They will vote from fear and remain victimized. It takes a lot of guts and sacrifice and courage to deal a fatal blow to the Party. Even if they have the power to do so, they won't.

I fear that the stablishment's Trump-fear manipulation of the people will work for them. I commented on this last night:

Trump might do something dangerous and illegal …like Hillary has already done, and will no doubt continue to do.

As if Presidents had power and congress isn't permanently dysfunctional.

I'd like a description of ONE really terrible thing Trump might do and how Congress would instantly pass legislation allowing it — because both Parties are sooo anxious to approve whatever Trump wants to do. I'd also like to hear ONE description of a Trump process whereby the United States immediatley becomes a fascist state.

What does fascist even mean? A merger of corporations and government? That horse has already left the barn.

Anyway, I'm all ears. I want to get scared, too.

Trump is the Hillexit vote.

Perhaps the Millennials will get behind beating the Democratic Party at their own game.

racism, why would Trump raise it? But I think in some people, although they may not talk about it, maybe Obama did lower it. He didn't make an issue out of it, but just by being a capable leader, some people may have been surprised by that and may be more accepting now. They are, of course, much quieter than those outraged by his audacity.

As for Trump, I would hypothesize that we are more influence-able to let out our worse nature than our better? Or religion would have made us all into good people by now.

At any rate, he still worries me. But so does she. I am looking seriously at third party.

Now let's have a little chat about SJW. I had to go look it up, and per Wiki, "'Social justice warrior' (commonly abbreviated SJW) is a pejorative term for an individual promoting socially progressive views."

Srsly? You're going to use a pejorative term for progressives on a progressive blog?

I don't think you meant it that way, but it looks like a right-wing insult. You might want to rethink its use.

Begone! Before somebody drops a house on you, too!

Former CIA director, retired four-star General Michael Hayden, "warned that the US military would refuse to obey Donald Trump's orders if he became President and followed up on some of his campaign rhetoric."

National Review’s David French, an Iraq veteran, : “[W]ords cannot express the contempt I felt for Trump’s insistence that the military would follow his unlawful orders to murder women and children....If he won the White House and tried to implement his ‘policy,’ the military would refuse to comply — because it has honor, because it respects the law, and because it knows the lessons of history."

We remember Lt. William Calley, who ordered his men to massacre civilians at My Lai. We might remember Capt. Ernest Medina who established the rules of engagement for the assault on the hamlet and who reportedly participated in the massacre. We don't remember Warrant Officer Hugh Clowers Thompson Jr. who did what little he could to save some lives and to report to higher-ups what was happening, only to be ostracised and shunned.

I thus can't be certain that the US Military will do as General Hayden and David French insist and obey domestic and international law against the kinds of travesties Drumpf seeks to commit. Our own history shows that under the right conditions, US troops could act no differently than did the SS. All it takes is for the higher-ups to set the rules, as was the case at Abu Ghraib. How many officers went to the brig?

I'm not inclined under such history to trust the word of the military when -in the US- killing is incorporated into just about ever game available to kids reaching draft age - and the draft IS coming.

edited link

like "SJWs" and "PC police" and "femnazis". The first is to denounce them and the people who use them - this is the usual reaction and with regard to the people who normally use them the right reaction, but it is counterproductive, it simply adds to the social polarization and proves the evilsayers' point.
Please remember that "politically correct" was originally used by legitimate American leftists to label and expose stalinists. That is the second way. Stalinists are not leftists, and they existed. There are demagogues who call themselves progressives and feminists and such; and there are sincere people who have gone down a wrong path due to lack of thinking. By not exposing them or denouncing them or correcting them we perpetuate that which we detest, and we defeat our own purposes.