US Presidential Inauguration Donald Trump Civil: Sorted by

Today the US presidential inauguration will take place to inaugurate
the 45th US President, Donald Trump

Please keep all comments in this post civil. Even though politics can be
a heated topic, keep in mind that this is just an internet forum, and
that there's no reason to attack other users. Also, all top level
comments must be questions or they will be removed. All questions
related to US politics will be redirected to this thread.
Link to Livestream
Link to previous Megathread
7119 comments
share
top 200 commentsshow 500
sorted by:
new (suggested)
[]lamenting_kitty [score hidden] 4 minutes ago
Was the trash left over from the womens march that awful? Or are
conservatives trying to nitpick anything to criticize the march?
permalink
embed
[]helloboots [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Why is having a good relationship with Russia a bad thing?
permalink
embed
[]Pie_Gun [score hidden] 22 minutes ago
As a concept, it is a good idea to have normalized relations with a

nuclear power.
However, when that country is invading sovergn nations, and attacks
america's democratic institutions, to do nothing in retaliation is not
normalizing relations, it is showing weakness to a dangerous dictator.
permalink
embed
parent
I don't really think Obama did anything when Russia annexed Crimea,
right?
permalink
embed
parent
[]cynical_trill [score hidden] 2 minutes ago
The united States applied economic sanctions to individuals involved in

the invasion.
permalink
embed
parent
[]cascaderade [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
i read somewhere that every time we've tried being friends with them
in the past, putin tried to undermine our country or democracy again.
permalink
embed
parent
[]GilmoreHappy [score hidden] 25 minutes ago
I always wonder the same thing. At one point Japan was one of our
most hated enemies, and now they are an ally. However, Putin has
some old school soviet blood in him, so I'm not cool with welcoming
him with open arms.
permalink
embed
parent
[]PM_ME_MAMMARY_GLANDS [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
Minorities who are often considered to be attacked by Trump (women,

Latinos, LGBT, etc.), why did you vote for him, and are you still
content with your support?
permalink
embed
Woman here. I voted for him because I liked his policies, not because
of my identity as a woman. I'm more than content with my support.
permalink
embed
parent
what are his policies? i don't recall him ever really explaining or stating
his policies.
permalink
embed
parent
I like his America First platform.
permalink
embed
parent
[]Drumanas [score hidden] 17 minutes ago
There's a pretty direct way to get his policies

www.donaldjtrump.com/policies
permalink
embed
parent
[]tollercoster56 [score hidden] 42 minutes ago
I didn't vote for him, but I never felt attacked by him either. Most of
what he says is common sense. If you let a lot of illegals in then the
country will turn into a shithole just like mexico...That's why I'm for
legal immigration with background checks. I know a lot of people with
criminal background from my country of origin who come over
legal/illegally, join gangs and ruing the city we(minorities) live in.
I have to deal with the shootings and stabbings day to day and live in
a high crime area but white people don't so they're like yea just let
them come on in without even checking who they are.
permalink
embed
parent
[]PM_ME_MAMMARY_GLANDS [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
That's a really interesting point of view.
permalink
embed
parent
Seriously, why don't democrats just come out and overthrow trump by
force and institute clinton as their rightful dictator? I mean, this is
what they want right? A dictatorship not a democracy?
permalink
embed
Nobody is saying that. I am getting really tired of these straw man

arguments from Trump supporters.
We don't overthrow trump because we believe in democracy. That
means we believe in the right to protest, freedom of the press, and
freedom from discrimination. Incidentally, these are all things Trump
ahows signs of being against.
permalink
embed
parent
[]Spudrockets [score hidden] 24 minutes ago
Look, as screwy as our democratic system has gotten in the past few
years, it's still a democratic system. If I am OK with Obama getting
elected in 2012, I can't argue for a violent overthrow of Trump today.
Violence as a political tactic is generally deplorable, from an a priori
standpoint. My allegiance to Democracy is greater than my allegiance
to Democrats.
permalink
embed
parent
[]chipluvr 7 points 1 hour ago
To those who participated in the Women's March yesterday, did you

vote in November?
permalink
embed
[]ostentia [score hidden] 3 minutes ago
Yes, absolutely.
permalink
embed
parent
Marched, voted, wrote, satirized, argued, talked, discussed,

editorialized, canvassed!
permalink
embed
parent
[]jediment [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
Yes. I take voting very seriously and would never dream of not voting.
permalink
embed
parent
[+]100percentDeplorable comment score below threshold (3 children)

[]GilmoreHappy 6 points 1 hour ago
I don't think they would admit to not voting. They aren't as stupid as
Colin Kaepernick.
permalink
embed
parent
[+][deleted] 1 hour ago (1 child)

[]dansevigny 1 point 1 hour ago
Women who feel marginalized by Trump, can you explain why you feel
that way?
permalink
embed
Aparently trump pointing out that promiscuous women who only care
about your money will consensually let you touch them anyway you
want as long as you give them money is sexist.
That's like saying....Oh yea prostitutes man...They'll let you put them
in any position you want for a couple of 100's then people saying that's
somehow sexist.
permalink
embed
parent
I'm really confused how people are saying his comment is him
"admitting he's a rapist".
permalink
embed
parent
[]cryptiiix 3 points an hour ago
Anyone else notice Bill peeping at Ivanka? Even funnier that Hilary
noticed and Bill didn't even care
permalink
embed
[]Kusibu 1 point an hour ago
Just about everyone who browses Reddit did, thanks to the "savage"
GIF.
permalink
embed
parent
[]Keep-reefer-illegal 2 points an hour ago
Their marriage seems like it is in shambles.
permalink
embed
parent
[]PM_ME_UR_BATMANS 2 points an hour ago
Favorite joke I've seen come from that: "Get yourself a man that looks
at you the same way Bill Clinton looks at women that aren't his wife."
permalink
embed
parent
[+]NinjaHDD comment score below threshold (3 children)

[]biasedaf 2 points an hour ago
How would you rate Trump's presidency out of 10 so far?
permalink
embed
According to him, it doesn't start until Monday.
permalink
embed
parent
[]Enzo-Unversed [score hidden] 55 minutes ago
8/10
permalink
embed
parent
[]helloboots 4 points an hour ago*
Great! He's already signing executive orders
Ease the burden of the ACA
Signed a law allowing Mattis to serve as defense secretary
9/11 is now a "National Day of Patriotism"
Repealed Obama's freeze on low-interest rate FHA loans (This is

good because these loans have a low down-payment, are offered to
high-risk people, and are often defaulted. This is what helped cause
the mortgage crisis)
Plans to re-instate the Mexico City policy (saving at least

$600mil)
permalink
embed
parent
I contend that though all those actions are troubling (not here to argue
about most of them though) the most idealistically disturbing is the
Mattis one. He is setting a precedent (get it? Haw Haw) of military
leaders taking loyal to him taking posts that previously were controlled
by civilians. The rule he created an exception to was designed to
ensure that the upper leadership of the military (mostly the President,
who is not a military personality, but also the Sec. of Def.) were
civilians.
permalink
embed
parent
Idealistically perhaps, but not in practice. Mattis was already a civilian

for a few years, just not the required 7.
Since you said that all of these actions are troubling, what do you have
against 9/11 being a national day of patriotism? I might get the day
off work.
permalink
embed
parent
[]RanchDressinInMyButt 1 point an hour ago
Ease the burned of the ACA

Aka, fuck over people with pre-existing conditions. Fuck over kids
under 26 still on their parents insurance plan. Fuck over the poor rural
fucks who can't afford health insurance that voted for him.
Oh, then fuck over millions of others!
permalink
embed
parent
Actually, if you researched, you'd see that the executive order he

signed does none of those things. It just directing state agencies to try
to reduce the burden using the language in the current act. It might
also encourage the sale of healthcare across state lines, something
that could reduce costs.
pending such repeal, it is imperative for the executive branch to
ensure that the law is being efficiently implemented, take all actions
consistent with law to minimize the unwarranted economic and
regulatory burdens of the act, and prepare to afford the states more
flexibility and control to create a more free and open health care
market.
NYT article https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/20/us/politics/trumpexecutive-order-obamacare.html
permalink
embed
parent
"Aka, fuck over people with pre-existing conditions."

If you have a person who's house already burned down trying to buy
insurance for their home do you think anybody would sell it to them?
No.
You're basically saying the young and healthy should directly subsidize
the old and sick. Insurance doesn't work that way...You pay now in the
hopes that maybe you'll need it in the future.
permalink
embed
parent
[]GilmoreHappy 1 point 1 hour ago
There are parts of ACA that he wants to keep, such as keeping kids on
their parents insurance until they are 26, and not declining coverage of
pre-existing conditions. The ACA is extremely complex (as was
intended) and isn't something that can easily be repelled.
permalink
embed
parent
Honestly, I'd rather reduce the number of young parent's on their

parent's insurance - if it means those people are entering a stable
workforce with employer-provided care.
permalink
embed
parent
[]RanchDressinInMyButt 1 point 1 hour ago
That isn't what he promised his supporters, is it? He promised a full

repel of the ACA.
What are his replacement plans? It will still leave millions of people
without health insurance if he doesn't find a replacement.
permalink
embed
parent
http://obamacarefacts.com/trumpcare-explained/
Then, after a meeting with President Obama, President-elect Trump

suggested he would either amend ObamaCare or repeal and replace it
(not just repeal) and would keep key provisions like guaranteed
coverage for preexisting conditions and allowing kids to stay on their
plans until 26.
permalink
embed
parent
[]NinjaHDD -1 points 1 hour ago
1/10
permalink
embed
parent
[]Keep-reefer-illegal 2 points 1 hour ago
Its been 2 days/10

so 10/10
permalink
embed
parent
[]librarian2016 5 points 2 hours ago
Did anyone else see the video where a security person appeared to be
asking Mrs. Gingrich for her pass or something? then the person
followed her as she (and he and another lady) walked into, through
and then outside to the inaugural platform, finally she stopped and
dug around in her purse. She handed something to her friend and then
the security person tucked it under his coat. I am NOT making this up.
I was watching CBS live. I know what I saw. It was like she didn't want
to give up whatever it was. A thermos, a can...? How can I find the
original broadcast, it's not just the swearing in.
permalink
embed
[]terriblegoat 2 points 1 hour ago
Gun
permalink
embed
parent
[]13thSinner 2 points 2 hours ago
Will the protests against trump actually do anything?
permalink
embed
No.
permalink
embed
parent
[]Kusibu 4 points an hour ago
The goal, in theory, is to show solidarity. They seem to have done that.
Whether you consider that to have done anything is up to debate.
permalink
embed
parent
Burning down a mcdonals is a lot of solidarity.
permalink
embed
parent
[]Kusibu [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
Those few aren't representative of the whole.
permalink
embed
parent
Enough people are rioting that I think using the word few is
misleading.
permalink
embed
parent
Out of literally millions of people, a few hundred rioters really is a

few. Don't get me wrong, those people are total assholes and doing
jack shit to improve "solidarity", but they really don't deserve to drag
down the whole.
permalink
embed
parent
[]Keep-reefer-illegal -3 points an hour ago
Nope. They are protesting a fact, not an idea.
permalink
embed
parent
[]ArkeryStarkery 5 points an hour ago
The organizing before and meetups during are what will last - they
build networks of people who will coordinate in the future on less
showy but ultimately more effective projects.
permalink
embed
parent
[]SJWs_can_SMD -1 points 2 hours ago
Besides wasting city resources on the cleanup, no.
permalink
embed
parent
[+]paul5287452 comment score below threshold (3 children)

[]r_roman -1 points 2 hours ago
If the Trump Administration took a turn for dictatorship what would

stop him?
permalink
embed
[]GilmoreHappy 2 points an hour ago
You don't infiltrate a government and become a dictator, you

overthrow a government. There is literally no way for him to become
an actual dictator. Plus, if he did, all you liberals would be very happy
that the NRA exists and many of us Republicans have guns.
permalink
embed

parent
"You don't infiltrate a government and become a dictator, you

overthrow a government. "
This seems like what democrats are trying to do, overthrow trump and
institute hilary as their new dictator.
permalink
embed
parent
I somewhat agree. However, I don't think some democrats actually

want Hillary as president, they just want someone from their side to
be president. Part of their problem is that there is no real person to
lead the charge for them. The days of worshiping Obama are over, and
there really isn't a viable candidate to replace him (at the moment). I
feel like a lot of the rage we are seeing from the left is because they
are lacking direction and hope (Pardon the Obama pun).
permalink
embed
parent
[]r_roman [score hidden] 54 minutes ago
That's funny how Fox News and other right wing outlets thought
Obama was going to void term limits to keep the presidency for
another 4 years was possible. But Trump doing it is beyond belief. And
you don't get to have all the fun, I keep my arsenal and ammo well
stocked.
permalink
embed
parent
I literally never heard Fox, or other right wing news outlets talk about
him getting a 3rd term. I also do not follow extreme right-wing new
sources. But I see your point, you have guns too. Cheers to you.
permalink
embed
parent
[]r_roman [score hidden] 38 minutes ago
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/07/obama-for-third-termcongressman-pushes-to-end-term-limits-for-us-presidency.html
I guess you missed this in your thorough watching of Fox News. I
guess it happens there's only so many hours in the day. And that's just
a quick two-minute google search.
permalink
embed
parent
Sorry, I don't regularly google search "Obama 3rd term president." I'm
not that paranoid. Also, that is from over 4 years ago...I guess I
maybe forgot about that story since it was so long ago.
permalink
embed
parent
[]PM_ME_UR_BATMANS 2 points 1 hour ago
I feel like this does a pretty good job of stopping him
permalink
embed
parent
[]helloboots 4 points 1 hour ago
You don't just "take a turn for dictatorship", it would require

overthrowing the government. Trump wouldn't do that because its bad
for business.
permalink
embed
parent
But democrats would, take a look at the riots on the streets.
permalink
embed
parent
[]Keep-reefer-illegal 13 points 2 hours ago
Congress, courts, age and term limits.
permalink
embed
parent
[]r_roman -2 points 2 hours ago
Dictators killing anyone that openly opposes them wouldn't be the first
time.
permalink
embed
parent
Except for Trump isn't a dictator. One of the main reasons the U.S. has
multiple branches of government is specifically so the President can't
become a dictator.
permalink
embed
parent
I highly doubt Trump will do that.

The last president to kill an american without trial was Obama.
permalink
embed
parent
[]r_roman 1 point an hour ago
Ok Big Pharm, I'll play ball who did Obama kill without a trail?
permalink
embed
parent
Big pharm?
Anyway, 4 people with American citizenship died by drone, However, 3
were just wrong place/wrong time, so I will not even bring up 3/4
Anwar al-Aulaqi was fighting for a terrorist organization (al-quada) at
the time of his droning. However, he was in Yemen at the time.
However, he was still an American citizen killed by the US government
without a trial who was not an immediate threat, although he was a

threat, he was not holding hostages or anything.
permalink
embed
parent
[]r_roman 1 point an hour ago
Correct. But that is a stretch from what I'm asking about. I fully think
that it would never happen because as someone pointed out it would
be bad for business. Just playing devils advocate though.
Big Pharm was just poking fun at your user.
permalink
embed
parent
[]That_Guuuuuuuy 2 points an hour ago
You even admitted he was a threat. If he had shot a US Army officer,

then you wouldnt have cared. They acted appropriately
permalink
embed
parent
I am not saying the guy was a saint, I know he is a piece of trash who,
if given the chance, would attempt to kill US military members.
But he is still the first American citizen killed by the government
purposefully without a trial since the civil war
permalink
embed
parent
[]natsandniners 5 points 2 hours ago
The public. There would be protests and riots and ultimately possibly a
civil war.
permalink
embed
parent
[]r_roman 0 points 2 hours ago
Would we be hoping that our military doesn't take orders from them?
permalink
embed
parent
[]natsandniners 1 point 2 hours ago
Well they may, but if the military took aggressive action against the
public, there would be a revolution (Syria as an example). There are
enough people that, even if the military fought against, would still
stage a civil war
permalink
embed
parent
[]r_roman 2 points an hour ago
You may under estimate the largest military force in the world
controlled by the wrong man.
permalink
embed
parent
[]Kusibu [score hidden] an hour ago
Mattis would not take Trump's shit if he turned on the United States.
permalink
embed
parent
[]natsandniners 2 points an hour ago
Not saying they would win, because the military would wipe out a
revolution in one fell swoop. However, you're also assuming that there
would be no insubordination or even discomfort on the part of the
military to take part in a dictatorship
permalink
embed
parent
Has anyone else just been really happy since trump won? Like
everything is lining up just right?
permalink
embed
I have become a way more patriotic Canadian, and way more happy
with Prime Minister Trudeau, so in a way, yeah.
permalink
embed
parent
[]OhJustShutUpAlready 4 points 2 hours ago
I am concerned about what I saw on the white house official page roll back into fossil fuels (oh no no no) and greater military spending (I
mean US is already the strongest. Does it need to grow thrice as
much?)
And the rest is just cautiously optimistic.
permalink
embed
parent
[]justafish25 2 points 2 hours ago
Well since I got accepted into MED school and got my scholarship, yes.
permalink
embed
parent
Congrats!
permalink
embed
parent
[]BaackMan987 0 points 2 hours ago
So far yes
permalink
embed
parent
[]folzeal 0 points 2 hours ago
Who honestly gives a flying fedora about how large the inauguration
crowd was? Was it larger or smaller than the one in 2012/2008? What
are the official reports?
That's right, there are none because no one decided: Hey, let's do a
headcount in case there's going to be a shitstorm about the crowd
number tomorrow. It must be a real slow news day if this is the only
thing that matters right now.
permalink
embed
[]Stranger0nReddit [score hidden] just now
People only care because the media reports on it and people think that
means they are supposed to care.
permalink
embed
parent
It's mainly due to the "EVIL FASCIST TRUMP" hate train taking over
the report of it that showed up on /r/nottheonion recently. It is an
issue, and we shouldn't turn a blind eye to it, but at the same time
people are overreacting to an absurd degree.
permalink
embed
parent
[]terriblegoat 4 points 1 hour ago
Trump needs to vilify the media, pass on the perception that the media
is fake news, that trump is the only source of real facts. If trump can
control the perception of truth it makes manipulating his base easier.
It's easier to spread falsehoods, and increasingly difficult to effectively
critize him.
Crowd size isn't the issue, the issue is the perception of truth and who
controls it.
permalink
embed
parent
[]ArkeryStarkery 2 points 1 hour ago
Every time there's a big event in DC or NYC there's several people

doing crowd estimates - news sources, transit services, and police
forces to name a few. Usually takes the estimators a few days to come
up with solid numbers that aren't just guesstimates from aerial photos.
permalink
embed
parent
[]ericestate 6 points 2 hours ago
If Trump says he is "at war with the media" does that count as an
official Declaration of war?
permalink
embed
[]Alex_From_LMB 2 points 2 hours ago
Asking the real questions
permalink
embed
parent
[]helloboots 3 points 2 hours ago
No. Congress must also declare war.
permalink
embed
parent
[]bradholtzer44 3 points 2 hours ago
Why is Trump hated/liked? Why is Clinton hated/liked?
permalink
embed
[]Donalf 14 points 2 hours ago
Trump is liked because a portion of Americans are fed up with the

political correctness that has taken over the Two-Party system.
Therefore, Trump's controversial views on topics are seen by some as
Trump "saying it like it is," exposing the hard ugly truth and
confronting political "bureaucracy" head-on with ambitious projects like
the Mexico border wall. He also appeals to people's sense of
xenophobia, and he seems to prefer isolating the USA from the
international community (for example, he endorsed Brexit) and wants
a more "get tough" policy with troublesome nations like China and the
Middle East. He also promises stuff like restoring the Detroit car
industry, and reducing unemployment as well as finally beating back
Daesh, although whether he will actually do this or how he intends to
carry these out remains to be seen.
Now, people hate Trump for a variety of reasons. First and foremost,
many don't view him fit to be president: he has no previous career in
politics, and has some dubious success in his own private business
management. They view his twitter posts as extremely unprofessional,
and are critical of his sensational language and bold (yet vague)
claims. He seems to have some racist/xenophobic and sexist views,
which doesn't grant him much support there (although a decent
portion of ethnic minorities elected him). Finally, even some
republicans preferred that Ted Cruz would have been the Republican
candidate rather than Trump, so felt slightly cheated. Right now,
people are afraid of Trump because this mandate, the US congress is
predominantly republican and so will likely approve whatever bills he
passes, crazy or not. He also wants to undo most of the projects that
Obama struggled for years to pass in congress, like Obamacare.
Ok, now Hillary. People like her because she actually has political
experience: she was minister of foreign affairs a few mandates ago
and several claim that she was the true brains when her husband Bill
was president. She wanted more female equality and she would also
be the first female president of the USA (much like Obama was the
first coloured president), so her election would be seen by some as a
great leap forwards in gender equality. She is more politically correct
than Trump, and some simply miss the Clinton mandate.
Why don't all American's like Hillary? Because since she has political
history (unlike Trump), she also had a few scandals. There was the
Benghazi crisis where the US embassy there was taken hostage:
Hillary's inability to react as minister of foreign affairs meant that
some Americans did die. Likewise, there was the email scandal, where
she carried out some presumably illegal acts through her Government
email. Some view her as a candidate only willing to appease lobbyists
who funded her campaign (whilst Trump allegedly self-funded himself).
There are several more reasons for each of these sections. As a nonamerican, I tried to label some of the most prominent ones that came
to my mind from reading news/reddit and tried to make it as unbiased
as possible. Personally, I prefer Hillary only as a lesser of two evils, but
no candidate was a saint. In fact, I hope that the controversy of these
elections combined with any possible blunders committed by Trump
will be used by the American people to rethink their politically
polarised two-party system, which I think does not do a good job of

representing the people's political views.
permalink
embed
parent
[]bradholtzer44 [score hidden] 37 minutes ago
Thank you so much this is an excellent answer
permalink
embed
parent
I hope that the controversy of these elections combined with any

possible blunders committed by Trump will be used by the American
people to rethink their politically polarised two-party system, which I
think does not do a good job of representing the people's political
views.
Please yes. PLEASE yes. If everyone who turned up for the Women's
March here in the U.S. turned up again to call out for ranked voting,
there's a distinct possibility that the political system could be
completely turned on its head with that one change alone.
permalink
embed
parent
[]S21Molla 2 points 3 hours ago
Okay guys what the worst possible outcome now trump is officially
president? (Be creative ;) )
permalink
embed
Giant alien heads show up in the sky shouting SHOW US WHAT YOU
GOT! El Presidente goes to talk to them, bungles it, and earth gets
destroyed.
permalink
embed
parent
War with China.
permalink
embed
parent
[]natsandniners 7 points 2 hours ago
Some foreign country says that his hands are small, he gets pissed
and launches a nuke.
permalink
embed
parent
[]ItsMeNotYouJustUs 2 points 1 hour ago
They attacked his hands, nobody has ever attacked his hands before,
I've never even heard of this before. Just look at his hands. Do they
look small to you?
permalink
embed
parent
[]Keep-reefer-illegal -1 points 2 hours ago
He doesn't fulfill most of his promises.
permalink
embed
parent
[]Scherezade_Jones 3 points 1 hour ago
I would think that's an optimistic view. I think worst case would be him
delivering on many of the things he has said. They aren't all dystopian
taglines, but enough of them are scary enough to make that a pretty
alarming prospect.
permalink
embed
parent
[]Keep-reefer-illegal 2 points 1 hour ago
what is dystopian?
permalink
embed
parent
[]TorbjornKegBreaker 1 point 2 hours ago
Just like every single other president? Who would've thought....
permalink
embed
parent
[]Phroneo 7 points 3 hours ago
I'm not a fan of Trump, but this Gigapixel view of the inauguration
really does show a packed crowd all the way back to the monument.
What am I missing? Is the media really lying to make him look worse?
Why would they lie when there's enough reality?
http://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2017/01/politics/trumpinauguration-gigapixel/
permalink
embed
[]santijurk 1 point an hour ago*
That does make it look like there are more people than the sparse
aerial photo being compared to Obama's first inauguration.
However if you zoom in on the gigapixel the white structures at the
end are not actually at the base of the monument and you can still see
a fair amount of empty ground before those.
From the podium it might indeed look like the crowd goes all the way
back but that doesn't make it true.. Perspective is a powerful thing.
BBC article including aerial photo
** Edit to ask that if they really did have record breaking crowds, why
would the press secretary not just offer an aerial photo to back up
their claim?
permalink
embed
parent
[]jBROMZ 2 points 2 hours ago
The media lied, plain and simple.

the actual crowd
It WAS crowded all the way to the monument
Bonus
/u/vodkaandponies Do atleast a tiny amount of research before you

dump provenly false information.
permalink
embed
parent
[]vodkaandponies 1 point 2 hours ago
So the photos from vox are fake then?
permalink
embed
parent
Yep. It's a fact. Not as in the pictures are photoshopped, but as in

disingegius, and unfair.
permalink
embed
parent
Not photoshopped, but many photos were taken before the actual
event.
It is also worth noting that the crowd was moved around due to two
entrances being shut down by violent thugs.
permalink
embed
parent
[]vodkaandponies 4 points 2 hours ago
unfair because they are unflattering?

By the same logic, your photos are unfair because they are
deliberately try to show the crowds as bigger than they are.
permalink
embed
parent
[]jBROMZ 1 point 2 hours ago
No, it only shows that the crowd reaches all the way to the
monument, JUST LIKE OBAMAS. Never said Trumps crowd was bigger
than Obamas, just calling out the media for deliberately comparing a
crowd during the speech with a crowd hours before speech in order to
make Trumps look much smaller than it actually was.
permalink
embed
parent
just calling out the media for deliberately comparing a crowd during
the speech with a crowd hours before speech in order to make Trumps
look much smaller than it actually was.
the photos were taken at the same time.
permalink
embed
parent
Just in case you didn't get it the first time, and need proof including
the crowd with the president in the same picture, here you go.
You can do your mental gymnastics all you want, but this is already
proven wether you like it or not.
http://i.imgur.com/jhpqro4.jpg
permalink
embed
parent
the crowd was smaller than obamas. it doesn't matter if it looked

"packed" and that's the sweetest thing in the world. just knowing that
trump doesn't have anywhere near the support as obama must drive
him up the fucking wall
permalink
embed
parent
[]vodkaandponies 0 points 1 hour ago
keep telling yourself that.
permalink
embed
parent
[]helloboots 1 point 2 hours ago
Hah, some of the ponchos are pretty silly.
permalink
embed
parent
[]wandering_ones 4 points 2 hours ago
It's a very different angle, you really have to take into account the
landmarks on the side then compare it to the uncropped overhead
shot. When you do that, the area that is full in that gigapixel image
actually only represents a portion, they put up a white temporary
structure that you can see doesn't normally sit there and in Obama's
inaguration pictures you can see the crowd extends beyond that even
when comparing a similar angle with the gigapixel image.
Overhead shot. You can also see that white building at the bottom of
this image as well, whereas the crowd clearly extends beyond that
same point in Obamas and beyond the edge of the frame.
Obama Megapixel image
permalink
embed
parent
contrast and compare these pictures from Obamas inauguration, taken

from the air
And yes, I know it's Vox, but pictures don't lie.
permalink
embed
parent
[]Phroneo 2 points 3 hours ago
But is there any merit to their claims of more security delaying people?
The Gigapixel picture clearly shows a packed crowd. This was probably
at a later time so they should show a comparison between the crowds
then. Maybe other nearby places too if it was less crowded this time. I
recall the trip statistics showed a large difference too so it does make
sense taht numbers were lower but the pics published everywhere
exaggerate the situation IMO.
When they make fun of Trump saying he could see crowds all the way
up to the monument, the Gigapixel image shows they are being
dishonest. Sure it wasn't the biggest crowd ever. That's silly to claim,
but I can't help but feel they are being partially dishonest.
permalink
embed
parent
[]Keep-reefer-illegal 1 point 2 hours ago
Yes. two entrances were shut down,
permalink
embed
parent
Not that i've seen.
This was probably at a later time so they should show a comparison
between the crowds then.
The pictures from Vox were taken at the same time, of the same
location, from the same vantage point.
When they make fun of Trump saying he could see crowds all the way
up to the monument, the Gigapixel image shows they are being
dishonest.
you can't see very well from the angle of the GP.
permalink
embed
parent
[]T_____________T 2 points 3 hours ago
Mental health professionals and enthusiasts of Reddit, what

assessment would you give the current US president?
permalink
embed
[]TagProNoah 17 points 3 hours ago
Mental health professionals can't assess people they haven't met in

person.
permalink
embed
parent
[]BlackPanther01 8 points 3 hours ago
Boi, he cray
permalink
embed
parent
[]Panthaaaaas -1 points 3 hours ago
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahha
permalink
embed
parent
[]othasodithasoidt -4 points 3 hours ago
parents of reddit, how would you rate the childishness of trump

"haters", their inability to gracefully concede defeat and the tantrums
that they constantly throw because their candidate lost?
permalink
embed
parent
[]Donalf 3 points 2 hours ago
You say this, but I have a friend who obnoxiously supports Trump in
any way possible. Like, I understand believing that he will deliver his
promises and that he is better than Hillary, but I knew this guy for
over 10 years and suddenly over the last 18 months he's turned into a
self-absorbed asshole who lashes aggressively like a 5 yo (literally
triggered in every sense of the word) every time someone so much as
does a side remark about Trump and his policies, whether that be in
real life or in cancerous facebook posts.
permalink
embed
parent
[]tomorsomthing 9 points 3 hours ago
Republicans of reddit, why don't you care about free speech when it's
anyone else?
permalink
embed
parent
[]Putin-the-fabulous 6 points 3 hours ago
Much higher that you, as you throw your toys out the pram over a
simple joke.
permalink
embed
parent
[]House_Bitch 3 points 3 hours ago
Free speech is a beautiful thing.
permalink
embed
parent
[]impartialcharles 11 points 4 hours ago
This is my take on the elections and what has occurred thereafter, it's
not a political rant as much as it is a plea toward structured reasoning.
My thoughts stemmed from the massive amount of misinformation and
outright stupidity I've seen on various social media sites. It is all too
easy to make an assumption of political affiliation, perspectives,
backgrounds, etc. It's just as easy to conform to one side or the other
based on popular demand and without any knowledge outside of basic
talking points. Somehow, we have lost the ability to reason as a
society. I'm not sure of the steps we can take to mitigate
disagreements and ultimately find common ground. Perhaps the Reddit
community can be a voice of reason lol.
I wasn't old enough to be fully present during the Bill Clinton nor GW
Bush presidency. In hindsight, there are a number of things both did
right and there are a number of things both did absolutely wrong. The
sunset bill and Patriot Act (the name is a misnomer), respectively, are
the first two that come to mind. But it is important to be critical of
anyone in such a high position of power. I was critical of Obama at
first. At the end of 8 years, there is little data to support the idea that
he was less than a good president. By nearly every measure, we are
better off now than during the Bush presidency. We are no longer in a
recession (which not only could have been prevented but would have
also caused the worst depression in American history). Unemployment

is lower, the economy is stronger, GDP and household income are both
higher. Not to mention the advancements made in social equality.
My political stance is determined by the issue, as should yours. There
is no conceivable way you can agree with every single idea of a given
party. I do my best to be sure that my ideas conform to the founding
principles of this nation, scientific data, objective truths and
fundamental justice. Let me be clear on a few things. There is a
profound difference between having an opinion and denying an
objective truth. Contrary to popular belief, an opinion can be wrong.
Which leads to President Trump. I am equally a critic as before. As
should you be. I didn't vote for either parties candidates, I voted for
Gary Johnson. And only because I felt he was the best candidate we
were offered. However, like every President, I do believe that he has
America's best interest at heart. He may be a little (or a lot)
misguided, but well-intentioned.
The DNC gave the election away. They gave the nomination to
someone who had not earned it. Granted, she has more votes on
paper, but those votes primarily came from the South which almost
always votes Red. Minus the vote suppression thing, that was their
fatal mistake. I have little doubt that Bernie Sanders would have been
the 45th president had the DNC gave him the nomination. The vast
majority of his votes went to either Trump or Johnson.
The Republican party created Donald Trump. The last 8 years was
spent demanding a birth certificate, questioning his religious views,
name calling, denying scientific consensus, losing touch with the voter
base, claiming someone was out to take away guns, etc. He was a
partial leader of that movement, might I add. And I haven't seen any
calls for his birth certificate to be released yet, which is kinda one of
my points.
Our democratic republic did not fail. We cannot have a popular vote
because of an unequal distribution of the population. In that case,
generally speaking, the same people in the same area, with the same
ideas, would decide the election. Now, you can argue that the
structure of the system needs to be redesigned. There are a number of
people who are either not eligible to vote or simply decided not to. The
political setup itself hinders the viability of candidates because of rules

that place limitations on party affiliation and voting power. I get that
as well.
Those in protest are not in the wrong, unamerican, etc. You have the
same right to speak out as they do to stand up. That is a constitutional
right. The acts of protest are warranted. Climate change exists, gender
inequality exists, racial bias also exists. Civil liberties and social
tolerance are equally as important. None of the aforementioned
sentences should be argued. And there is very good reason to believe
that some of those things may be in further jeopardy. We have heard
comments and ideas that give their movement at least some degree of
validity- also irrefutable.
The idea of widespread welfare abuse existing is utterly false. In fact, I
would wager that what would be generated by the dollars stashed in
tax havens of America's top earners would far exceed the dollars spent
on welfare programs. And if not, it definitely would when combined
with the tax breaks or other financial benefits (e.g. "too big to fail").
The blame is being placed,, quite literally, the wrong people.
Not a single person have even entertained the idea that Mexico is
going to pay for a wall... Lol. You and I will pay for that stupid, stupid
wall. With that said, how many of you grew up on a farm? And how
many of those farms employed people under the table? Right. So,
given that the average family farm struggles today as it is, what
happens to your profit if you have to pay someone who isn't willing to
work for $5 dollars an hour? Right. Now extrapolate that across the
entire nation. Assuming a third of Ag laborers equate to a third of
production and a third of financial gain... That's a pretty big sum of
money. Which, in turn, is reflected back to you, the consumer.
Destroying the ACA without a replacement plan doesn't make any
sense at this point.
He will not bring back long terms coal jobs. This is a free market
economy. The decline of coal-related jobs has little to do with
government regulations. It has more to do with market demand and
advancements in technology. The market is shifting towards renewable
(i.e. cheaper) energy technologies. The industry itself utilized the
same concept.. it shifted from labor to machine intensive practices
over the last 10 years or so. We used to travel by horse, think of that.
Similarly, we will one day produce energy in a new, cleaner, cheaper,
and innovative way.
I don't think people have as much of a problem with Trump himself, as
they do what he represents. It's the old saying "if you lay with dogs,
you're going to get fleas". Regardless of his personal views, you
cannot dispute that his movement gave birth to uprisings we all
thought were left in the distant past. It made unacceptable behavior
mainstream again. It sets a bad example solely based on perception.
Outside of that, his blatant disregard for science is almost astonishing.
You can also throw in all of the ridiculous statements we've heard, but
I digress. As far as the rest of the administration goes, I'm actually
surprised (and excited) to see Elon Musk being brought on. Same with
Mad Dog. Trying to be optimistic here, but the
credentials/integrity/competence of the rest are all more than
questionable, particularly DeVos. Side note, I'd 10-1 take Donald
Trump over Mike Pence. That should speak volumes.
Lastly opinions, religious beliefs or moral framework do not matter.
In any context of government or legal boundaries. Your rights end
where another's begin (be that in reference to gun ownership,
marriage equality, race, religion, sexual orientation, woman's rights,
etc.). If a potential or existing law violates any of the beliefs you hold but the law itself doesn't impact your personal rights - it doesn't (and
shouldn't) matter. This is America- Land of the Free- and not the land
of restriction.
I have no right to tell a woman what she can and cannot do with her
body, I have no right to tell someone who they can and cannot marry.
So on, and so fourth. Just like you have no right to tell me the specs of
a gun I choose to carry, nor tell me which religion is more acceptable
to follow. That isn't within your rights because your opinion absolutely,
under any circumstance, does not matter. Live and let live. That's my
take.
permalink
embed
[]othasodithasoidt 7 points 3 hours ago
At the end of 8 years, there is little data to support the idea that he
was less than a good president. By nearly every measure, we are
better off now than during the Bush presidency. We are no longer in a
recession (which not only could have been prevented but would have
also caused the worst depression in American history). Unemployment
is lower, the economy is stronger, GDP and household income are both
higher. Not to mention the advancements made in social equality.
You can't say a president is good or bad immediately after their term.
You are also giving obama a lot of positive benefit of the doubt. for
example, the national deficit is huge and the economy is stagnant. It
recovered from the recession but not by a huge amount. One of the
big reasons people support trump is the economy simply because the
economy really isn't that healthy. There is a decent amount of data
saying that obama wasn't that great for the economy. see: deficit,
interest rates, economic jump when trump got elected, spending
power of middle class dropping, ACA being an insurance companies
wet dream
permalink
embed
parent
I gave him a lot of benefit of the doubt for the very reason why you
state his effectiveness can't be completely evaluated immediately
following his term. As it stands today there is no question that, by
most measures, the country is in better shape than what was left by
Bush.
Concerning national deficit, yes it is larger. I'm recalling from memory,
but with the exception of Bill Clinton, the deficit has grown under the
last 5 presidents. Albeit a higher under Obama. But as you stated, you
can't evaluate a president immediately following his term. The great
recession happen as Bush was leaving office. A strong argument can
be made that at least a portion of the debt added by Obama could be
due to the terrible economic condition he inherited. It takes years to
recover from such drastic conditions, we haven't fully recovered to this
day. That's condition is directly coordinated with the negligence of
several parties, all prior to Obama's first term. The Federal Reserve
slashed interest rates. The Clinton Administration pushed for lower

credit and down payment requirements. The Bush Administration failed
to provide oversight to a deregulated Wall Street. And Wall Street
offered low quality, high risk loans which were essential bundled as
packs of shit (in the form of mortgage securities) and sold as
diamonds (bonds) for collateral. They knew the risk and they knew
what the aftereffects could potentially be. Back to your point about
interest rates- they can't always remain low, it is simply not
sustainable for extended periods of time. Same in reverse.
I disagree with your statement about economic recovery. Economic
recovery is slow, yes, but it's hard to argue that it isn't better. As a
side note, I never used the word "great". I have no doubt that the
economy is not at peak performance, there are a number of things
that could be improved upon, including some of the things you
mentioned. But collectively, as a whole, its conditions are better than it
was 8 years ago. This is not a critical analysis to the finest details, I'm
speaking about it in its entirety.
Back to the deficit, yes it's high. But could that also be a reflection of
the magnitude of the great recession? Yes, it is probable. In 08
revenues fell and that cause spending to increase. There is no defined
limit at which the economy comes crashing down due to the deficit.
It's only an issue if it can't be repaid. We can sit and theorize the
possibilities but ultimately we can't know when it becomes an issue,
possible solutions we may have, nor its consequences. We still have a
strong credit rating and it hasn't hurt private investments. Not to
mention the 831 billion dollar stimulus package over 10 years. My
point is, a lot of the deficit can be viewed as a result of trying to repair
what was previously broken.
We still have the strongest and largest economy in the world, even
compared to China. It has recovered, slowly but surely.
There are still issues, Ill agree with you on that matter. Wage
stagnation, income inequality, etc. I'm not an economist. I'm a 23 year
old college student and my area of focus is entirely science based. My
perspective is at face value, using relatively available information, and
only having a fundamental and conceptual understanding.
permalink
embed
parent
[]geekmuseNU 0 points 3 hours ago
I disagree with your last paragraph concerning the gun thing. Access
to an abortion or same sex marriage has no effect on the people not
receiving an abortion or getting a same sex marriage. This is not true
for guns. They objectively have a huge impact on non-gun owners
(and other gun owners too for that matter). If it's concerning our
personal safety we absolutely have a right to an opinion on the specs
of your gun. It's not in the same category of debate
permalink
embed
parent
[]impartialcharles 1 point 2 hours ago
Apply the same logic to a car. You have no right to tell me the car I can
drive, I have no right to tell you. There is an assumed risk in either
circumstance dependent on the driver (or gun owner). But owning a
particular car or carrying a particular gun does not come with a set of
inherent risk to anyone other than the owner of said object. Your
assumed risk stem from the owner or person responsible, not in the
object itself.
permalink
embed
parent
[]gamedevelopersguild 2 points 3 hours ago
The gun in my gun safe has no effect on you.
permalink
embed
parent
[]geekmuseNU 1 point 3 hours ago
Until it leaves said safe, or it no longer becomes your gun. It's not just
an issue of trust in you (though that is a factor and accidents do
happen), it's an issue of trust in literally everyone who will potentially
end up interacting with it. Does it have an effect on me right this
second? Maybe not, that doesn't mean it won't
permalink
embed
parent
I could potentially interact with too much water and end up drowning,
but I don't think we should limit the amount of water you keep in your
pool.
permalink
embed
parent
Until it leaves the chapel/vagina, or it no longer becomes your

marriage/child. It's not just an issue of trust in you (though that is a
factor and accidents do happen), it's an issue of trust in literally who
would potentially end up interacting with your marriage/child. Does it
have an effect on me right this second? Maybe not, that doesn't mean
it won't.
See, that's the issue, you can't say my gun rights are any less
important than any of the other state rights being argued. Sure,
someone can steal my gun and kill you as your child you aborted could
pick up a knife and kill 30 people in 30 years. Just remember, there is
a reason you call the cops when you're in danger and it's not because
they show up in a nice car.
permalink
embed
parent
[]geekmuseNU 0 points 2 hours ago
Yes I can. Gay marriage hasn't killed anyone. Abortion hasn't killed
anyone. Guns on the other hand kill quite a lot of people in the US
every year, a lot of whom aren't gun owners themselves
permalink
embed
parent
So do cigarettes, but I don't think I have any authority over whether

or not you smoke. It becomes my issue when its around me. Same
with a gun. I referenced the specs of the gun, not the location in which
it can/cannot be carried.
permalink
embed
parent
[]geekmuseNU [score hidden] 26 minutes ago
That's still an invalid comparison, guns are designed to kill and maim.
Tobacco is just designed to get you buzzed, it just has a lot of
damaging side effects. And besides, there is a hell of a lot of authority
over what exactly we can and can't smoke. The specs do matter, not
all guns are created equal, otherwise there wouldn't be different
varieties in the first place.
permalink
embed
parent
Gay marriage hasn't killed anyone.

Future children of those married if they had been married to different
gender.
Abortion hasn't killed anyone.
Like every child that didn't get born.
Guns on the other hand kill quite a lot of people in the US every year
Incorrect. There has not been a single self-aware firearm ever
produced that has decided to end someone's life (since self-aware
firearms do not exist).
permalink
embed
parent
[]EmoteSpammer 1 point 1 hour ago
By your logic every person who isn't having as many children is

possible is killing future children.
permalink
embed
parent
[]gamedevelopersguild [score hidden] 32 minutes ago
I'll admit, it's a bit much but the guy above was saying that Guns were
just up and deciding to kill people so... you know.
permalink
embed
parent
[]RazarTuk 3 points 3 hours ago
I think the other thing that led to Trump's election actually was
Hillary's "deplorables" comment, or at least the culture it expressed.
Political correctness culture actually has gotten more extreme as of
late, actually as evidenced by South Park. So what Trump represents
more than any -isms you may accuse him of, is a complete rejection of
political correctness. The difference, though, between him and the rest
of the right, which should have disqualified him, is that he also lacks a
thing called tact. At this point, things started to steamroll. The left
would attack people for even associating themselves with Trump, and
this would only drive more people to him because of what he
represented. However, even if people were driven to him, they
certainly wouldn't want to admit it, because of cultural pressure. This,
along with the server scandal, is what led to 3rd party candidates,
such as Gary Johnson, polling as high as 10%. This is when the left
made their critical mistake. The relative lack of public support for
Trump lulled them into a false sense of security, and Hillary stopped
trying. As a result, they weren't able to convince those moderates they
had once scared into Trump's arms to vote for her again. So even
though the polls may have shown it was in the bag for the left, a silent
block rose up in November to win the election for Trump.
This is why people's actions after the election are so concerning. Yes, I
get that people are upset and understand why they march. But actions
like Shia LaBeouf starting a continual livestream until Trump is out of
office, kicking New Wave Feminists out of the march for being pro-life,
and representatives refusing to even attend the man's inauguration
are only fueling the flames of this political divide which got the man
into office.
As described in the election megathread:
Weve seen this before in 2008 when, after feeling voiceless and
marginalized for the better part of a decade, those who chose not to
submit to the will of the Republican political machine (minorities,

homosexuals, atheists, etc.) said, no more andSNAP! This time we
got the same result, but on the opposite side. If you demonize the
people you disagree with, label them as racists, sexists, and
oppressors and insist any and all of their successes are a result of
some unearned "privilege," they will create a counter-revolution.
Point four often poses the most formidable internal threat to those in
power because it creates complacency and leads the ruling party to
overestimate their consensus. This was exhibited by Hillary Clintons
decision not to visit rust-belt states (making the false assumption
they were all locked up and voting Democrat) and the polls we were
force-fed by liberal friendly media for the past 24 months. Its possible
that the methodology/analysis of said polls (all 10,000 of them) was
deeply flawed; or perhaps those collecting the data and reporting the
results merely lied. Whichever you choose to believe, it is clear that
the Democratic Party, like so many often do, fell victim to comfort.
Certain that they had constructed an infallible political powerhouse,
failure was never even considered as a remote, outside possibility as is
evidenced by Hillary Clintons lack of a prepared concession speech.
source
permalink
embed
parent
there were people at Trump rallies chanting "she's a cunt, vote for
Trump!" and wearing shirts saying "Trump that bitch!" with pictures of
Hillary being punched in the face.
The deplorable's comment was pretty accurate in that regard.
permalink
embed
parent
[]Kell08 2 points 2 hours ago
I didn't want Trump to win, but you can find many individuals acting
that way supporting any candidate. It doesn't mean "deplorable" would
apply to the majority of the people supporting a candidate.
permalink
embed
parent
And Clinton never said all the Trump supporters were deplorables.
permalink
embed
parent
If you demonize the people you disagree with, label them as racists,
sexists, and oppressors and insist any and all of their successes are a
result of some unearned "privilege," they will create a counterrevolution.
I'm not trying to defend those Trump supporters who truly are
deplorable. But when you lump everyone else in with them, just
because they hate Trump slightly less than your own candidate, that's
when you lose an election.
permalink
embed
parent
At the very best, you are still enabling the worst people like that by
sticking with him.
I've yet to see a single trump supporter call out the sexism and bigotry
shown by so many.
permalink
embed
parent
[]House_Bitch 1 point 4 hours ago
Well said.
permalink
embed
parent
[]impartialcharles 1 point an hour ago
Thank you, I appreciate it.
permalink
embed
parent
[]Kell08 1 point 2 hours ago
This comment had 0 points when I saw it. Who downvotes something
as simple as "Well said"?
permalink
embed
parent
[]House_Bitch 0 points 2 hours ago
Who knows. Maybe I should have written a paragraph explaining why I

agree but I couldn't be fucked tbh.
permalink
embed
parent
[]JackHarrison1010 3 points 4 hours ago
This is one of the most comprehensive breakdowns of the political and

social climate in the US I've seen.
permalink
embed
parent
[]impartialcharles 1 point 1 hour ago
Thanks, that's probably the best compliment I've received. I

appreciate it.
permalink
embed
parent
[]dieth 4 points 4 hours ago
With America about to implode which states could end up seceding and
joining Canada as a new province?
permalink
embed
[]clashFury 0 points 3 hours ago*
California, Oregon, Washington, and New England
permalink
embed

parent
[]SJWs_can_SMD 2 points 2 hours ago
which states
...
New England, and NYC
.........................
permalink
embed
parent
[]clashFury [score hidden] 28 minutes ago
What?
permalink
embed
parent
[]SJWs_can_SMD [score hidden] 4 minutes ago
*
permalink
embed
parent
[]Pie_Gun 1 point 3 hours ago
Ah shit we are gunna have to build a wall to keep out the Americans
permalink
embed
parent
[]Kell08 2 points 2 hours ago
We are not paying for Trudeau's wall!
permalink
embed
parent
[]Pie_Gun 1 point an hour ago
Fine, we will pay for it, but you will pay us back!...
Maybe it will be a fence.
It will be a glorious fence though.
permalink
embed
parent
[]othasodithasoidt 1 point 3 hours ago
its actually hilarious how much some people are sore losers about the
whole election process.
permalink
embed
parent
[]gamedevelopersguild 1 point 3 hours ago
The current political climate in under 140 characters, folks.
permalink
embed
parent
California, but not to become Canadian.
permalink
embed
parent
[]Sharpes_Sword 0 points 4 hours ago
Parts of California would definitely change. Northern California

(Jefferson State as they like to call it) would change from the rest of
California and stay in the union while southern California and Bay area
would probably secede. Central valley might stay in the union.
California by itself is already a complex one.
permalink
embed
parent
[]Chodhosame123636 3 points 4 hours ago
Why do large cities vote democrat? Eg California and new york
permalink
embed
[]RanchDressinInMyButt 1 point an hour ago
Major cities often have a more diverse crowd in terms of race, social
economic background, and culture. And I'd say these people flock
there because there are more opportunities there(better jobs, better
education).
Whereas in rural America you tend to have only white people. They
aren't surrounded by a diverse collection of all of the above. While I
don't think they are inherently racist, they simply don't understand the
struggle that different races/cultures face. It is hard to empathize
when you don't understand.
It is sort of like how not all that long ago, gay marriage and gay people
were still pretty hush hush and looked down upon. Then when the
LGBT crowd started having representation in media and entertainment
it helped shift the opinion of the nation. Because it gave all these
people who never had experiences with gay people before experiences
with them.
They finally saw them as normal people who had normal problems,
normal fears, normal failures, normal triumphs.. you get the picture.
permalink
embed
parent
[]caroja 4 points 2 hours ago
The divide in rural counties is extreme because there is no real need to

interact with anyone different than yourself. This is how
Gerrymandering by the GOP has succeeded. GOP supporters are vocal
and given to real world punishment ( preventing employment, chasing
children waiting for the school bus, killing your livestock ) if you
disagree with them. Sounds crazy until you live where I do. In cities,
you interact with a wide variety of people. Not here.
permalink
embed
parent
[]JackHarrison1010 11 points 4 hours ago
Because there are more types of people in cities. People living there
meet the people Trump is scapegoating and realise that they aren't
actually bad people.
permalink
embed
parent
[]othasodithasoidt -4 points 3 hours ago
The amount people are willing to lie to themselves to convince

themselves that they're right all along is astounding.
Trump being inaugurated must be devastating for you huh? Still trying
to rationalize it to yourself in your head? "Trump won cause everyone
else is ignorant"
permalink
embed
parent
Well, I hope you get what you asked for in your president
(http://www.areyousorryyet.com/)
permalink
embed
parent
load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments (7227 replies)

US Presidential Inauguration Donald Trump Civil: Sorted by

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

US Presidential Inauguration Donald Trump Civil: Sorted by

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Today the US presidential inauguration will take place to inaugurate

the 45th US President, Donald Trump

[]lamenting_kitty [score hidden] 4 minutes ago

Why is having a good relationship with Russia a bad thing?

As a concept, it is a good idea to have normalized relations with a

The united States applied economic sanctions to individuals involved in

[]cascaderade [score hidden] 30 minutes ago

[]PM_ME_MAMMARY_GLANDS [score hidden] 52 minutes ago

Minorities who are often considered to be attacked by Trump (women,

I like his America First platform.

[]Drumanas [score hidden] 17 minutes ago

There's a pretty direct way to get his policies

[]tollercoster56 [score hidden] 42 minutes ago

That's a really interesting point of view.

[]tollercoster56 [score hidden] 55 minutes ago

Nobody is saying that. I am getting really tired of these straw man

[]Spudrockets [score hidden] 24 minutes ago

[]chipluvr 7 points 1 hour ago

To those who participated in the Women's March yesterday, did you

[]Spudrockets [score hidden] 23 minutes ago

Marched, voted, wrote, satirized, argued, talked, discussed,

[]jediment [score hidden] 50 minutes ago

[+]100percentDeplorable comment score below threshold (3 children)

[+][deleted] 1 hour ago (1 child)

[]cryptiiix 3 points an hour ago

[]Keep-reefer-illegal 2 points an hour ago

Their marriage seems like it is in shambles.

[]PM_ME_UR_BATMANS 2 points an hour ago

[+]NinjaHDD comment score below threshold (3 children)

How would you rate Trump's presidency out of 10 so far?

According to him, it doesn't start until Monday.

[]Enzo-Unversed [score hidden] 55 minutes ago

[]helloboots 4 points an hour ago*

Great! He's already signing executive orders

Ease the burden of the ACA

Signed a law allowing Mattis to serve as defense secretary

9/11 is now a "National Day of Patriotism"

Repealed Obama's freeze on low-interest rate FHA loans (This is

Plans to re-instate the Mexico City policy (saving at least

Idealistically perhaps, but not in practice. Mattis was already a civilian

[]RanchDressinInMyButt 1 point an hour ago

Ease the burned of the ACA

Actually, if you researched, you'd see that the executive order he

[]tollercoster56 [score hidden] 48 minutes ago

"Aka, fuck over people with pre-existing conditions."

[]GilmoreHappy 1 point 1 hour ago

Honestly, I'd rather reduce the number of young parent's on their

That isn't what he promised his supporters, is it? He promised a full

Then, after a meeting with President Obama, President-elect Trump

[]NinjaHDD -1 points 1 hour ago

[]Keep-reefer-illegal 2 points 1 hour ago

Its been 2 days/10

[]librarian2016 5 points 2 hours ago

[]13thSinner 2 points 2 hours ago

Will the protests against trump actually do anything?

[]Kusibu 4 points an hour ago

Burning down a mcdonals is a lot of solidarity.

Those few aren't representative of the whole.

Out of literally millions of people, a few hundred rioters really is a

[]Keep-reefer-illegal -3 points an hour ago

Nope. They are protesting a fact, not an idea.

[]ArkeryStarkery 5 points an hour ago

[]SJWs_can_SMD -1 points 2 hours ago