[lawprofessor]

Elray, interesting points.

Yet I would say I'm not entirely comfortable being in the company of countries such as Kenya, Saudi Arabia, or even Turkey as I have spent time in each.   

FH "Ride or Die that's how we roll". Now that line made me laugh. 

Slow Fade, I too like to shoot and own many guns.  But then I come from the land of the red neck as well, just way north of you.  I'd go target shooting with you any day. 

That all said, I do think Phoenix is correct that voting decisions speak to core values.  Obviously many here have different core values. 

Personally I am not happy with Trump as President and I was not thrilled with Obama as President although the differences I had with Obama were strictly policy differences while the same cannot be said with Trump.  I won't say I would have divorced my h for voting for Trump but neither would I justify his vote or sweep it under the rug.  It would have exposed a core values difference in our marriage to me. 

 Interesting to me is the distancing people do to explain away Trumps words.  For example the boys will be boys position but if those words were applied under a normal situation (as opposed to Mlc of our husbands) and Trump grabbed me by the anything part, I dare say with my ex (again prior to mlc crazy) would have seriously and grievously harmed Trump.  I imagine the same is true for most of those who voted both for and against Trump.  Yet when generalized on to the nameless faceless mass of women its viewed as boys will be boys man talk by many apparently.  I suppose it helps make sense of cognitive dissonance. 

Americans have a way of believing THIS or THAT could never happen here.  Yet for most of us we believed THIS or THAT could never happen in our marriages and it did as we ended up here.  I for one won't ever fool myself that way again. 

Lp

[Phoenix]

I agree that protests should be peaceful and civil, but there are not as many checks and balances as the general public may have believed and that is becoming more clear. If the American public had been asked a month ago, if a white nationalist could be named to a top Whitehouse position and possibly gain top secret security clearance, the vast majority would have said no, due to checks and balances. So while there may not be a need to flee the country or hide in one's house, that doesn't mean the concerns people have are not legitimate or should be discounted. As the saying goes, "Privilege is thinking something is not a problem, because it's not a problem for you personally."

I'm sorry, but my vows said "in sickness and in health, till death do us part" and I don't take them lightly. If adultery did not send me to divorce court then certainly voting for an opposing candidate would not either.

The fact that we are on this site illustrates how seriously we all take our vows. It's why I woudn't partner with a person so fundamentally in opposition to those values, in the first place, and would expect and want the same integrity from him. Neither did anyone say they would divorce over just any "opposing candidate." We are talking about something very specific.

Elray, I'm sorry, but your statement is factually incorrect. Naming a white nationalist to a Whitehouse (sadly ironic term) position is an endorsement of racism. The KKK does not publicly endorse racism either. That doesn't change what they stand for. That is the insidiousness of racism. People who want to be in the mainstream, do not typically ever "endorse" racism as a statement. Racist actions are endorsing racism, however. Racisms is also not about categories such as "soft." That's like being a little bit pregnant. Racists  jokes aren't jokes.They are racism. Racist language isn't "PC." It's racism.  Are you aware of the issues with Pence in regards to women's rights, reproductive rights and conversion therapy legislation? It's why companies wanted to leave Indiana and people were refusing to visit, and Pence's popularity plummeted until he started walking some of it back. Are you familiar with the cases against Trump for racial housing discrimination? Did you hear the way he speaks about people and their cultures, the recording of how he spoke about women? That is sexist, sexual harassment and he admitted to sexual assault in that recording. Terms are used a lot without people knowing what they mean or what constitutes them, but there are a lot of good resources for learning more if anyone is interested.

Mary Matalin is a great example, Sally Wood. She changed her Republican party affiliation over Trump. That's what I mean. It's not about taking issue over any opposing candidate. It's this one and what he and his team stand for.

The most recent tally of the popular vote indicates that Trump won that also.

Not yet, anyway. This from an hour ago:

"Hillary Clinton’s lead in the popular vote over President-elect Donald Trump has surpassed 1 million, according to Dave Wasserman of the nonpartisan Cook Political Report.

As the final vote counts continue to trickle in a week after Election Day, Wasserman’s tally found that Clinton had 61,963,234 votes to Trump’s 60,961,185 as of Tuesday afternoon."

Phoenix

[Sally Wood]

Phoenix it depends on where you get the numbers.  The site that I visited was collecting all tallies and getting a value that was most likely the closest. But whatever the number - which appears in your post to be very close - the system is what it is and it no longer matters.

In regard to core values - what is thought about JFK screwing Marilyn in the white house or Bill Clinton getting a BJ in the oval office. And let's face it he was a horn dog as Governor.  I voted for both of them.  In regard to Clinton people were fond of saying "well as long as he doesn't screw the country".  Yeah, it was men will be men.  I was very disappointed that they couldn't keep their zippers shut while holding the highest office in the land.

In regard to offensive comments - Hillary did not do herself any favors by calling part of the populace that didn't agree with her "deplorables".  Sorry but the President is an employee of the people - ALL of the people and is not above us.  You don't talk down to somebody and then expect them to vote for you.  Sorry doesn't work that way. 

[karmirtsaghik]

Slow Fade, Elray, others

Please, read my previous posts about Clinton. There is definitely two sides of everything. But thinking that Trump is just middle of the road Republican is wrong. So far his prounoucements have been nothing but extreme. His world view unfortunantely alligns closely with the extremists who he appoints to his cabinet. In fact, if instead of Trump there was some moderate republican, I would have voted for him against Clinton.

Elray, I agree with LP that the countries that build walls on your list are not exactly beacons of democracy, even EU member Hungary under Orban took a big sharp turn towards totalitarianism, including suppression of free press and political freedoms.

Now I will address checks and balances. Congress should act as one of these checks and balances. We have republican majority in both chambers of Congress. So far what we learned about their agenda is distruction, dismantling, eliminating, repealing, everything that has to do with Obama's legacy. We have Paul Ryan who has had serious doubts for a very long while whether he is going or coming, and we have Mitch, who sounds like demolition machine.

Nothing constructive and inspiring came from that instituion for a long time. We know Paul Ryan's world view, especially concerning economic and fiscal policies and wealth distribution. We know that repealing Dobb-Frank and eliminating Consumer Protection Agency is on agenda. In fact, a day after the election there was a rally on the Wall Street, which bankers are saying was just an appetizer. In not so distant past, we the American tax payers were asked to bail Wall Street out. These regulations and agencies were created to safeguard from future fallouts. We also know that they what they are trying to do with Medicaid and Social Security.

Then we have Supreme Court, which thanks to Republican obstructionsm has only 8 members. I do not think that Trump will uphold Garland's nomination. Instead he will nominate someone even further on conservative scale than Scalia was. There goes another check and balance. He already expressed the desire to overturn Roe v. Wade, and uphold Citizens United.

Saying that we have  to trust our future with these "checks and balances" and wait and see what Trump is going to do is wrong. Because, guess what? He is already doing it. If you are ok with white suprematists seating in the White house, people like Giulliani and Sarah Pallin in your Government, swasticas in front of our Churches and in the bathrooms of our Elementary Schools, then more power to you. I am not ok with that and like millions of other people planning to exercise my constitutional right to protest, the same way I did at the wake of Iraq war. 
We are left to public, grassroots to keep our Government accountable.

[Phoenix]

A thoughtful well articulated post, karmirtsaghik. 

In regard to core values - what is thought about JFK screwing Marilyn in the white house or Bill Clinton getting a BJ in the oval office. And let's face it he was a horn dog as Governor.  I voted for both of them.  In regard to Clinton people were fond of saying "well as long as he doesn't screw the country".  Yeah, it was men will be men.  I was very disappointed that they couldn't keep their zippers shut while holding the highest office in the land.

Agreed. I've not seen anyone suggest otherwise.

In regard to offensive comments - Hillary did not do herself any favors by calling part of the populace that didn't agree with her "deplorables".  Sorry but the President is an employee of the people - ALL of the people and is not above us.  You don't talk down to somebody and then expect them to vote for you.  Sorry doesn't work that way.

That statement was said in a particular context, at a very specific event, and was not about all of Trump's supporters. It was about a portion that scares, and are deplorable, to a good number of people. But rather than belabor the point, Trump and his supporters should heed the same advice. It's why there is such a lack of support for his presidency. His words and actions are disrespectful--even abusive--of large swath's of our nation. He is not being an agent of ALL of us by any means. Hypocrisy in action.

Phoenix

[osb]

I think there are a lot of chicken little's running around saying the sky is falling. Personally I will wait and see. There is nothing to protest until there is something to protest. That is why we have checks and balances.

Never, ever would I divorce my husband because we have different views. We have 2 daughters, and I pity the man who messes with them, no way would my husband tolerate it. FROM ANYONE. He doesn't agree with what Trump said, but then he knows how men talk. He hears it all the time in his job.
And some advise now, don't EVER bash my husband because of who he voted for.

If you are opposed to sexism, bigotry, racism, and xenophobia but vote  for someone who in language and action (or inaction) endorses these things -- you are voting without integrity, "wholeness." Your vote doesn't reflect your core values.

I also feel that if my H were to have voted for a candidate that said (yes, in public and on tape) the things that Mr Trump espoused, that would be a deal breaker for me. Perhaps some people are in the comfortable position to blow off casual xenophobia, because it does not directly threaten them. I cannot - it disenfranchises me. Perhaps you'd have to wear my skin to know the feeling? I know if your president were to build a wall, my folks would be placed outside of it; if he deported, my folks would be on the tarmac; and even if he only fantasizes about this, it empowers people to hurt (verbally or physically) people who look like me, just for a little vicarious rush of power with impunity. A vote for that package is also a vote that endangers me and mine, even if you don't see the danger (...and why would you? To you, it's just chicken little; to me, it's exclusionary in the most painful way). So this is why our quite different lived experiences may give rise to different reactions to the same bluster.

[Anjae]

Hungary, Kenya, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, what a fourthsome of great examples, Kenya being the least bad of them all, and the one who may have a legitimates reason for a wall . If the US have to copy examples, they should copy good ones,
no bad ones. 

Turkey and Saudi Arabia building walls to keep jihadits aweay is a sort of a laugh. They both sponsors jihadits.

If my husband voted Trump (or an Euopean equivalent) that would be cause for irreconcilable differences and divorce.

Karmirtsaghik, please break your post into paragraphs. Otherwise they are hard to read (and I keep to have to edit them from carriages returns). Thank you.

[Thundarr]

I take a break from HS for a week and the best thread in years happens, and so up my alley!  I'll definitely have to catch up on both threads and jump into what will probably be #3 by that time.

[Velika]

If you are concerned about wellbeing of innocent people, then please do not vote for a bellicose president. Most of the protesters are holding messages of love, tolerance, and unity and are peacefully exercising a right many have died for.

If you have expeosnced a type of discrimination in a large or small way at the workplace or elsewhere, please draw on that to understand the prejudice and injustice some Americans have had to fight for for generations.

The schools that are providing a safe space for students to talk ARE the real world, just like this forum is a place people can turn to when they need a safe space to feel heard and understood when faced with a poorly understood mental illness.

We should all be grateful to those who are able to envision a better world.

[karmirtsaghik]

If you are concerned about wellbeing of innocent people, then please do not vote for a bellicose president. Most of the protesters are holding messages of love, tolerance, and unity and are peacefully exercising a right many have died for.

Velika I agree with you. Most of the people who voted for Trump out of dislike for Hillary are now waking up to a new much tougher reality. And now they are saying:
you see no big deal if we built a wall, see Saudi Arabia and Turkey built one.
deport 2-3 million people,
ban Muslims from entering the US,
a couple of swastikas in front of churches or in school bathrooms did not hurt anybody let police deal with it,
do not protest we have checks and balances,
racism is subject to interpretations,
Trump is our President let us wait and see what he does,
Intimidate and threaten our opponents and then call for piece and tolerance and understanding, no worries
He did not mean what he said, he is going to govern differently,
White supremacist in the White House, no worries.

The list of excuses and rationalization of the votes cast goes on and on. In fact Trump, at the moment has 61% disapproval rating. I.e. that certain percentage of  people who voted for him are regretting or at the least are not comfortable with their vote. Voting is a right and very important part for functioning democracy, but It also bears responsibility.

 As a descendant of Genocide survivors, I simply cannot agree with any of Trump's rhetoric. I do not take my life and liberties for granted. If Trump continues this way, we should look forward for him to try to overturn Korematsu vs. US, as well, and set the camps.