Re: 2016 Election
 

The problem here is that there is a good chance that Republicans could win even more seats here and then have enough seats in the Senate for a super majority.

Also, the bigger issue is that how much damage Trump will do in the mean time. Clinton with a GOP House and Senate would still have veto power. No change is better than bad change.

Re: 2016 Election
 

Had Clinton won, it would have been easy for the Republicans to tie the Democratic Senate incumbents to the failing Democratic administration (thanks in no small part to themselves) and have a greater chance of flipping them as a means to generate 'change'.

With a Republican administration, it becomes that much more difficult to try to flip those states (most of them are in the north east) because any possible changes to policy (creating jobs etc) wouldn't likely have had enough time to demonstrate any impact. Any controversies (and I think that there will be a few in this administration) are often tied to the governing party candidate, and makes it a tougher sell - "Sick and tired of all the corruption and controversies in Washington? Fix it by electing more of us!".

I would agree that Trump will do damage to the US, but a lot of his controversies are going to be rather 'overt', and people will be more vigilant and aware of some of the things that he does, or tries to do, rather than more subtle plots that are hidden in the details of bills etc. It may also force one or both of the major political parties (not holding my breath) to actually work to try and address the growing divide between the coasts and the middle of the country.

That being said, I sincerely hope that the next mass shooting / terrorist attack in the United States is by a Western European Christian by the name of Bill (or Joe, or Janet etc.)

Re: 2016 Election
 

I cannot help but wonder what is going through the minds of many of the electors to th electoral college. I cannot imagine any with a conscience are feeling comfortable with proposed cabinet members and Trumps mentally challenged tweeting as well as his use of his office for business purposes. The odds may be long..but they may surprise us.

The country can do nothing but go backwards with a Trump presidency.

Re: 2016 Election
 

All of these things could have also been said if Hillary won.

I do agree that with Trump it is more amusing.

I see no reasonable expectation of a joint effort to resolve the massive problems facing us, the system is designed to make that extremely difficult.

Seems the only option to a do nothing Congress is one that will do a lot that will piss off many people.

Re: 2016 Election
 

Would a Somali Immigrant qualify? Name tba.

Re: 2016 Election
 

Apparently one of the electors in Texas has already resigned over his conflict between his beliefs and the state vote.

Electoral College member resigns rather than vote for 'unqualified' Donald Trump | The Independent

My comments above aside, I wouldn't be surprised if there is a massive attempt to try to provide reason for electors to be able to abstain or switch their electoral vote, based on a justifiable position (rather than 'I don't personally like him')

Re: 2016 Election
 

That might bring a revolution sooner than expected.

Re: 2016 Election
 

At this point, it wouldn't, since it was a knife attack, and at this point, the motivation for the attack isn't really known (but because he was Somali, it will likely be deemed a terror attack - especially if there's no evidence to the contrary. Who knows, maybe he snapped as a result of people who were emboldened by Trump's win and were verbally attacking him

These type of stories however will fuel Trump's narrative however, regardless of the actual facts, but may not actually help in finding a solution.

Re: 2016 Election
 

I did not realise that using a knife and car? made a difference.

You assume there is a solution.

Re: 2016 Election
 

Should a significant amount of electors flip their votes, the reaction may depend on the reason voters flipped.

If it was a result of evidence of some shady business dealings, then there would likely be some pushback. If it was a result of an FBI report that conclusively demonstrated that the Trump campaign had actively colluded with the Kremlin about hacking emails, anti-Clinton stories etc., reaction might be more tempered.

Re: 2016 Election
 

Not long before this becomes a non issue and anything like that would not be immediate.

Re: 2016 Election
 

Unfortunately, in this case, using a knife and a car does make a difference because no one was actually killed, aside from the attacker. Sadly, between now and inauguration day, there will likely be more violence that will displace today's attack at OSU from the headlines.

Re: 2016 Election
 

But the GOP can counter with "Democrats are obstructing everything, you need to give us a super majority!" Plus, the Senate map is very much in favour of the GOP in 2018.

Several Democrats facing 2018 re-election are from states Trump carried | PBS NewsHour

I agree all the controversies will be overt, but they have been overt during the campaign and it hasn't damaged him. With the Supreme Court, repealing all of Obama's executive orders, rolling back climate change regulations etc., all looking likely, any "benefits" of a Trump presidency are massively outweighed.

Re: 2016 Election
 

The alternative is something much more 'covert'. Did you ever wonder why the ACA Marketplace had its renewal period (with higher rates) come out in November, just a week prior to the Election?

In a 'normal' campaign, that would have been an even bigger issue than it was in this one. Having the renewal option in November, along with a number items that caused issues with the effectiveness of the ACA were put as requirements for their approval of the bill by a group of Republicans led by Ted Cruz.

Regarding the Supreme Court, a Republican-majority would never have confirmed a single candidate that Clinton put forward, just because they could. Prior to the election, the Republicans had floated the idea that there really wasn't any specific number of Justices required by the Supreme Court, so perhaps that would require some study etc etc. In the 'worst case' scenario I mentioned previously, the super majorities could decide that say.. 15 justices was the right number, and appointed a raft of ultra-conservative judges that couldn't be stopped from confirmation.

Re: 2016 Election
 

What you're describing is an example of politics, and Republicans play the game much better Democrats. And yes it will far more obvious what Trump is doing because he's an incompetent moron. But the fact is the consequences can be much worse.

If Clinton won, I imagine Republicans would have pushed through Merrick Garland in the lame duck session because he's centrist and Clinton's pick would have been more liberal.

As it is, I don't see Democrats filibustering Trump's pick for the next two (or more) years, so there will be a conservative majority again. Also, look at who else is on the court. Will RBG, Breyer and/or Kennedy still be around in another four years? It could very easily start to look a lot more conservative without any packing. Not to mention all the openings on lower courts that Republicans have dragged their feet on.