Vote 2016

For American readers – As you plan for your business day on November 8, 2016 – Please remember to Vote.

I originally posted the photo below on Patently-O back in 2004 with the following caption:

Here is a picture of my neighbor and Senate hopeful Barack Obama and his daughter casting his vote.

80 thoughts on “Vote 2016

  1. 7

    At 3.1.1.1 Ned writes:

    “Max is entirely right about the average Joe and their anger.”

    Sometimes revenge is slow to deliver. For example, it was Maggie Thatcher in the early 1980’s that created the English “Rust Belt” and started the wave of deregulation and globalisation, which has led to this summer’s BREXIT.

    The International Monetary Fund has an Economic Research Department. It recently published a Research Paper that explains the slow-to-emerge long term corrosive effects of globalisation on society. Economists: how do you put a price on policies that in the course of 40 years destroy society?

    But when Maggie Thatcher on globalisation warned us with her mantra TINA, she was right. However, there is a choice, how best to manage globalisation. Let’s see if Trump (the supposed expert manager) can do it better.

    TINA = there is no alternative

    1. 6.1

      Lol.

      Great question: what do racist misogynist a holes want out of the patent system?

      Let’s give all these white power lizard brains a free software patent! Because that’s the path to a golden future for them.

      Seriously, though, America just took a big step down the craphOle. Patents can’t fix this mess.

        1. 6.1.1.1

          patent leather, I too do not know what will happen now, but I had no hope that it would get better under Clinton (e.g., repeal IPRs). At least there is hope now.

    2. 6.2

      Aside from the Malcolm rant, I would expect that the impetus to not accept “politics as usual” and to break from beltway stagnation might be good news for those who want positive change from within the patent office.

      1. 6.2.1

        MM

        It’s difficult to assess the principles of economics and property rights (especially IP) which would come to bear from an individual and a party which eschews ideas and principles as such.

        Note that the style this far seems to point toward central management/ dictatorial rule (force Apple to manufacture in the US) and not towards laissez-faire capitalism, isolationism and protectionism (wall with Mexico, tear up NATFA etc.) and not toward voluntary trade and competition, and what seems to be lip-service borrowed from the left regarding job fabrication in resource and manufacturing sectors. The entrenched right as anti-intellectual, has never been able to persuasively argue or stand for the moral basis of individual rights.

        This other sort of kool-aid bears little difference from what has been offered from the socialists, but it’s only a slightly different spin on Statism, paternalism, interventionism. Certainly there is little reason to expect any actual shrinkage of government or its interference with the rights of individuals.

        There is little reason to assume any principled rally for the intellectual property rights of individuals.

        So, what are IP rights to minds like these? Perhaps they are nothing… and will be completely ignored, or perhaps they will be seen as an opportunity, as something to take for the welfare of the public at large or some lobbying demographic.. I hear someone now in power has a lot of experience with eminent domain and takings….

        1. 6.2.1.1

          anon2, this is simple.

          Since ’99, median incomes have gone down by thousands as jobs moved offshore. The cause of this are free trade (not fair trade) deals like NAFTA, high corporate taxes, too much regulation of all sorts, but not so much high labor rates. I know this as I worked for Seagate and was a pioneer in moving jobs offshore.

          Trump wants to reverse the trend. In patent law, he needs to reduce the cost of obtaining an enforceable patent, and making enforcement of patents much more reliable. That goal can, in my opinion, be best achieved by ending post grant reviews of all sorts, reversing eBay, Medimmune and other such cases, while at the same time continuing to outlaw business method patents and functional claiming that are so much subject to abuse.

          I had no hope of any reform along these lines under Clinton. I do under Trump.

          1. 6.2.1.1.1

            I worked for Seagate and was a pioneer in moving jobs offshore.

            Listen to Ed Heller! He’s totally not a self-interested self-absorbed moneygrubber!

            He really cares about America. Sure he does. Because he was a “pioneer” in screwing working people over to serve the interests of “investors.”

            LOLOLOLOLOL

    3. 6.3

      If the reports of Peter Thiel being appointed to the Supreme Court are correct, I think we can expect even tougher standards for software claims. Silicon Valley hates software patents.

      1. 6.3.1

        Greg, I think you would be right there. Thiel would “get it.” I could think that even MM could get behind Theil for this reason.

        1. 6.3.1.1

          I could think that even MM could get behind Theil for this reason.

          This may come as a total shock to you but Theil’s alleged position on software patents isn’t a very compelling reason to support his nomination as a (LOL!) Supreme Court Justice.

          It’s funny to see how some people’s brains work, though. Justice Peter Theil? Wow.

  2. 5

    link to nytimes.com

    “Trump has shown that our message is healthy, normal and organic — and millions of Americans agree with us,” said Matthew M. Heimbach, a co-founder of the Traditionalist Youth Network, a white nationalist group that claims to support the interests of working-class whites. It also advocates the separation of the races. […]

    “What you can’t say is that we’re just a bunch of marginal l00ns,” [Robert Spencer] said.

    Well, Robert, you’re wrong about that. You are definitely a bunch of marginal l00ns!

    The funniest part: “anon” can’t bring himself to admit that there’s some very important differences between the Republican Party and and the Democratic Party. Like the former is the vastly preferred party of whiny white p0wer racists and the latter one isn’t (and that’s been true for a long, long, long time). But he’s a very serious person! And it’s oh-so-uncivil talk about this stuff.

    1. 5.1

      It is most definitely NOT a case of “can’t admit” Mr. Trump of this blog.

      Rather, you want to ig nore the Donkey CRP dribbling down your chin.

      1. 5.1.1

        It is most definitely NOT a case of “can’t admit” Mr. Trump of this blog.

        Says the guy who refuses to admit what everyone on the planet with more than half a brain can see a zillion miles away: the US Republican Party is the party of racists and their Presidential candidate actively worked to empower those people, and he succeeded.

        But go ahead and keep telling your story about “both parties are the same cr@p”. After all, it’s not like these white nationalist lizard brains have bad reputations. They’re very serious people! Super thoughtful. Deep thinkers. Just like you.

        1. 5.1.1.1

          You are WAY off – I have NO part of the Elephant CRP.

          You seem to have a real problem with that.

            1. 5.1.1.1.1.1

              Your response misses – as usual.

              And as usual, you attempt your number one meme of
              A
              O
              O
              T
              W
              M
              D

              Wake up son

      2. 5.1.2

        And just so nobody forgets (because the effort that will be expended to make everyone forget this is going to be enormous): Trump didn’t work these fascists into a frenzy by himself. He was backed all the way by Republicans, up and down the ticket. Those same Republicans have been actively grooming and coddling this same batch of scum for years and a lot of them are going to end up in the House and the Senate where they will continue to do whatever they can to break everything they can’t control and then blame the broken-ness on hippies and brown people. Rinse, recycle, repeat, as they slowly swirl down the drain clutching their precious guns.

        1. 5.1.2.2

          “this same batch of scum”

          Was last night seriously not enough to get you to understand that denigrating your opponents as “scum” and “RAYCISTS” and “ISMS” etc. is a losing strategy and instead you need to present a viable, non-white-exclusionary (esp. a non-poor-white-exclusionary) path forward? You’re supposedly smart, but you don’t seem capable of understanding that basic political fact.

          Literally everytime you or one of your ar se hat elitist buddies does that Trump et al quite literally gets stronger and their peens that much harder and excited.

          Or are you just addicted to that toxic mix that worked so well for 50 some years? The “cuck”servative which it worked so well on has been exposed MM, and for all time they will be exposed. The mainstream conservative will forever be less politically “cucked” from this day onward. Hate of your toxic mixture will bind them together as a strong glue, forever blocking your “progress” (most of which the avg nobody barely cares about or whether or not it happens) until you and yours cease.

          “where they will continue to do whatever they can to break everything they can’t control and then blame the broken-ness on hippies and brown people.”

          You mean assign responsibility for it, correctly, to the people who caused it (regardless of whether they be hippies or brown or otherwise where “liberals” would give those people a “pass” because “eviiiil white letters”). There’s a slight difference between the two, though gynocentrists like yourself don’t understand that difference.

          1. 5.1.2.2.1

            denigrating your opponents as “scum” and “RAYCISTS” and “ISMS” etc. is a losing strategy and instead you need to present a viable, non-white-exclusionary… path forward…

            All other things being equal, I am sure that this is true. We do not win votes by disparaging our opponents as racists, and we would do well to acquire the self-discipline necessary not to make this mistake.

            That said, I doubt that this is really what we need to do to win next time. Donald Trump won fewer votes than Mitt Romney. In other words, Trump did not really “bring in new voters” as some are giving him credit. He actually lost voters relative to 2012. However, Hillary Clinton also won fewer votes than Barack Obama, and that is why she lost overall.

            What I learn from that observation is that we need to focus on using our primary process to select charismatic candidates. Pres. Obama was more charismatic than Sen. McCain or Gov. Romney. By contrast, Mr. Trump was more charismatic than Sen. Clinton (may the Lord bless her, but potted plants are more charismatic than Sen. Clinton). Evidently, charisma can make up for nearly any other professional or personal flaw in a candidate.

            I am not sure whether we need someone who is more charismatic than Donald Trump next time, or whether we need merely to clear a certain minimal threshold of charisma. One way or the other, however, that is really the democrats’ most urgent task. If we learn not to disparage our working-class white fellow citizens, that would be good, but probably not essential.

            1. 5.1.2.2.1.1

              “That said, I doubt that this is really what we need to do to win next time. Donald Trump won fewer votes than Mitt Romney. In other words, Trump did not really “bring in new voters” as some are giving him credit. He actually lost voters relative to 2012. However, Hillary Clinton also won fewer votes than Barack Obama, and that is why she lost overall.”

              What you’re saying is not technically true, though I understand what you’re saying. There were “new” voters for the republican ticket, beyond a doubt, there were simply a lot of old republicans that refused to vote for him. So long as he conducts himself well in the next 4 years don’t count on that last part happening again. But you’re right, if you want to win, all you have to do is run another first time black candidate (save for small time) on the “hope and change” wagon who is a great orator. Gl finding that purple squirrel again. But, you do still have the media machine, for now. Better hope the conservatives don’t start making their own in the mean time. And you better hope the media’s power doesn’t continue waning in favor of the alternative media on youtubes etc. You’ll also have to contend with the “big beautiful wall” that he’ll have built by then, and a ridiculous number of liberals self-deporting. I can barely count how many liberals (and illegals and “brown people” in general) I’ve heard of that are firmly literally self deporting right now.

              “What I learn from that observation is that we need to focus on using our primary process to select charismatic candidates. ”

              Indeed, but gl with that when your message is if not outright explicitly, then outright heavily implied, anti-white literally based on race and that is increasingly exposed even to your own base. Especially as the internal pressure from illegals wanes as they leave or are deported/jailed.

              “Evidently, charisma can make up for nearly any other professional or personal flaw in a candidate.”

              Course, check out “charisma on command” youtube channel.

              “however, that is really the democrats’ most urgent task.”

              I somewhat disagree, Trump is going to so fundamentally change the field upon which you’re playing you will barely recognize it in 4 years. Gynocentrism and the feminazi society it spawns will further deteriorate over the next few years as the population becomes “woke” to those tricks (this was going to happen regardless of who won but will now be sped up). Globalist power will recede around the globe over the next 4 years additionally and your war chests will not be quite so full. You have a fundamental messaging problem that trumps your charisma problems, deep though they be.

              1. 5.1.2.2.1.1.1

                I suppose that it will be interesting to see in four years how your predictions pan out. I find them implausible, but I also regarded Donald Trump’s chances of winning as absurd as recently as 8 months ago, so clearly my own intuitions of “plausibility” are unreliable.

                1. As so very often happens when one chooses to stop engaging in discussions because one does not like what the other side puts on the table.

              2. 5.1.2.2.1.1.2

                There were “new” voters for the republican ticket,

                Sure, if all we mean by “new” is “I voted republican this time, but did not vote in the last election” (and, to be fair, this is a more natural sense of the word “new” than the sense in which I am using “new”), then Trump brought “new” voters to the GOP. Of course, literally every candidate brings “new” voters in that sense.

                I was using the word “new” to mean a net gain in 2016 relative to what the party had 2012. I grant that this less straightforward sense of “new,” but I gather that you follow my broader point. Both Mr. Trump and Sen. Clinton lost voters for their respective parties on net. Mr. Trump received fewer votes than Mitt Romney (indeed, fewer votes than John McCain or George Bush, despite the fact that the voting eligible population has increased since those men ran for office). Sen. Clinton received fewer votes than Barack Obama. Mr. Trump, however, was able to confine his lost votes to states, like Texas, where he did not need them, whereas Sen. Clinton lost her votes in places like PA and MI where the loss could matter.

                As I look more carefully at the data that are emerging, however, I wonder how important my charisma hypothesis is. All other things being equal, I am sure that a more charismatic candidate will be better than the charisma-challenged candidate with which my party ran this time. That said, I see that in Wisconsin, the number of eligible voters lacking the requisite photo ID far outstrips the Trump margin of victory.

                In other words, perhaps we could have won with a charisma challenged candidate if only we had done a better job of making certain that our people had the requisite documents. That was probably not the sort of project that we could have completed in the few months between Clinton’s nomination and the election, but it is a doable task between now and 2020. Perhaps that should really be the #1 task for democrats: fighting the ID laws where we can, and organizing efforts to obtain IDs for voters where we cannot.

                1. “In other words, perhaps we could have won with a charisma challenged candidate if only we had done a better job of making certain that our people had the requisite documents.”

                  You guys and your “documents”. I wouldn’t dream too big on that, you guys already tried your hearts out on that front, and spent $$$$$$ doing it. And then some more $$$$$$$$.

                2. You are probably right about that. As I read more, I see that Clinton lost votes relative to Obama in Minnesota, despite the fact that MN actually relaxed its voter ID laws in 2016 relative to those in 2012. If democratic participation was down in MN (where ID could not have been a barrier), then why use ID laws in WI to explain the loss there? Charisma was probably the more important factor.

                3. Idk bro, I’m looking into it today, and I don’t think charisma was such a deciding factor, though that would have offset the problem. Looking at a variety of sources I see just thing after thing that was fcked with Hillary’s campaign right from the beginning. All the actually true wikileaks, her investigations she had to endure, her (or the DNC) rigging the primary, her making her gender an issue (didn’t win females for her it seems relative to barrack, but did lose her males), her checkered past on race topics, her previous support of and only halfhearted unbelieved turnabout on international trade policy, her failure to speak out against the wars that were unpopular, her knowing from the beginning that only one kind of race against trump would win (literally I’m not making this up she knew this from the beginning according to new leaks) was one where she got the media to portray Trump as a bigot/sexist instead of winning on her own merits, just on and on and on. The foibles were many and varied, just charisma wasn’t the beginning and end of her trouble, or even the major part it seems.

                4. Greg – your point is easily explained by the example I set (and advised others to take).

                  Perhaps you might want to recognize that impact.

              3. 5.1.2.2.1.1.3

                6, just observing MM wrestling with the situation he finds himself in tells us a lot. He continues to view everything in terms of race, and in his case, I am willing to believe that he actually believes this propaganda.

                That said, I am gladdened that Trump has repeatedly said that he is going to do something about the inner cites, etc. This will go a long way, I think, to easing racial tensions in this country and to expose the fear mongering that is going on here.

                Back in the day, Nixon argued that the Welfare State that Johnson was proposing was the wrong approach, and that it would end up with blacks living separately in their communities not unlike the Indians on their reservations. Well he was right.

                Eisenhower and Nixon were very large users of Affirmative action and have not been given enough credit for ending Separate But Equal. Warren was appointed by Eisenhower, and he single-handedly forged Brown v. Board. Most American do no know this, and or attribute the actions of Eisenhower and Nixon to Democrats. Yeah, those Republicans are goons (like yourself, says MM) and racists.

                I live in the San Jose area were people from all across the world live, work and play together. Here, there is no possibility of racism. None. What this proves to me is that integration does in fact work.

                1. “I am willing to believe that he actually believes this propaganda.”

                  He definitely does. The liberal left are literally the only people left besides fringe groups that give all that big of a sht about race. And it’s because of the constant blurbing on his media tubes, he’s otherwise quite smart enough to understand his way out of it. He probably didn’t hear Jon Oliver the other day informing him that, in fact, white liberals in NYC are now much much much more racistly segregated in their schools than the deepest “RAYCIST” southern areas. And that is precisely because the integration laws were drafted to carefully exclude them from having to integrate (huge surprise that liberals would do this even 50 years ago).

                  “That said, I am gladdened that Trump has repeatedly said that he is going to do something about the inner cites, etc. ”

                  It’s true, but there really nothing is to be done but clean up the crime so that businesses can come back. Maybe create some industry around those areas, but environmentalist laws are still strong and all the rest of the problems with industry in the US are also still in place, it’ll take awhile to truly revive urban areas. Plus, and as bad as this is to say, we have so many people in those areas who are so far “down the ladder” and who are outside the education system and “culture of success” (rather than the opposite culture) and would be unable to noticably move up the ladder in 4 years even if Trump did amazing things that I don’t think that you’ll see good progress in 4 years there except on crime and a little bit of business growth.

                  “Back in the day, Nixon argued that the Welfare State that Johnson was proposing was the wrong approach, and that it would end up with blacks living separately in their communities not unlike the Indians on their reservations. Well he was right.”

                  And yet here MM sits before you still enamored with the whole thing.

                  “. Here, there is no possibility of racism. None. ”

                  That’s not what google tells me, I get the feeling you haven’t been outside your ivory tower digging ditches with the lower class people of late.

                  Anyway we’re moving this discussion to the other thread so we don’t have to keep finding it.

            2. 5.1.2.2.1.2

              “Trump won fewer votes than Mitt Romney. In other words, Trump did not really “bring in new voters” as some are giving him credit. He actually lost voters relative to 2012. However, Hillary Clinton also won fewer votes than Barack Obama, and that is why she lost overall.”

              Food for thought here.

              How do you explain, Greg, Trump winning Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Michigan? I attribute it to working class Americans moving from the Democrats to the Republicans, a process that first started under Reagan.

              1. 5.1.2.2.1.2.1

                “I attribute it to working class Americans moving from the Democrats to the Republicans, ”

                That’s what some people on some media were saying, they saw the same trend.

      3. 5.1.3

        And I know it’s soooooo uncivilized to bring this stuff up.

        It’s so much better to just pretend that none of it is actually happening right in front of our noses. Nobody could see it coming, either! Nope. Total surprise.

        1. 5.1.3.1

          “And I know it’s soooooo uncivilized to bring this stuff up.”

          No MM, it’s legit to bring it up. But it is not legit to bring it up whilst trashing the other side. You can learn how to do it legit if you try, maybe.

            1. 5.1.3.1.1.1

              No. But while I appreciate he might act more of an ar se online like everyone does, this strikes me as something that he’s probably an ar se about irl moreso than his patent stuff.

  3. 4

    What a superb and touching picture.

    Best wishes from the UK to you and to all your readers and don’t forget to vote.

    Both Bill Clinton and his daughter Chelsea are alumni of University College, Oxford, of which I am also an alumnus. So college loyalty would dictate my preference if I were a US voter, which I am not.

    1. 4.1

      The right vote is the left vote,

      And the left vote is the right vote

      You don’t have to be a donkey to figure that out (though it probably helps).

      1. 4.1.1

        Sorry. It appears that we have let the rest of the world down. I did my part, but it was not enough.

    2. 4.2

      Paul, your support of your fellow traveler is noted. However, over time, you have consistently supported strong patent rights, which is hardly what today’s Democratic Party elites are about. They (and many Republican elites as well) have brought us a systematic weakening of patent rights, and a Supreme Court that is doing the same.

      Hopefully, and I do hope for this, the election of Trump bodes well for the US patent system. I had no hope that things would get better under a Clinton presidency.

      1. 4.2.1

        Trump gave a very positive and generous victory speech. Let’s hope that things continue that way.

        As a businessman, I agree that Trump MAY be better for the patent system. But only time will tell.

    1. 3.1

      I wasn’t bothered so much, Greg, about rewards, more about punishment, of people you think have treated you badly.

      Germany has coined a word for voters who use their vote to punish. It calls them the “Wutbuerger” (angry citizens). There are an awful lot of them in the former GDR.

      But not as many as in rural and small town England. The name for them in England is BREXIT-er. They were exposed only after the result of the Referendum. That’s because (in exercise of what little power they have) they chose not to tell the pollsters how they were going to vote.

      Continuing westwards across the Atlantic and further, to rural and small town America, where few if any read this blog, I wonder how many Wutbuerger are voting today. For me, in these days of advanced globalisation, they seem to be everywhere.

      1. 3.1.1

        I wasn’t bothered so much, Greg, about rewards, more about punishment, of people you think have treated you badly.

        Or, in the case of many US voters, punishing people because they’re not “True Americans”. There’s a word for those kind of people but it’s oh-so-uncivil to talk about it.

        Let’s all just be glad that they lost this election, bigtime, and their party is disintegrating before our eyes. Were it not for gerrymandering and voter suppression, the party would already be in the dustbin instead of clinging on and trying to break every aspect of the government that they can’t control.

        But I digress! It’s time to celebrate. And get ready for the midterms in 2018. ;)

        1. 3.1.1.1

          MM, Let’s all just be glad that they lost this election, bigtime, and their party is disintegrating before our eyes. Were you speaking of Hillary and her party?

          Today the people voted to put an end (at least for the time being) to elitist rule by sweeping the Democratic Party completely out of power for the first time since 1928. Was this rebuke the fault of Hillary and her fellows? I certainly think it was.

          I view what happened almost as revenge even though Trump is being given all the credit. He was the one who galvanized the built up anger you see on display.

          Max is entirely right about the average Joe and their anger.

      2. 3.1.2

        “they chose not to tell the pollsters how they were going to vote.”

        I think you meant to say the pollsters are globalist shills, bought and paid for, right?

        “I wonder how many Wutbuerger are voting today. ”

        Quite a few hopefully.

        “For me, in these days of advanced globalisation, they seem to be everywhere.”

        At least max knows of the evil. Even if he stands with it.

        1. 3.1.2.1

          advanced globalisation

          Oh noes! So scary.

          Before we know it, white people will be outnumbered, civilization will collapse, and the US will have a woman President!

          Who will stand up for white men and their natural right to a straights-only bathroom stall?

          Answer: 6

          We can all breath a huge sigh of relief.

          LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

          1. 3.1.2.1.2

            MM makes a RAYCIST post in response to a post not involving RAYCISM. How surprising for the modern day leftist RAYCIST.

            1. 3.1.2.1.2.1

              MD brought up the Brexiters and the Wutbuergers. It’s kind of silly to discuss them without discussing racism. Of course, if you strongly identify with those folks, then you might feel bad when the topic of racism inevitably comes up. That’s your problem, not mine. Find someone else to strongly identify with, or own it.

              You do realize, of course, that plenty of people believe they can defend racism with “facts.” It’s kind of an old tradition. If you’ve never met those people, you should make an effort to meet them. It can be educational.

              But you probably have all the facts you need already.

              1. 3.1.2.1.2.1.1

                MM, I think you do have a blind spot here. When people’s incomes go down, and they lose their jobs as they are moved offshore, their anger is not motivated by racism. To think that it is misses the whole point. This thinking refuses to even consider that it is the policies of the Democratic and Republican elitists that have caused jobs to move offshore. It is refusal to accept responsibility for one’s actions.

              2. 3.1.2.1.2.1.2

                “It’s kind of silly to discuss them without discussing racism”

                See Ned’s post below. If you’d ever drive outside your liberal elitist enclave and actually talk to those dirty RAYCISTS then you’d note that very few of them have squat to say that’s RAYCIST of late, but they have a lot to say about the economic situation in their town being in the shter, and you won’t even hear them bring up “brown people” in the whole conversation. Make no mistake, some are explicitly RAYCIST, just like you, except they’re against brown people instead of whites like yourself. But they’re quite over the fallacious notion that brown people are causing the whole list of economic issues, if for no other reason than they literally don’t see their brown neighbors suddenly living in luxury. They’re ignorant but they’re not so ignorant that they don’t know globalization itself (and monetarist policies) is dwarfing “the brown effect”, or whatever you want to call it, as of the 2000’s.

      1. 3.2.1

        Well, at least Greg your desire here about single party control came through.

        Not sure that THAT is a good thing though.

        1. 3.2.1.1

          Greg and you may not like having a populist party in power, but that is what happens when one makes laws and adopts policies that hurt the common folk. Since 1999, the median income of Americans has declined by several thousand dollars. Millions of jobs have moved overseas. 98 Million Americans are unemployed.

          That is the record of the Democratic Party. It is not a proud record.

          1. 3.2.1.1.1

            My comment had nothing to do with the populist party being in power, and completely to do with power unchecked.

          2. 3.2.1.1.2

            Since 1999… is the record of the Democratic Party.

            Huh? I am fairly certain that Republicans were in control for much of that period. I suppose some misery might be the fault of democrats, but surely republicans share much of the blame.

            98 Million Americans are unemployed.

            Do you care to cite a source for this assertion? There are only ~320 million people living in the U.S. Some of them are children. Some (lots, actually) are retirees. Your assertion is numerically implausible

            1. 3.2.1.1.2.1

              Greg, re: 1999, from Trump’s POV, Bush was part of the problem — a freetrader just like the O’man. You do know that Bush will not speak to Trump.

              98 million have left the workforce is a number I have repeatedly heard.

      2. 3.2.2

        The one ***very small*** silver lining here is that we have—at least for the moment—avoided a constitutional crisis in which judicial vacancies go unfilled for two to four years.

  4. 1

    Remember? After this particular campaign in particular, how could anybody possibly forget to vote?

    Deliberately choose not to vote, perhaps.

    But I do hope not.

    1. 1.1

      Absolutely MaxDrei.

      If one does not want either the Elephant CRP sandwich or the Donkey CRP sandwich, write in Bernie Sanders and send a message.

      1. 1.1.1

        write in Bernie Sanders and send a message.

        The message being “I don’t understand basic facts about elections or politics but I am a very pure and precious snowflake.”

        Hooray! Freedom!

        1. 1.1.1.1

          Or not – but go ahead and enjoy that Donkey CRP sandwich while you whine about G-g-grifters and turn a blind eye to the candidate who is the biggest g-g-grifter with her g-g-grifter backers.

          1. 1.1.1.1.1

            the candidate who is the biggest g-g-grifter with her g-g-grifter backers

            LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

            Or I could vote for a fascist, racist, mis0gynist path 0 l0gical l y ing ign0ramus who will nominate some Federalist Society tree stump to the Supreme Court.

            Oh, it’s such a difficult choice.

            Better buy a big bucket for your tears, “anon.” She’s pretty much guaranteed to be around for 8 years.

            1. 1.1.1.1.1.1

              You keep on wanting to make it only a choice of a Donkey CRP sandwich and an Elephant CRP sandwich.

              Wake up son (and wipe your chin).

              1. 1.1.1.1.1.1.1

                Besides which, it is your own (eternal) whining about those selfsAme G-g-grifters that YOU are always whining about…

              2. 1.1.1.1.1.1.2

                only a choice of a Donkey CRP sandwich and an Elephant CRP sandwich

                In fact, narcissists like you are perfectly free to vote for yourself. After all, it’s all about you, right? Isn’t it always? It sure seems that way.

            2. 1.1.1.1.1.2

              Better buy a big bucket for your tears, “anon.” She’s pretty much guaranteed to be around for 8 years.

              I did not buy a bucket. I was well aware that my write-in was not going to win. I will point out though that the third party candidate appears to have taken 4%. The no-Elephant CRP and no-Donkey CRP statement has been made.

              Did you buy a bucket for yourself?

Comments are closed.