AIBU to ask for help to understand the American Election resul

[Witchcraftandhokum]

I genuinely don't understand why anyone would vote for Trump

If you're American and voted for him or would have voted for him if you lived there can you please explain why?

@Zanatdy

Yes, Trump is horrible in regards to his treatment of women, as I've mentioned repeatedly. Won't find me denying that.

I'm taking about HER reputation though, saying that is the wide perception of her in the area I live, in response to the OP's question.

And yes, it's questionable that her career took off after her affair.

How can anyone justify their voting for a man who had a quite close relationship with known paedophiles and spent a lot of time on their island, has been accused of raping children and women, who has affairs, mocked a disabled man, thinks women who have abortions should be punished even if they're rape victims.
I don't understand how anyone can push this into the backs of their minds and ignore it because trans people, the economy and immigration are much more important?

Senators serve a six year term, so a third have to run for reelection every two years.

www.whitehouse.gov/about-the-white-house/our-government/the-legislative-branch/

And the House and the Senate don't always vote on legislation as the same time. Often a bill will originate in one, then get brought up for a vote in the other after going through a reconciliation process.

https://www.congress.gov/legislative-process/resolving-differences

Slut shaming women and being sceptical of their career success is nothing new for misogynists. I'm surprised that's all they're saying. I think Trump called her advisors pimps.

@BloodandGlitter

Because they see his policies as being better for the country than hers. Simple as that. His personal life is a secondary concern to those who vote for him- hence the success of MAGA. Many Republicans are very patriotic and this is very important to them.

Because I know I'll get attacked, I'll say again, I think Trump is a terrible person. Those who idolize him and dismiss the valid objections to him morally, are in the wrong.

Thankfully there are checks and balances here so it's not like he's going to become a dictator like people are hysterically claiming.

Maybe because they are fed up of multi-millionaire celebrities telling them who to vote for.

I make no attempt to understand why anyone would support an abuser. I couldn't give a shiny shit.

If you turn a blind eye to rape or abuse then you deserve to be demonised.

Regarding taxes (I'm American and pay quite a bit myself, into six figures per year between federal and state income taxes, so I DO feel the pain), we are still under Trump's tax plan. The TCJA expires in 2025. Going into his second presidency, Trump has been talking about reducing the corporate tax, deporting undocumented workers (44% of all agricultural laborers in the US are undocumented immigrants), and raising tariffs on goods brought in from outside of the US. If he decides to move forward in this manner, our income taxes will likely stay the same or increase and our cost of food and goods will increase as well.

That's not really true.

@MumOfOneAllAlone look at it as your Parliament split into 2, the Senate based on 2 equal members for each state so 100 senators representing the 50 states and the house which is based on population across the states so some states will have more house of rep members if they have higher population.

Both the Senate and house must pass bills into law but in the UK your councillors are not passing laws in Parliament, only MPs can do that.

In the UK Parliament pass laws for the country while local councillors represent wards and operate at local community level. In the US the Senate and house both pass laws for the country at federal level while the aldermen pass laws at city level representing wards.

So in summary the equivalent of local councillors in the UK will be Alderman at the city level in the US.

Another difference, states also have their state senate and house passing laws for the state with the governor acting as executive for the state. At the city level the mayor will be the executive who works with the aldermen to pass laws.

In the US laws are proposed through bills in either the Senate or house and goes through the parliamentary process and then vote which needs 2/3rd from both the Senate and house to pass. If it passes both Senate and house then it goes to the president who can sign the bill into law or veto it and send it back.

Trump has promised everything will be great once he is president (everyone will be better off, migrants will be gone, corruption will disappear, crime will disappear, you can keep your guns, fuel will be cheap, wars will end, and America will be great again, etc, etc) and enough people believe enough of what he has promised to vote him in.

Also putting a woman up against him was a mistake, large chunks of the US are still extremely reluctant to accept that a woman could lead the country.

Erm...no they responded to the right person. You didn't understand their meaning, I did. Let me explain, they mean you are pro life so you must have adopted lots of abandoned kids that were born to parents who didn't want them as they weren't allowed to have an abortion. Right? That's what they meant. But most pro lifers don't give two hoots about the unwanted child's life once they are born. Just so long as they are born eh? Now do you understand?

I was trying to simplify into the most basic scenario people would understand. It is a very different system to the uk.

It would be a mistake to assume that she lost solely or even primarily because she's a woman. She did nothing to distance herself from an unpopular Biden administration, refused to do long interviews with journalists, covered up Biden's cognitive decline, snubbed the moderate governor of the critical swing state of Pennsylvania as her VP pick, likely because he's Jewish, picked a VP from a state that she was going to win anyway, and refused to go on the most popular podcast in the country days before the election. I'm sure some people didn't vote for her because she's a woman and some people did vote for her because she's a woman.

It was not a brilliant campaign. Biden also gets a lot of the blame for breaking his promise not to run again and having to be forced out at the last minute.

This is broadly correct.

However, bills don’t need 2/3 to pass. It’s a simple majority vote. In the Senate, in the case of a 50/50 tied vote, the Vice President can cast a tie break vote.

A supermajority is needed to overturn a presidential veto but not to pass a bill under normal circumstances.

@Namechangey23

I haven't adopted children. That doesn't disprove the pro life position in the least.

It's actually one of the weakest arguments pro choicers put forth. It's like saying, 'oh, so you're against homelessness, but how many homeless people have you taken in?'

Yes, I'm against killing babies in the womb, and yes, I'm for helping them out after they are hopefully born. I'm hoping in my lifetime I can help people out in a practical way, who find themselves facing the situation of expecting an unwanted child. Thanks for asking those clarifying questions.

True, but in the Senate the use of the filibuster rule (which some Democrats want to eliminate) can delay voting indefinitely unless you have 60 votes to close debate.

https://www.senate.gov/about/powers-procedures/filibusters-cloture.htm

I think all the reasons the rest of the world is so worried about another Trump presidency are all the same reasons a lot of Americans voted for him.

He seemingly doesn't care at all about global stability or diplomacy - he'll always put his own (and therefore America's?) interests first. They don't seem to see/believe that his interests do not necessarily align particularly closely with their own.

I think they also believe we're scared of a Trump presidency because he's such a strong, powerful Tough Guy. When, in truth, we're scared because he's an unhinged, petulant toddler.

It wasn't my argument, I was just translating. But your analogy is not the same. I am against homelessness but my being against homelessness doesn't actively create more homeless people. Whereas being against abortion, by default does creates more unwanted children. Although most abortions are for medical reasons. If you were going to die because you had an ectopic pregnancy (which would kill both you and your baby eventually without treatment anyway) would you choose to let nature take it's course and choose to die so that you didn't have an abortion against your principles?

Yes, to break a filibuster in the senate requires a 3/5 supermajority. 60 votes brings the debate to an end and allows the bill to proceed to a vote but then the vote on the bill works on simple majority.

The 2/3 supermajority is for overturning a presidential veto (and constitutional amendments).

Abortion being banned doesn't create more unwanted children. Those children already exist, they are just not born yet. It may even mean less unwanted children as people take better precautions with contraception and are less likely to have sex with someone they aren't committed to.

I'm not against people taking measures to prevent conception, in fact I wish more people would. But when another human life comes into existence, that's when the morality of the situation changes. 2 lives are at stake now.

I don't think that statistically, most abortions are medically necessary abortions. These cases are rare. Most abortions are prompted by lifestyle decisions. In a lot of cases where a mother's health is threatened by continuing the pregnancy, a baby has reached viability and this doesn't need to be killed before the pregnancy is ended to preserve the mother's life.

Yes, I would get an abortion if my life were threatened by an ectopic pregnancy. I absolutely believe in exceptions for the life of the mother, as do almost all pro lifers. You wouldn't exactly be pro life if you expected women to die from preventable causes, to avoid an abortion of a child who is going to die along with her.

Again, these cases are rare, but where abortion bans are in place there must absolutely be very clear laws in place to make sure that a woman is able to obtain an abortion if her life is medically threatened. We need to make sure that doctors won't get into trouble for performing these abortions, and make sure all healthcare staff are aware of the laws in place.

Oh well. 70 million plus folk disagree with you. It's not only this thread. Rant rant stamp stamp you're all thick. Change the record.

Awful misogyny, coupled with the fact that Trump has been found guilty of multiple sex crimes and his "success" comes off the back of him cheating, lying and stealing, even after starting off with multi-million dollar gifts from his dad.

I think someone was asking about the state setup, in simplistic terms it’s a mini version of the federal setup.

Two houses (senate and assembly), a Governor, and a Supreme Court. They do all the same things for their state that the Federal Government does for the country.

Then each county has again a similar but smaller setup ( County Executive, county council) with authority over county business.

And finally cities who typically have a Mayor and a city council. Charged, you guessed it, city business.

@saltinesandcoffeecups My fun fact of the day is that one state (Nebraska) has a unicameral state legislature. It’s the only state to only have one chamber (called the senate) and not a bicameral one mirroring the federal model.

Prices have gone through the roof - it costs more to buy milk or fill a car. Wokeism is rife. Democrats are viewed as the party of censorship, lockdown, vaccine mandates.

Plus Kamala has been an incredibly rubbish candidate who was foisted upon the democrats with no regard to the normal selection process. I’ve listened to her so many times and am yet to hear her say anything comprehensible.

the fact you can’t understand why people would vote for trump singularly demonstrates your failure to step outside of your own world view or look into the most basic facts