They aren’t wasting any time. U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski hopes to advance a proposal to allow for oil and gas drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska, seeing an opportunity with Republicans controlling Congress and Republican Donald Trump set to become president.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/nov/9/murkowski-young-to-pursue-arctic-refuge-drilling/

    Reply
  39. Another ambitious to-do list from Michael Moore:

    Reply
  40. June

     /  November 10, 2016

    If Trump decides that he can stoke his ego better by being a public face while leaving the hard, messy work of actually running a government to his cabinet, then these candidates for cabinet positions ought to make us all shudder.

    http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/who-is-in-president-trump-cabinet-231071

    Reply
  41. I just saw this on ‘Instagram’
    “I HOPE THAT TRUMP IS A GOOD PRESIDENT. WANTING HIM TO FAIL IS LIKE WANTING THE PILOT TO CRASH THE PLANE THAT WE ARE ALL ON”

    Reply
  42. Maybe I didn’t quite get what I meant across.

    I was there for the fight against Nixon. My dad, a life-long Republican and Korean War vet, actually changed party in 1972 because of Nixon’s win. This was after getting divorced from my anti-war Peace & Freedom Party/women’s rights/desegregationist Japanese stepmom and survivor of the US camps in WWII. She was right, he was wrong, and it took a horrible election for him to see this.

    That’s what I mean about galvanizing people to get off their butts and out from in front of their MSM propaganda tv screens and organize. Like what Suzanne said above, she’s already moving forward. That’s what everybody needs to do.

    After Nixon in ’72, there were so many different people that came together that didn’t do anything but bicker before Tricky Dick won that it suddenly became a very Big Tent unheard of beforehand. Nixon was so repugnant…you had to have been there to see it as I’m sure some of the posters here were also. I was beaten by violent cops (how many here have felt that pain?), repeatedly arrested for things like the non-illegal crime of ‘refusing to show ID’ and jailed while my kidneys pee’d blood from the rabbit punches as I was hung over a concrete wall and pummeled, but IT DIDN’T stop us from fighting back. It energized (I admit it was energized with disgust!).

    Trump now is just as repugnant as Nixon was back then. Remember, Nixon slammed the racist drug war into effect to stop the anti-war movement and the black anti-segregation movement as was reported by his boy Erlichman(sp?). Worked, too. Nixon held a gun to our heads then, Trump is doing it now. And we may have not recognized it yet but the climate was already falling apart in 1972…

    As for Hillary… RS, I still think there are too many rose-tinted glasses on this site to look at her in the light of day. Including you. No offense meant, she has a very good propaganda team but she was holding a gun to our heads, too. We have been living in the Reagan world since 1981 no matter which letter was put beside the candidate name. The neoliberal wealthy that run the DNC are little different from the neoliberal wealthy that run the RNC. Their kids go to the same private schools, they go to the same ‘events,’ they intermarry, and they serve on the same board of directors of corporations that are destroying just about everything we hold dear in favor of a higher quarterly profit.

    So NO, RS, I am not an advocate of what you suggested about me. Break up the left? I’m so far left that I recognized Bernie as an old school FDR democrat who continues to support more billions for the F-35 fighter that, it so happens, is being built in his state. War is jobs, yes? Long as it is war on the ‘those others.’ Rather, I am exactly the opposite because I lived through Nixon and saw how people came together to fight the bastard.

    Now we get together and fight this bastard. Remember, people, the only ones that are going to effect change is us, not the wealthy that control this country. Get off your ass. We have a fight on our hands.

    From my 1944 edition of Webster’s Complete Reference Dictionary and Encyclopedia:

    Fascism
    n; any centralized governmental system fostering strong nationalistic policies and exercising absolute control over all activity, rigid censorship, and suppression of opponents.

    Can we say Free Speech Zones cages, NSA spying on every click of the mouse every phone call every email, DAPL attacked by militarized police forces, gerrymandering and loss of voting rights, and corporate control of a two party duopoly political system and the government through a revolving door policy? Yep, we have a fight on our hands, no doubt. Are we all up to it? I’m old, getting older, but I’ll be damned if I’m going to roll over and whine about this puke!

    And no, I did NOT vote for Trump!

    Reply
    • +1

      Just walked passed Columbia Univ. students organizing an anti-Trump event on Saturday. People appear to be mobilizing quickly.

      http://www.papermag.com/all-the-anti-trump-protests-and-rallies-you-should-be-attending-in-the-2086945561.html

      Reply
    • On the other hand, there’s also this:

      Day 1 In Trump’s America

      Reply
      • Thanks for posting. Seems like the state of fear has already arrived.

        Reply
      • Marcusblanc

         /  November 10, 2016

        This happened after Brexit, and although things have calmed down somewhat, here in the UK, there is no way of going back for most of the victims. They have been terrorized.

        Every racist has just had the green light to vent their obnoxious beliefs, and although I think this wave of attacks will subside at some point, there is probably a new normal (both in the UK and US).

        My sympathies to all in the US, I know how you feel, in fact I’ve been having Brexit nightmare flashbacks, such are the similarities. That is whilst still being in the middle of the rolling omnishambles that is exiting the EU, which might take a decade to complete.

        Please try and get rid of him by any means possible, for the sake of the planet. His record is not, err, unimpeachable.

        Reply
        • Well, it just came out that the Russians were, indeed, consulting with the Trump campaign. Looks like a much bigger breach of national security than any silly email scandal.

        • The Russian interference in the election is a perfect reason to go right at the electoral college and force them to cast their votes for Hillary instead of Trump. Maybe we don’t have to wait until 2020, let’s make this happen now! I am feeling energized.

        • OK. Fair enough. But for the future, can you please moderate your views and become generally less absolutist? Hillary was our candidate which is why I pushed so hard for her. And we have a large number of candidates to look at during 2020 including Michelle Obama, Warren, and many others.

          I didn’t in any way think that Bernie Sanders was too extreme. In fact, I voted for him in the Primary and would do so again. But when it became clear that Hillary was the nominee, the rational thing to do was put our full weight behind her. This was not a repudiation of Bernie, just a recognition that we had to run with Hillary.

        • I guess that makes sense, but I would not like to see us lose twice to Trump. Wouldn’t it make more sense to stick with Hillary? Now that I know that the Russians are tampering with our election I would prefer to go with the strongest person and that is surely Hillary. We just need to really push the electors to do the right thing, to reject the Russian interference and to abide by the will of the american people as expressed by the popular vote. Don’t back down. This is our moment. Maybe we don’t have to wait until 2020?

        • For 2016, I think there may be a long shot given the fact that so much that has happened is unprecedented. So maybe we should focus on that now and think about 2020 after this mess is sorted?

    • Hillary is not perfect. No rose colored glasses here. But she is a far cry from Trump. And I would much rather have had her as my president than have 4 years that explode many things that I love and hold dear that would be protected under a Hillary Clinton Presidency.

      The thing that gets on my nerves about these long screeds that you post is that a lot of your statements are unsupported or based on bad information. Kind of a GISH. Like when you say a thing such as — the DNC was rigged. That’s basically untrue. And the whole bit about surveillance is far more nuanced than you let on. Yes, it’s an issue. And no I don’t support it. But is that the issue that’s going to cause me to give my vote away and allow Trump to be president? Hell no.

      Reply
      • Marcusblanc

         /  November 10, 2016

        ‘Those politicians are all the same.’

        One of the most dangerous phrases known to man, I bet they said that in Germany in the 1933 election.

        Reply
      • climatehawk1

         /  November 13, 2016

        Plus, we’ll have to live with Trump’s Supreme Court for next 15-20 years. And another Administration that appoints jerks instead of qualified people to head agencies (case in point, FEMA and Katrina).

        Reply
        • that supreme court thing is really a bummer. Alioto, Roberts and Thomas are pretty hard right. I think there is no doubt we are getting another hard right justice now and that leaves most controversial decisions up to Anthony Kennedy. It will probably get worse during the Trump presidency. This really is a shame. The Reagan Revolution has really run over us.

  43. Kalypso

     /  November 10, 2016

    It gets worse. There is a far right populist wave moving across the Western world. France will hold elections in May. There is a presidential candidate there that holds the same views as Trump. She also wants France to leave the EU and NATO. Should she win climate negotiations will be thrown into further disarray. I’m sorry to say this, but the climate and environment is f*cked. Sorry for the harsh language but we all know it’s true.

    http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2016/11/09/501398066/trumps-election-gives-hope-to-europes-far-right

    Reply
  44. Whachamacallit

     /  November 10, 2016

    Man, your 2090 story seems like it’s getting uncomfortably close to actually happening…

    Reply
    • With Trump, it’s kinda gets locked in. The potential break point away from fossil fuels moves back at least 10 years maybe 20 or more if he wrecks the EPA and guts everything like he’s threatening to. We don’t have this time. We need to respond to climate change now.

      Reply
  45. Daily Kos is regrouping and has good things to say. The loss has a silver lining.
    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/11/9/1594649/-Trump-s-Pyrrhic-Victory-Provides-a-BIG-Silver-Lining-for-Democrats?detail=email&link_id=1&can_id=773924285f0e0db14d508a486f2c52ad&source=email-trumps-pyrrhic-victory-provides-a-big-silver-lining-for-democrats&email_referrer=trumps-pyrrhic-victory-provides-a-big-silver-lining-for-democrats&email_subject=trumps-pyrrhic-victory-provides-a-big-silver-lining-for-democrats

    Maybe we are right where we need to be. I think Hillary needs to take a couple of weeks off so can get her new server up and running, get her email archives in order, and line up a few speaking engagements with the banks to cover household expenses and then she will be fine and ready to go. The rest of us need to really work on message discipline. We need to extinguish the impulse to go with stupid third party politics. Let’s get going with start the 2020 campaign. We need to stop questioning the wisdom of the DNC and the super delegates. I think there is every reason to believe that we can get a Hillary rematch with Trump in 2020 and that’s a contest that Hillary is almost sure to win.

    So, let’s get to work on the message discipline and get ready for 2020. Hillary brings an amazing amount of experience and competence to the office. Trump is an idiot and his supporters are fools, but if we all keep explaining the benefits of global trade to them, they will come around. Let’s make this happen! We need to dump Tim Kaine and recruit Comey to run with HRC, that way we get rid of the October surprise stuff that might otherwise arise.

    Chin up, let’s dig in and make this happen! Go Hillary!

    Mike

    Reply
    • Why not start out with a Warren who would do more of what we want or work to actually get Hillary elected now by urging a no confidence vote for Trump from the Electoral College?

      Reply
      • wili

         /  November 10, 2016

        “no confidence vote for Trump from the Electoral College”

        Wow, I hadn’t thought of that. I can’t imagine that Trumpsters would be particularly…happy about it!

        Reply
      • I think it’s hard to go with anyone but Hillary in 2020. Her experience and competence are unmatched. There is almost no way that she could lose to Trump two times. Warren is really a lot like Jill Stein and Bernie Sanders, I think she is too far left for a national election. We need a leader who understands international trade and finance. We need a leader who is not afraid to use US military power to keep us safe. I think it has to be Hillary in 2020. Hillary just needs to hone her message and move slightly to the center and she wins. Sanders drove Hillary into crazy socialist territory with talk about Medicare for everybody and free college. Crazy talk turns off US voters.

        Reply
        • Hold on. You spend the past three months pontificating about the virtues of Jill Stein and now you want Hillary in 2020. Mike — please explain why I shouldn’t block you for obvious trolling?

        • Robert, you have been so persuasive in your explanations about the importance of avoiding stupid third party voting that I am now a convert. I think Hillary in 2020 is a slam dunk. We all learned so much from this bitter loss, it’s time to pick up the pieces and get it right next time. Go Hillary!

        • How old are you, Mike?

        • 63 years of age and a natural born US citizen! Why? What does my age have to do with it? Not sure I understand the question.

        • Mike — you’ve got to look at it from my side here a bit. You’re coming across as a concern troll. I’m sorry to say this. But it’s getting pretty ridiculous. A younger person might make these kinds of statements due to base naivete, but outside that, the shifts and assertions you’re making here are pretty preposterous.

          A party and a political movement is not just about one person. And there’s more nuance than what any given particular source provides about a given candidate. I like Hillary. But I know she comes with baggage and she doesn’t support some of the policies that I like. The strengths you just listed RE Hillary are true but there are weaknesses as well. I think she was a decent candidate this time. But she faced a lot of tough stuff. A lot of misinformation. So if you’re more sympathetic to her now, then that’s great. But maybe we shouldn’t go all halo effect on her now either, right?

        • In any case, Bernie Sanders and Warren are not extreme. As you said in a recent post, Sanders is an FDR democrat. Yeah. I think you are done here.

        • lesliegraham1

           /  November 13, 2016

          ‘Crazy talk’ about systems that have been in place in Europe for over half a century.
          You have no idea what ‘socialist’ even means and you sound about 12 years old.

        • My inner twelve year old breaks out at times. I still have my bernie signs, so I am ready but I think that train left the station. I would love to be wrong about that. Thanks for helping me adjust. The idea of President Trump has spun my bearings and rocked my sensibilities.

    • An ancient poem I’ve always loved. One I feels captures this moment completely:

      “Defenseless under the night
      Our world in stupor lies;
      Yet, dotted everywhere,
      Ironic points of light
      Flash out wherever the Just
      Exchange their messages:
      May I, composed like them
      Of Eros and of dust,
      Beleaguered by the same
      Negation and despair,
      Show an affirming flame.”

      Reply
  46. wili

     /  November 10, 2016

    The job losses for the working class have already started:

    The morning after the election, GM announced a major shift from car production to trucks, and cut 2,000 jobs in its midwest U.S. plants. No word yet whether that will affect production of the Chevy Bolt.

    http://media.gm.com/media/us/en/gm/home.detail.html/content/Pages/news/us/en/2016/nov/1109-production.html

    Reply
  47. Suzanne

     /  November 10, 2016

    Just got off a telephone conference call with NRDC and it’s members…and according to them it had hundreds and hundreds of participants in today’s call. I find this comforting…and tells me that Progressives are not going to sit idly by and just react to the Lunatic’s administration. We are already moving forward with proactive action…now.

    At NRDC they are already preparing to obstruct the Trump Administration in every way with all the roadblocks they can including aggressive litigation. They reminded us that despite what Trump might say…he can’t just come in and tear up the Paris Agreement or just rescind the CPP. And they are already preparing and focusing on how to stop him when he tries.
    They did not minimize the threat he presents…but they feel in their 46 year history they have had many attacks from Republicans …and they are prepared to make it incredibly difficult for the Trump administration to achieve their goals. And make it too difficult for him because of the political capital he would have to expend to get all that he wants. They are also relying on all of us to exert pressure to stop him.

    I don’t want to go on and on. But I just wanted to say…that I think if we Progressives stay actively involved and vocal…we can try to minimize the damage that is to come via the Lunatic and his minions. I took great comfort that there were so many on this telephone conference call. People are “fired up and ready to go”….and we have to all stay that way.

    One more thing..A question was asked that I thought was great. Someone was asking about if NRDC had plans to form a coalition with other Green groups and with other groups on the “hit list” by the Trump people…for example Planned Parenthood…Human Rights Campaign etc. In other words…getting them to utilize resources to unify other groups to work together to fight against what is going to come. NRDC did say this is being discussed..and in fact they had Planned Parenthood at their September board meeting..and have had NAACP at another. (I personally think the idea of a coalition is a good one..since we are facing such incredible conservative forces).

    There was more..and if others are interested I can relay more details. I am just glad so many are already in “full attack” mode…and motivation at the grassroots level seems high to me just from this one telephone conference. Fingers crossed.

    Reply
    • Suzanne

       /  November 10, 2016

      And while I was on the phone with NRDC..an email came in from 350.org..and their video conference information came in…it will be Friday, November 11th at 7 Eastern.

      Reply
    • Great to hear.

      Reply
    • Fantastic news! And so good to see that so many people are mobilizing on so many fronts.

      In other news, and this shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone here, Trump’s not draining the swamp in Washington, he’s filling it:

      https://theintercept.com/2016/11/08/trump-transition-lobbyists/

      Reply
    • Dave Person

       /  November 11, 2016

      Hi Suzanne,
      Unfortunately, litigation has severe limits. I know most of the NRDC folks working on forest and land issues in the Pacific Northwest and I have been a player in several of their cases involving the Tongass National Forest. The problem for all those groups is that the courts rarely decide cases on scientific merit. When the plaintiffs and defendants each have their experts, the courts almost always defer to the agency experts. Groups like NRDC tend only to win cases when they can nail the agency with violating process not on the merits of science. The agency has to be shown to have violated process or the law. That can be a high bar to overcome. I hear that Sarah Palin is nosing around to become Secretary of Energy or Interior. Can you imagine that? Think how the science programs in those agencies will go down. One thing under Trump that will come up very quickly, is that the repubs will push hard for oil and gas development on BLM, National Park, National Wildlife Refuge, and National Forest lands. On top of that, they will try to engineer massive give aways and sell offs of those lands to states and then private entities. Senator Lisa Murkowski and Congressman Don Young are already hard at work on those efforts. NRDC and like organizations are going to be really busy.

      Reply
      • Suzanne

         /  November 11, 2016

        Thanks Dave for your thoughts. The issues you listed were discussed yesterday at length, and they know these will be some of the first attacked by the Lunatic’s administration. And again, they were not minimizing the hurdles. What I found a bit (and I mean a bit) hopeful, is how many people not only at the NRDC but with their membership…are how fired up are prepared to fight not only with aggressive litigation, but with activism to minimize the damage. Not just send a check …but feet on the ground activism…Making noise! I am not naive, I know we are facing incredible odds over the next four years…but if Progressives can get off their couches…and take to the streets…just maybe we can slow down some of the damage.

        If I don’t hold onto some “ray of hope”…I will curl up in a ball…and none of us can afford to do that…being proactive and vocal is all we have left.

        Reply
        • Dave Person

           /  November 11, 2016

          Suzanne,
          I agree entirely with you. Many groups will be energized but one thing they all need to do is rethink strategies that focus so much on the federal government. They really need to concentrate a lot more on the individual states, something the repubs have been doing for years, often through ALEC.

          dave

        • Suzanne

           /  November 11, 2016

          Absolutely…spot on!!

  48. Reply
  49. Marcusblanc

     /  November 10, 2016

    I appreciate all the attempts to look at the reasons for this, but as an outsider, I’m surprised that the last minute intervention by the FBI, has not got more attention.

    It was as big a blow for her as ‘pussygate’ was for Trump, but it seemed very, very thin. I cannot recall an intervention like that, without substantive evidence. Are there any precedents?

    Reply
  50. John McCormick

     /  November 11, 2016

    How many stages in the grieving process?

    Yesterday lightning strike as would a terminal diagnosis from an oncologist and today I am damned mad at the cancer I could have prevented.

    I hope tomorrow is positive. I told myself the next step has to be ahead.

    He and the Congress will rescind Obama’s Executive Orders, put myron ebel of competitive enterprise institute in charge of EPA reshuffling. More to the point, federal laws on same-sex marriage would be shifted to the States along with many other federal laws.

    Bring it on. States have very huge political power to change this nation by governing us where our Congress and President cannot..

    Most of America’s big environmental laws were enacted, in DC between 1970 and 2009. DC was headquarters for national enviro groups that lobbied the legislation to the President’s desk. The past 50 years we have ignored the politics of our States. It is time to change that.

    Reginal Greenhouse Gas Initiative is 9 Northeast States that agreed to lower carbon dioxide emissions from the region’s power plants by 2.5% each year through an auction of emission allowances the plants buy. The proceeds go towards State-wide energy efficiency and renewable investment rebates.

    RGGI can study how to cap transportation fuels through a similar auction and use that huge new revenue to insulate more homes

    I know a blog is not the place to start a conversation. This will be archived tomorrow.

    So, look around at the opportunities we have in the States if they are governed by honest people. We are at the end point.

    Reply
  51. Robert In New Orleans

     /  November 11, 2016

    The Terrorists Have Won:

    Reply
  52. Robert In New Orleans

     /  November 11, 2016
    Reply
  53. coloradobob

     /  November 11, 2016

    A warm climate is more sensitive to changes in atmospheric CO2

    “Our results imply that the Earth’s sensitivity to variations in atmospheric CO2 increases as the climate warms,” explained Friedrich. “Currently, our planet is in a warm phase—an interglacial period—and the associated increased climate sensitivity needs to be taken into account for future projections of warming induced by human activities.”
    Using these estimates based on Earth’s paleoclimate sensitivity, the authors computed the warming over the next 85 years that could result from a human-induced, business-as-usual greenhouse gas emission scenario. The researchers project that by the year 2100, global temperatures will rise 5.9°C (~10.5°F) above pre-industrial values. This magnitude of warming overlaps with the upper range of estimates presented by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

    Read more at: Link

    Reply
  54. coloradobob

     /  November 11, 2016

    Stockholm had its snowiest November day in 111 years
    The Local (Sweden), Published: 10 Nov 2016 06:51 GMT+01:00
    The Swedish capital had more snow than on any November day in a century.
    Stockholm was covered by at least 30 centimetres of snow early on Thursday morning, more than on any other November day since records began in 1905, according to national weather agency SMHI. .

    http://www.thelocal.se/20161110/stockholm-just-set-a-new-snow-record

    Reply
  55. coloradobob

     /  November 11, 2016

    The drought in Southern Africa , has taken a wild swing.

    Reply
  56. Cate

     /  November 11, 2016

    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/strange-pumping-effect-above-asia-threatens-the-ozone-layer

    Aerosols above the Tibetan plateau are hitting the stratosphere.

    “A weird phenomenon is happening high above the Tibetan Plateau and the Himalayas that could prove to be an atmospheric nightmare. Pollutants that gather from India and China in the lowlands around the mountains can be boosted as high as 18 kilometers, reaching the stratosphere—the atmospheric layer directly above the troposphere that contains most of Earth’s ozone. That is far higher than aerosols from vehicles, power plants and fires usually reach. Once aerosols are that high they can spread globally, destroy the ozone layer that protects us from ultraviolet radiation and exacerbate global warming, researchers warn.”

    DT would be so all over this.

    DT, we miss you. Please be well.

    Reply
  57. Cate

     /  November 11, 2016

    Michael Mann brings real back into politics.

    “Climate trumps everything.” Even Trump.

    “Finally—and perhaps this is where all Americans can find common ground—the clean energy revolution is well underway. The rest of the world is no longer debating climate change, it is moving on with a rapid transition to carbon-free energy. Do we want to be left behind in the great economic revolution of the 21st century? Or do we want to compete in the clean energy race, improving our international competitiveness and making our nation greater? Do we want to buy solar panels and wind turbines from China, or do we want to manufacture and sell them to China and everywhere else?”

    https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/climate-trumps-everything-no-matter-who-is-president/

    Reply
  58. Cate

     /  November 11, 2016

    And one more from SA—responses from its Board of Advisors.

    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/richard-dawkins-and-other-prominent-scientists-react-to-trump-rsquo-s-win/

    “The president-elect has expressed disinterest or disdain for the results of scientific analyses relevant for public policy, and the vice president–elect has been an open enemy of science.”

    —-Lawrence Krauss, director of Origins project, Uni of Arizona

    Reply
  59. June

     /  November 11, 2016

    This may be reversed when he-who-shall-not-be-named ascends to the throne, but maybe the momentum mentioned above will prevail.

    U.S. seeks to speed wind, solar development on federal lands

    The Obama administration on Thursday took a major step toward encouraging development of renewable energy on federal lands in six Western states by establishing a competitive bidding process similar to how oil and gas leases are awarded.

    http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-energy-renewables-idUSKBN1352NW

    Reply
  60. June

     /  November 11, 2016

    This, like geoengineering, really concerns me. I don’t think we know enough about the complex interactions that sustain our ecosystems to start meddling. We are just starting to discover the impacts of climate change on ecosystems.

    “Climate change is changing nature so much it may need ‘human-assisted evolution’, scientists say”

    The researchers suggested humans might have to step in to help nature.
    “One such strategy is to use assisted gene flow, the managed movement of individuals or gametes between populations to mitigate local maladaptation in the short and long term,” the researchers said.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change-global-warming-changing-nature-human-assisted-evolution-a7410286.html

    Reply
  61. Spike

     /  November 11, 2016

    Sorry you folks and the rest of the world have to deal with this jackass. Elected on 25% of the vote! We thought Brexit was bad being pushed through with 37%, and as with Trump it was all based on lies.

    Since the Brexit vote I and numerous others have been fighting the right wing coup we have had in the UK, and have learned much, and the following is some of what I and others have been trying to do.

    Support your young people and minorities/victims; keep questioning their democratic mandate like a dripping tap; use the functioning parts of the state (courts/local governments etc..); form groups of like minded citizens (I am in several anti-Brexit ones) to bounce off one another and give mutual support and spread best practice; march/demonstrate and be visible but respectable; do not stand aside when hate speech is being used – I’ve reported numerous instances; empathise and show concern for victims and do what you can to help; publicise the views of prominent intellectual and external critics who will not be perceived to be in the internal political dog fight.

    Above all keep questioning the legitimacy of what they are doing and raise reasoned doubts and concerns. Try and peel away the half-hearted naive supporters amenable to reason or the raising of doubt from the real head bangers.

    I don’t know if we can stop Brexit but we are giving them a real fight and they are clearly rattled judging by their reaction. At the very least we may salvage something from the wreckage of our country no prevent isolation in a repressive police state.

    Whatever totalitarian states jail or repress dissenters for is worth doing – otherwise they wouldn’t bother.

    Reply
  62. coloradobob

     /  November 11, 2016

    5,000 people on the ground fighting over 30 wildfires in the Southest US.

    Smoke Blankets Southeast as Winds Fuel More Than 30 Wildfires

    https://www.wunderground.com/news/southeast-wildfires

    Reply
  63. coloradobob

     /  November 11, 2016

    Aqua/MODIS
    2016/316
    11/11/2016
    08:10 UTC
    Fires and smoke in northern India

    Reply
  64. coloradobob

     /  November 11, 2016

    Trump’s draining of the swamp has a lot of alligators on the project ……..

    Trump Campaigned Against Lobbyists, but Now They’re on His Transition Team

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/12/us/politics/trump-campaigned-against-lobbyists-now-theyre-on-his-transition-team.html?action=click&contentCollection=Politics&module=Trending&version=Full&region=Marginalia&pgtype=article

    Reply
  65. Please stop all this talk about politics. And get back to what you guys are good at: reporting the effects of climate change. While you’re shedding tears about your grief that you’re suffering over Trump, and all of what you say does not matter since the guy is yet to take over the White House Until January, so it come across as cry babies and victims exposing their wounds. What about the 27 Thousand people forced out of their homes in The Dominican Republic!! Are your tears over losing an election more important than the tropical flooding just off our coastline? If we don’t have evidence to shove in the face of deniers, we’re muck. So stop whining and get the data and push it in their faces!!

    Reply
    • Policy is the other side of data, Xavier. We need to make the connection between the two or data is just shouting into the wind. And policy comes from politics. Part of changing direction involves holding bad actor politicians accountable. And Trump is among the worst of them all.

      As for what’s happening in Dominica, it can’t be separated from the fact that Trump is now planning to dump more carbon into the atmosphere and make these kinds of events even worse. The two are linked.

      That said, thank you for your concern and we will absolutely continue to report here and to provide the analysis and effective communication necessary to help people to understand how the data really affects them on a personal level and how it’s so very critical that we get politicians in power who understand the problem.

      Reply
  66. Yeah, of course, the DNC. What did they do to elect Hillary? (A lot.)

    While you’re at it, others deserving of protest:

    1) Jill Stein/Bernie or Bust folks, who would prefer to take out their anger at the DNC and consign the rest of us to Trump’s Supreme Court appointees for at least a decade. Hey, purity is all.

    2) The media, that elevated Trump from a massive zero and also focused to the point of insanity on Hillary’s use of a personal e-mail server.

    3) WikiLeaks and the Russians, who meddled in this campaign in a way that appears to have been quite effective.

    4) James Comey and the dicks at the FBI who helped get him to intervene in the campaign at the last minute (and while people were already voting).

    5) The DNC, that for some weird reason decided to back a former First Lady, with a bazillion contacts, friends, and allies throughout the party organization, instead of a Senator who had never deigned to run on the Democratic ticket (for the record, I supported Bernie and contributed to his campaign, because I thought the Dems were too close to Wall Street).

    6) Fox News and the other far-right media, who created an alternative universe that served as a playground for racists, sexists, homophobes, religious fundamentalists (not calling them Christian) and anti-intellectuals (like climate science deniers) to have their worst instincts validated and supported.

    7) The pollsters, the best of whom were still saying there was a 70% chance of Hillary winning, right up to the end, and who definitely gave the impression earlier (before Comey stepped in) that she was headed for a big victory.

    8) The millions of Democrats who voted for Obama, but either did not turn out this time or defected–Trump’s vote was down slightly from Romney’s.

    9) The Electoral College.

    That’s a short list. I could go on, but you get the general picture. But by all means, let’s kick the crap out of the DNC. That should fix things right up.

    Reply
  67. Ridley Jack

     /  November 14, 2016

    Insane Arctic Heat right now and the forecast on Climate Reanalyzer is for the arctic to hit 7 plus C in the coming days.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

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

%d bloggers like this: