Trump Inauguration

[Apathy]

 

 

 

 

My problem with all the protests and people saying they are scared is this:

 

-Trump cannot take away gay marriage. he doesn't want to anyway.

-Trump will not deport anyone who is here legally. That includes Muslim and Hispanic citizens.

-Trump turned down his KKK endorsement. Can we stop using that as ammo already?

-Even if you are here illegally, any deportation program would be slow-moving, and I can guarantee that very little deportations will take place by the time he leaves office.

-Women already have a strong place in society. They will continue to.

-He is not Hitler. Making comparisons between him and Fascism is completely sickening, because we all know that will never happen to our country.

 

I hated Trump with a passion in the primaries. I wish he wasn't my party's nominee, but he was. He won the election the same way 44 of our previous presidents have. It's time to sit back.

Never before in the history of the United States has a hostile foreign power made such a deliberate effort to interfere in our election and sway it in a particular direction. There was nothing typical about the way that Trump won the election.

 

Regarding your sixth point, here's something that's been making the rounds on Reddit lately:

 

Political scientist Dr. Lawrence Britt recently wrote an article about fascism ("Fascism Anyone?," Free Inquiry, Spring 2003, page 20). Studying the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia), and Pinochet (Chile), Dr. Britt found they all had 14 elements in common. He calls these the identifying characteristics of fascism. The excerpt is in accordance with the magazine's policy.

The 14 characteristics are:

• Powerful and Continuing Nationalism

  Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.

  Most presidential candidates do some of these things too. I don't know how this is fascist.

• Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights

  Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.

  He is a typical conservative with regards of human rights. You're talking to a brick wall with this one.

• Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause

  The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.

  I am not saying I condone this. But look at the tweet at the end of this post.

• Supremacy of the Military

  Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.

  He may increase military spending, but by an expected, un-alarming amount.

• Rampant Sexism

  The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy.

  Once again, tweet at the end of this post.

• Controlled Mass Media

  Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.

  N/A

• Obsession with National Security

  Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.

  N/A

• Religion and Government are Intertwined

  Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.

  N/A

• Corporate Power is Protected

  The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.

  He gave up his businesses

• Labor Power is Suppressed

  Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed .

  No signs of even wanting to attempt to do this

• Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts

  Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts is openly attacked, and governments often refuse to fund the arts.

  N/A

• Obsession with Crime and Punishment

  Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.

  N/A, and if you think this is true then it's sickening. The few bad officers out there are fired quickly.

• Rampant Cronyism and Corruption

  Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.

  Trump isn't corrupt, but someone else this election was...

• Fraudulent Elections

  Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections. Oops, forgot to do my assignment. Brb gotta blame Russia.

Care to tell me which one of those don't aptly describe Trump's actions so far? I can make a case for any of them.

https://twitter.com/RitaPanahi/status/822590239344656384

 

My problem with all the protests and people saying they are scared is this:

 

-Trump cannot take away gay marriage. he doesn't want to anyway.

The fear, in the case of gay marriage and for LGBT rights overall, is not with Trump, but with his appointment of conservative justices that will ignore stare decisis and will roll back previous holdings supporting gains in those areas. The Republican platform is virulently opposed to LGBT rights.

You're talking to a conservative. But it has already been ruled, and I see no possibility of it going back.

-Trump will not deport anyone who is here legally. That includes Muslim and Hispanic citizens.

No one is concerned with those that are here legally - it's what happens to those who have come to this country, worked hard, contributed to society - and will be denied any chance at a path to citizenship. Those people take almost nothing from society - they hold jobs most Americans won't touch, they can't qualify for most social support programs or "entitlements", they can't access healthcare and the list goes on and one - but contribute greatly to it. And we DON'T want them to gain citizenship? They are the very kind of people we SHOULD want to provide a path.

I hold a slightly awkward view on immigration. If they come here, they had better be able to fend for themselves. That means working those jobs, and being able to provide for yourself. Once you can provide for yourself and prove to be a basic American, feel free to become a citizen and pay your own tax dollars.

-Trump turned down his KKK endorsement. Can we stop using that as ammo already?

He did so only after a considerable period of time, after lying about his knowledge of what and who David Duke is, and only after his poll numbers dropped due to his intractability in refusing to deny. In short, it's clear that he welcomed their support, and denounced it only when he had to.

No he did not enjoy it.

-Even if you are here illegally, any deportation program would be slow-moving, and I can guarantee that very little deportations will take place by the time he leaves office.

See above.

 

-Women already have a strong place in society. They will continue to.

But not an equal place. They still trail men in wages for the same jobs, in representation in positions of authority or power (elected office, corporate leaders, etc.). More importantly, Trump has made clear - both in word and deed - that he views women as merely objects and not equals.

He appointed those "objects" to his cabinet. Take it as an apology, but he did it. And without tantrums, they have been continuing to provide for society.

-He is not Hitler. Making comparisons between him and Fascism is completely sickening, because we all know that will never happen to our country.

He is engaging in many of the same practices that are used by anyone that has become, or sought to become, a dictator. The best way to ensure that it never happens in this country is to challenge those practices at every step.

I hated Trump with a passion in the primaries. I wish he wasn't my party's nominee, but he was. He won the election the same way 44 of our previous presidents have. It's time to sit back.

For the entirety of the Obama presidency, Republicans protested his position or his legitimacy. Trump has proven to be a liar, a bigot, a misogynist, a sexual predator, and more. Not only is it NOT the time to "sit back", the exact opposite called for.

Not in the same way. It was a discussion at the dinner table, or on Twitter, or whatever. I was not a political person whatsoever until people started going crazy, then that's when I stepped in. And if you don't sit back, then I assure you that extreme racists or sexists won't stop until you do sit back.

Everything I say is in the bold red text.

 

Seriously? These protests do not help get the message across to their target in a positive manner. Instead, they criminalize people who's opinion differs from theirs, and make the people they're criminalizing go more extremely against them, therefore causing an inevitable race war. Ridiculous how this is still going on.

If these protest continue for the next 4 years, than Trump will win another election....and I'm ok with that

[knapplc]

If Trump loses the female vote, or it turns out in favor of his opponent, he'll get shellacked in the next election.

 

He already lost the General Election by 2.9 million votes, and only won because of a quirk of America's election process.

[AR Husker Fan]

 

My problem with all the protests and people saying they are scared is this:

 

-Trump cannot take away gay marriage. he doesn't want to anyway.

The fear, in the case of gay marriage and for LGBT rights overall, is not with Trump, but with his appointment of conservative justices that will ignore stare decisis and will roll back previous holdings supporting gains in those areas. The Republican platform is virulently opposed to LGBT rights.

You're talking to a conservative. But it has already been ruled, and I see no possibility of it going back.

 

As a lawyer for more than 30 years, I can assure you that precedent is overturned all the time. How do you think laws change? How do you think we went from the courts SUPPORTING segregated schools to finding them illegal?

 

 

 

-Trump will not deport anyone who is here legally. That includes Muslim and Hispanic citizens.

No one is concerned with those that are here legally - it's what happens to those who have come to this country, worked hard, contributed to society - and will be denied any chance at a path to citizenship. Those people take almost nothing from society - they hold jobs most Americans won't touch, they can't qualify for most social support programs or "entitlements", they can't access healthcare and the list goes on and one - but contribute greatly to it. And we DON'T want them to gain citizenship? They are the very kind of people we SHOULD want to provide a path.

I hold a slightly awkward view on immigration. If they come here, they had better be able to fend for themselves. That means working those jobs, and being able to provide for yourself. Once you can provide for yourself and prove to be a basic American, feel free to become a citizen and pay your own tax dollars.

 

Not the issue - the issue is why people are protesting Trump or fear how Trump will treat the issue. It isn't how you feel about it.

 

 

 

-Trump turned down his KKK endorsement. Can we stop using that as ammo already?

He did so only after a considerable period of time, after lying about his knowledge of what and who David Duke is, and only after his poll numbers dropped due to his intractability in refusing to deny. In short, it's clear that he welcomed their support, and denounced it only when he had to.

No he did not enjoy it.

 

If he did not enjoy it, he would have denounced it immediately rather than lying by claiming he didn't know David Duke, what he stood for, or what the KKK was. He did not, and he only finally denounced it - after a considerable period of time - when he was forced to.

 

 

 

-Women already have a strong place in society. They will continue to.

But not an equal place. They still trail men in wages for the same jobs, in representation in positions of authority or power (elected office, corporate leaders, etc.). More importantly, Trump has made clear - both in word and deed - that he views women as merely objects and not equals.

He appointed those "objects" to his cabinet. Take it as an apology, but he did it. And without tantrums, they have been continuing to provide for society.

 

A token act does not negate a lifetime demeaning women.

 

 

 

-He is not Hitler. Making comparisons between him and Fascism is completely sickening, because we all know that will never happen to our country.

He is engaging in many of the same practices that are used by anyone that has become, or sought to become, a dictator. The best way to ensure that it never happens in this country is to challenge those practices at every step.

 

Your inability to refute is duly noted.

 

 

 

I hated Trump with a passion in the primaries. I wish he wasn't my party's nominee, but he was. He won the election the same way 44 of our previous presidents have. It's time to sit back.

For the entirety of the Obama presidency, Republicans protested his position or his legitimacy. Trump has proven to be a liar, a bigot, a misogynist, a sexual predator, and more. Not only is it NOT the time to "sit back", the exact opposite called for.

Not in the same way. It was a discussion at the dinner table, or on Twitter, or whatever. I was not a political person whatsoever until people started going crazy, then that's when I stepped in. And if you don't sit back, then I assure you that extreme racists or sexists won't stop until you do sit back.

 

Absolute and utter crap. In a State of the Union address, a South Carolina Republican representative interrupted the President to shout, "LIAR" at him; Fox News demonized him; Republicans challenged his birth status for almost the entirety of his Presidency; the Alt-Right engaged in creating the most salacious lies possible and spread them with absolutely no qualms. The fact of the matter is that what has happened to Trump doesn't even begin to compare.

 

 

Everything I say is in the bold red text.

 

Seriously? These protests do not help get the message across to their target in a positive manner. Instead, they criminalize people who's opinion differs from theirs, and make the people they're criminalizing go more extremely against them, therefore causing an inevitable race war. Ridiculous how this is still going on.

Assuming, for the limited purposes of argument, that your claim is correct - despite the evidence throughout history to the contrary - what is the proper way for a group to raise their concerns and open the eyes of the rest of society? To date, no other method has worked. The only time, as an example, that some got elected and pushed through an agenda to broaden a group's rights was only after lengthy and vociferous protests that awakened the general public.

[Moiraine]

If Trump loses the female vote, or it turns out in favor of his opponent, he'll get shellacked in the next election.

 

He already lost the General Election by 2.9 million votes, and only won because of a quirk of America's election process.

 

The GOP is in a race against the clock or needs to find a way to get the under 40s/minorities shifted closer to their side. To be blunt, their biggest voting groups are going to be steadily dwindling and then die off in 25 years. At the same time the minority population will increase.

 

The Democrats need to stop what happened in North Carolina from becoming the norm.

[zoogs]

 

 

The GOP is in a race against the clock or needs to find a way to get the under 40s/minorities shifted closer to their side.

 

There are ways, but they don't involve changing policies.

 

Which is worrying.

[Danny Bateman]

 

The GOP is in a race against the clock or needs to find a way to get the under 40s/minorities shifted closer to their side.

 

There are ways, but they don't involve changing policies.

 

Which is worrying.

 

 

Whitford v. Gill. Bookmark it. Kennedy's opinion will likely determine the future on gerrymandering. He's previously suggested the key to his ruling against gerrymandering:

 

“if workable standards do emerge to measure these burdens . . . courts should be prepared to order relief.”

 

So the key for the plaintiffs here may be to quantify how much gerrymandering hurt fair representation in Wisconsin.

 

Beyond that... voter suppression efforts are concerning. I'd imagine we're in for a raftload of Voter ID laws in the coming years. Sessions is a Voter ID law proponent, so we can probably count out any federal pressure against them. What can we as people do about it?

[Apathy]

If Trump loses the female vote, or it turns out in favor of his opponent, he'll get shellacked in the next election.

 

He already lost the General Election by 2.9 million votes, and only won because of a quirk of America's election process.

Well that quirk of an election process allows every vote to be heard rather than 4-5 states to decide who wins.

 

You take away California who has the most electoral votes at 53, a state that Hillary won BTW with more than 4 million votes, than Trump would've had 2 million more popular votes than Hillary.

[Landlord]

Freedom, and along with it, equal standing and respect and representation, are never given voluntarily by the oppressors or the dominant culture.

[funhusker]

 

If Trump loses the female vote, or it turns out in favor of his opponent, he'll get shellacked in the next election.

 

He already lost the General Election by 2.9 million votes, and only won because of a quirk of America's election process.

Well that quirk of an election process allows every vote to be heard rather than 4-5 states to decide who wins.

 

You take away California who has the most electoral votes at 53, a state that Hillary won BTW with more than 4 million votes, than Trump would've had 2 million more popular votes than Hillary.

 

The the quirk meant to allow "every vote to be heard" is responsible for "discounting millions of votes". Got it.

 

I understand your point about the EC and mostly agree. It gives smaller states a larger voice than they deserve in National policies (but I think the values need tweeked). But a person, including Trump, would be ill-advised to ignore the beliefs of the majority. Mary Jane from Los Angeles is just as much of an American as Joe Blow in McCook, Nebraska.

[zoogs]

 

 

The GOP is in a race against the clock or needs to find a way to get the under 40s/minorities shifted closer to their side.

There are ways, but they don't involve changing policies.

 

Which is worrying.

 

Whitford v. Gill. Bookmark it. Kennedy's opinion will likely determine the future on gerrymandering. He's previously suggested the key to his ruling against gerrymandering:

 

I actually wasn't even thinking about voter suppression. The two I had in mind were dismantling or controlling the media, and wars (we're already in an endless one, and something something ISIS is already a yuge part of Trump's distraction rhetoric arsenal).

 

 

If Trump loses the female vote, or it turns out in favor of his opponent, he'll get shellacked in the next election.

 

He already lost the General Election by 2.9 million votes, and only won because of a quirk of America's election process.

Well that quirk of an election process allows every vote to be heard rather than 4-5 states to decide who wins.

 

This is a very funny description of the Electoral College on both counts.

 

It is many things. These are two of the things it is precisely not.

[Apathy]

 

 

 

If Trump loses the female vote, or it turns out in favor of his opponent, he'll get shellacked in the next election.

 

He already lost the General Election by 2.9 million votes, and only won because of a quirk of America's election process.

Well that quirk of an election process allows every vote to be heard rather than 4-5 states to decide who wins.

 

You take away California who has the most electoral votes at 53, a state that Hillary won BTW with more than 4 million votes, than Trump would've had 2 million more popular votes than Hillary.

The the quirk meant to allow "every vote to be heard" is responsible for "discounting millions of votes". Got it.

 

I understand your point about the EC and mostly agree. It gives smaller states a larger voice than they deserve in National policies (but I think the values need tweeked). But a person, including Trump, would be ill-advised to ignore the beliefs of the majority. Mary Jane from Los Angeles is just as much of an American as Joe Blow in McCook, Nebraska.

So you understood my point but yet mock it at the same time....got it

[funhusker]

 

 

 

If Trump loses the female vote, or it turns out in favor of his opponent, he'll get shellacked in the next election.

 

He already lost the General Election by 2.9 million votes, and only won because of a quirk of America's election process.

Well that quirk of an election process allows every vote to be heard rather than 4-5 states to decide who wins.

 

You take away California who has the most electoral votes at 53, a state that Hillary won BTW with more than 4 million votes, than Trump would've had 2 million more popular votes than Hillary.

The the quirk meant to allow "every vote to be heard" is responsible for "discounting millions of votes". Got it.

 

I understand your point about the EC and mostly agree. It gives smaller states a larger voice than they deserve in National policies (but I think the values need tweeked). But a person, including Trump, would be ill-advised to ignore the beliefs of the majority. Mary Jane from Los Angeles is just as much of an American as Joe Blow in McCook, Nebraska.

So you understood my point but yet mock it at the same time....got it

 

Let me clarify. I understand (and 'somewhat' agree) with your first sentence. I was "mocking" your defense of that sentence and the dismissal of the state of California.

[Moiraine]

LOL. The electoral college does not allow "every vote to be heard." It makes votes in certain areas of the country weighted more strongly and any vote above the 1 vote that flips the state to one candidate is meaningless. Winning a state by 1 vote is the same as winning the state by 1 million votes. Thousands and thousands of California voters' votes are not heard.

 

The popular vote weights each vote equally. Every vote is heard with the popular vote.

 

I know math and logic are real hard but this is about as simple as it gets.

[ZRod]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Today was a great day!!! Also found this quite interesting

Why?

Because we got a new president

So... you're comparing Booth's disdain for Lincoln to many's disdain for a guy who has:

-Literally said he will build a costly wall between Mexico and the US

-Called on a foreign government to hack his opponent

-Wants to ban muslims from entering this country

-Treats sexual assualt as a joke

-Has insinuate that if his opponent should have won she should be killed

-Calls women fat, pigs, and nasty

-Mocked a person for their disability

-Refused to release his taxes

-Has tried to put people in his cabinet who; plagiarized their college thesis, have been linked to racist ideas/behaviors, are essentially unqualified for their position

-Refuses to remove his company from his family to clear up any ethical issues

-Is essentially in bed with Russia

-And has called the majority of America his enemy...

Seems like a good comparison.

So misguided

I hope your work offers a cry room for you

Then please, show me the error of my ways. Why did you post that video? Why are you insinuating I'm a cry baby? Why am I misguided?

I can't explain Mike Rowes reasoning for the video, only he can do that so here is his response (I changed the Facebook users name to yours)

In no way, Zod, have I compared Trump to Lincoln. What Ive done, is compare the conditions that existed in the country today, with those that existed in the wake of another contentious presidential election a century and a half ago. Those conditions strike me as interesting: Two Republicans, each of whom believed they were going to lose the election, wound up winning. Each candidate was viscerally hated by half the county, each vowed to transform the border, each treated the press with contempt, and each was considered by many to be a tyrant. One hundred and fifty years ago, a lot of Americans were absolutely convinced that Abraham Lincoln was an illegitimate president. Many today feel the same about Trump.

Does that mean the same thing will happen with Donald Trump? No. Does it mean that Trump and Lincoln share any personality traits, or that history will remember Trump as fondly as Lincoln? Of course not. It simply means that the certainty you feel today regarding Trump being the next Hitler is no different than the certainty felt by millions of Lincolns detractors back then. Its the feelings Im comparing, Jason not the candidates. Listen to the story again, and Ill bet you agree.

Mike

You and I both know why Rowe posted that. It's really not that deep. I'm supposed to look at Booth and somehow feel bad for my distaste for Trump because Booth killed Lincoln. There's a rather large differnece between the context of the two elections as has already been pointed out. The disdain for Trump isn't because he was urging to continue a vicious civil war, declaring martial law, and censoring the media (all Liberties that were given back once the emergncy had passed); but because the things he has said and "promised" to do are extremly un-American, and the way in which he carries himself is an embarrassment to this great country.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Today was a great day!!! Also found this quite interesting

Why?

Because we got a new president

So... you're comparing Booth's disdain for Lincoln to many's disdain for a guy who has:

-Literally said he will build a costly wall between Mexico and the US (And that's a bad thing? Probably won't happen but I'm sure he'll tighten up the border though)

-Called on a foreign government to hack his opponent (Crooked hiliary...fine by me and he was joking)

-Wants to ban muslims from entering this country (There's a difference between banning and doing thorough more in depth background checks)

-Treats sexual assualt as a joke (Ya cause no man has ever talked that way around their boys?)

-Has insinuate that if his opponent should have won she should be killed (Never heard that but only that she should be in jail and that he would put her there if he wins)

-Calls women fat, pigs, and nasty (Called a former pageant fat so I guess he's a meany to all women but disregard all the women he has empowered by promoting them within his business)

-Mocked a person for their disability (This has been so overblown. Trump talks like that. Even mocked himself and Cruz months and years before this so-called incident.

)

-Refused to release his taxes (who cares really? I don't ask my parents to release their tax information for me to see)

-Has tried to put people in his cabinet who; plagiarized their college thesis, have been linked to racist ideas/behaviors, are essentially unqualified for their position (Haven't all presidents been accused of this as well? Also his cabinet isn't even done, it's barely started so a lot of what you heard where rumors)

-Refuses to remove his company from his family to clear up any ethical issues (He's stated that he could run both but chooses not too and will solely focus on his Presidency. If he can be successful at running both than why is this an issue?)

-Is essentially in bed with Russia (Ha)

-And has called the majority of America his enemy...(Mainly the media which is true)

Seems like a good comparison.

As to your other points:

 

1. You would have us waste billions on a wall that can be defeated with a tunnel, ladder, plane, catapult, parachute? We could desperately use that money for roads, bridges, schools, etc.

 

2. Calling on a foreig power to havk a US citizen for personal gain... and they essentially did it. What a joke...

 

3. He said ban. Refugees are already vetted very heavily. Immigrants don't have an easy time getting here legally either, it can take years

 

4. I've said some pretty derogatory things, but I don't think I've bragged about walking in on naked (possibly underage) teenagers and sexually assualting women.

 

5. It's there if you care to listen

 

6. So he says one thing and does another? Trump may have a few women around him who aren't his children or married to him, but he treats the rest pretty awful.

 

7. Almost every modern President has released his taxes. It assures the publice he's financially competent, doesn't have conflicts of interest, is making his money legally, and isn't receiving benefits from a foreign government.

 

8. Dismiss it if you want. I gave up smacking my limp hand near my chest after high school, because it's pretty goddman offensive.

 

9. Like I said these are the people he wants (even if they didn't get in). Most people apoint nuclear physicists, educators, and the like. Also the rumors about the plagiarism and unpaid taxes are not rumors, they are confirmed fact.

 

10. Because it's unconstitutional!

 

11. It's a little more than funny the amount of odd ties their are to Russia, and hoe much he's kissed Putin's ass.

 

12. Inauguration night he pretty much called any one who opposes him (over half the voting public) his enemies. Further more the media is not the Presidents enemy. The fact that you think they are is frightening, to say the least. The media is in essence our fourth branch of government, they check all the other branches and provide communication between the people and the government.

[Red Five]

 

If Trump loses the female vote, or it turns out in favor of his opponent, he'll get shellacked in the next election.

He already lost the General Election by 2.9 million votes, and only won because of a quirk of America's election process.

Well that quirk of an election process allows every vote to be heard rather than 4-5 states to decide who wins.

You take away California who has the most electoral votes at 53, a state that Hillary won BTW with more than 4 million votes, than Trump would've had 2 million more popular votes than Hillary.

If you can take away CA from the total, then I'm going to take away TX and say Hillary won by almost 4M votes.