STILL wondering when Americans are going to fall out of love with Republicans.

In May, I posted this.

And after November 8th, I'm still left wondering.

How, after

* Nixon and his tenure of incompetence and illegal shenanigans,
* Tone-Deaf and bumbling Jerry Ford,
* Reagan and all of the scandal and ruin that happened during and because of him,
* Bush Sr and his recession and war,
* documented and data-backed evidence that Republican economic policy leads to awful periods of contraction, stock market crashes and joblessness,
* The obstructionist 104th Gingrich Congress,
* The DimSon and his reign of stupidity, incompetence, war and TWO recessions (the latter being the worst this country had seen in seven decades),
* The obstructionist Boehner and then Ryan Congress,
* Mitch McConnell, just about the most useless Senate leader in Modern American History,

. . . how, after ALL of this, with all of this information and visual evidence at their hands can people STILL be so vexingly in love with Republican politicians? WHY ARE THEY LIKED MORE???

How do they STILL see them as these heroes, these strong leaders who care for their needs? I DON'T have an answer to this. All the narrative control in the world shouldn't hold precedent over your eyes, your bank accounts and your futures.

I'm extremely disappointed in this country. I seriously thought we would grow up and get smarter by now.

You say I'm wrong? Pretty soon, with the control of that precious Judicial branch, the Plutocracy will be complete. They have most of the states, governorships and legislatures. They have the media. They have religion. Corporate America has them. Where am I wrong here?

The worst part about it all is . . . they don't even have to work nearly as hard to convince voters that their side is better as we do with ours. They just get away with selling them hope dope/religious fear. We have to have extensive ground game, county/state strategy, perfect messaging, politicians without an OUNCE of flaw whatsoever, etc. etc. etc.

All they have to do is bring a popular brand name, bring a few wedge issues and cooked-up conspiracies, disguise themselves as a populist and they win. The public believes them without an ounce of question and it's fucking ridiculous that they fall for it.

What cures the economic ills of "Flyover Country"/Middle/Rural America?

Pundits America-wide saw this election as a message that working/rural America has it perpetually awful in life and put their seemingly only chance at opportunity in an "outsider CEO" to be their savior (I'll wait for you to be finished doubled over laughing, but that's one of the narratives being tossed about). The idea was that Trump "had the stronger economic message".

. . . . . . I just read that as he straight up bullshitted his way to the voter's hearts in this area. Giving companies free money in the form of corporate tax cuts will inspire them to lay workers off by the metric ton.

He was never going to "bring jobs back". No one's going to bring jobs back. Corporate greed is a Pandora's box that ain't closing.

Search me how your precious Capitalism survives with no GMI, a chopped social safety net, the entrance fee to higher education being that of a mortgage and too few jobs for the millions of people that need them, but I'm sure the CEO Cabinet will figure it out

You don't really want to ask the people that live in these areas to "move"; that requires money and a job waiting for you, one that isn't always a guaranteed permanent. I'm just not understanding what these people are expecting to happen. I don't see how WE solve this. I don't really have any answers on how they're supposed to be gainfully employed.

The vague buzzwords thrown around by corporate America when asked what America's solution is to ward off an almost-certain bleak economic future . . . "innovation", "education", "information", "New Industries", "high tech businesses" . . . . would those, er, "solutions" ever happen in North Dakota? Iowa? Kansas? Ohio's counties that Hillary didn't win (all but seven)? Rural Pennsylvania?

The thing is, can permanently un/under-employed people "SUPERSIZE THEIR SKILL SET HAW HAW HAW" when they have no income to contribute for training? How does capitalism continue when you have millions of people who y'all won't hire and won't give them a substantial social safety net to even survive? This is expecting an individual solution to a structural problem.

I have YET, YET to hear a coherent and planned answer from a conservative as to how these problems get solved.

Murica, 2016:

CEOs: "BUY MUH STUFF!"
Worker/Consumer: "My wage hasn't increased in inflation adjusted dollars since Disco was popular and I have bills."
CEOs: "BUT MUH PROFITS!"
Worker/Consumer: "Sorry."
CEOs: "You're ungrateful and complain too much. I'm laying you off and automating your job!"
Worker/Consumer: "This isn't fair! We should elect a billionaire who understands our needs!"
U.S. Teabagger Gubmint: "Thanks. We're cutting your social security, destroying the social safety net and lowering taxes on the rich!"
Worker/Consumer: "What the hell?"
U.S. Teabagger Gubmint: "You fucked up. You TRUSTED us! Remember that movie?"
Worker/Consumer: "We need a universal basic income!"
U.S. Teabagger Gubmint: "SOSHULISM? HA HA HA HA HA! Move to Switzerland, Commie!"
Worker/Consumer: "GODDAMN IT! The obvious solution to all this is . . . . to vote for MORE Republicans; they'll screw things up so badly a Progressive Revolution will HAVE to happen!"
1984: Nope.
The Handmaid's Tale: Nope.
V for Vendetta: Nope.
It Can't Happen Here: Nope.
Worker/Consumer: "What am I supposed to do?"
Me: "Maybe wake up and see that there's no value in demonizing people or humanity? Stop making bad voting choices?"
Worker/Consumer: "Now you're just talking crazy, hippie!"
CEOs (to automation): "BUY MUH STUFF?"

MURICA.

My grandfather survived Pearl Harbor. He fought fascists in the European Theater.

How does Kurt Eichenwald, in the same article . . .

. . . get to say:

Why are Republicans portrayed as strong generals/leadership types?

How strong can a person be when they . . .

* worship authoritarians
* trust corporations
* identify with oppressors rather than the oppressed
* think it’s a basic human need to be led
* refute science and history to believe stories
* bully people who won’t fight back and conduct "wars" on concepts and rhetoric
* push toxic narratives and call it “news”
* blame an imagined "powerful left" calling them names for their horrible voting choice
* continually and unknowingly employ the abuser's mentality (you MADE me do _____!!)
* are jealous of, mad at and lay blame at the feet of the "have nots"
* think life is one big competition that can be won by violence
* live their life as a bitter, paranoid coward who thinks everyone and everything is out to get them

Nowadays, we call that . . . "Presidential".

Hey, Mr. (cringe) President-Elect . . . .

. . . . don't you have a JOB to study for?

Dude, I seriously doubt your exemplary CEOing is going to apply here. That mindset's for idiots and your voters. But I repeat myself.

You got homework to do. Get off Twitter before you embarrass this country even more than your Prefrontal Cortex-void voters already have.

From the people who were screwed by the Republicans the most to the politicians that screwed them -

You just got to wonder WHY.

Trump Voter Math:

So Andrew Puzder, guest on CNBC (natch) just said the dumbest goddamned thing ever . . .

The Restauranteur and heavily Republican donor just said on CNBC, when pressed about how you separate Donald Trump's economic platform from his rather predatory views on women . . .

and I'm paraphrasing . . .

"I look at two candidates who aren't perfect. I view one of them as a corrupt, power-hungry Richard Nixon type candidate and one who is an enterprising, economically sound Bill Clinton/John Kennedy type candidate. Between those two, I'm going to pick the Clinton/Kennedy type."

You Read That Right. He actually just likened Donald GropenFingerer to Clinton and Kennedy.

Oh, What The Fuck. #liberalmediamyASS