Do you think that pop culture will be different depending on whether Trump or Hillary is elected? Pop culture seems to change around the time of a presidential era. I just wondered how different pop culture will be if Hillary gets elected compared to Trump and vice versa.

I think regardless of who wins this November, the unprecedentedly bitter divide between liberals and conservatives will be all the same. The only thing that would truly affect the political current would be an institutional realignment, which requires the collapse of our current regime standards that date back to the Reagan Administration.

Well, it wouldn't change politics whether is Trump or Clinton who wins the presidential election. I think it's safe to say that they'll make the people who disagree with them feel upset, because that's politics to you.

Well, it wouldn't change politics whether is Trump or Clinton who wins the presidential election. I think it's safe to say that they'll make the people who disagree with them feel upset, because that's politics to you.

I mean change pop culture like movies or music or fashion.

I mean change pop culture like movies or music or fashion.



The day the music died....  :\'(

I mean change pop culture like movies or music or fashion.


For pop culture, I think it would just stay the same. Unless somebody tried to assassinate Trump, then we would probably have a more darker tone for not only politics, but also pop culture. It kinda happened for the JFK assassination in late 1963, but that's when 60s culture started to rise.

For pop culture, I think it would just stay the same. Unless somebody tried to assassinate Trump, then we would probably have a more darker tone for not only politics, but also pop culture. It kinda happened for the JFK assassination in late 1963, but that's when 60s culture started to rise.

Why would someone assassinate Trump just because they don't agree with his politics?  ???

Truth is we don't know if it will be different. Although if Clinton won she would be the first female president which is a pretty big deal.

Why would someone assassinate Trump just because they don't agree with his politics?  ???


Because he's a pretty controversial guy. I mean, he's getting sh*t ever since he announced his presidential campaign last year. I know it may seem insane, but there are people out there who want to assassinate him.

Especially this guy.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/authorities-man-vegas-rally-said-he-wanted-kill-trump-n595876

Because he's a pretty controversial guy. I mean, he's getting sh*t ever since he announced his presidential campaign last year. I know it may seem insane, but there are people out there who want to assassinate him.

Especially this guy.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/authorities-man-vegas-rally-said-he-wanted-kill-trump-n595876

I know he's controversial but there will always be famous people with unpopular opinions. You would have to be a crazy person to kill the guy though.

Why would someone assassinate Trump just because they don't agree with his politics?  ???


If that happens it would be all over the news.

Well, it wouldn't change politics whether is Trump or Clinton who wins the presidential election. I think it's safe to say that they'll make the people who disagree with them feel upset, because that's politics to you.


I actually think that the Republican Party could undergo a slight ideological shift if Trump wins the election.

Trump isn't what you would call an "orthodox conservative". He goes hard right on stuff like immigration and fighting terrorism, but, as far as I can tell, is much more socially liberal when it comes to social issues like gay rights than most members of his own party. He's also shockingly secular for a modern GOP candidate. In fact, this is probably the first time since the Carter/Ford election in 1976 that the Democratic nominee seems to be more "religious" than the Republican nominee. Trump has also said that he would not cut government programs like Social Security/Medicare, and talked of raising taxes on "hedge-fund guys", positions that would've made it impossible for someone to get the Republican nomination before 2016.

What I could potentially see happening if Trump wins is the GOP developing something of a "Trumpist" wing that moves away from Wall Street, and the Religious Right, and in a much more Nationalist/Populist direction that is heavily anti-immigrant, and anti-free trade, but largely ignores social issues. This could work in 2016, but would be disastrous for the GOP in the decades to come, as the USA becomes an increasingly diverse country, and the white vote makes up a smaller share of the pie.

Of course, Trump seems to change his position on key issues on an almost hourly basis, so I could be completely wrong about all of this. ;D

Of course, Trump seems to change his position on key issues on an almost hourly basis, so I could be completely wrong about all of this. ;D


Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if he ultimately adopts an anti-LGBT rights platform as Mitt Romney basically did in 2012. The elements within the current Republican establishment are a lot more powerful than a lot of people realize.

Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if he ultimately adopts an anti-LGBT rights platform as Mitt Romney basically did in 2012. The elements within the current Republican establishment are a lot more powerful than a lot of people realize.


He's already essentially done that on abortion. Everyone knows that Trump is really pro-choice. He was even on record coming out against the partial-birth abortion ban pushed by George W. Bush back in the early '00s.

Then, out of the blue a few weeks ago before the Wisconsin primary, he suddenly changed his tune and said that woman should be legally punished for having an abortion, a position that even most religious fundies don't hold. ::)

What I could potentially see happening if Trump wins is the GOP developing something of a "Trumpist" wing that moves away from Wall Street, and the Religious Right, and in a much more Nationalist/Populist direction that is heavily anti-immigrant, and anti-free trade, but largely ignores social issues. This could work in 2016, but would be disastrous for the GOP in the decades to come, as the USA becomes an increasingly diverse country, and the white vote makes up a smaller share of the pie.


So basically, the US doesn't really need Trump to become their president, if the US is already becoming more diverse throughout the years? I don't know why we need Trump or Clinton in the first place. I wish there was a third party candidate, if the election took up a debate.

So basically, the US doesn't really need Trump to become their president, if the US is already becoming more diverse throughout the years? I don't know why we need Trump or Clinton in the first place. I wish there was a third party candidate, if the election took up a debate.

There is. The ones currently running are Jill Stein and Gary Johnson although Bernie could be considered a 3rd party candidate.

There is. The ones currently running are Jill Stein and Gary Johnson although Bernie could be considered a 3rd party candidate.


That would be better, since Trump and Clinton get a lot of hate from either sides. Even I don't really think that Clinton isn't that well, because it seems like she goes with anything that's a popular opinion. Trump on the other hand is just batsh*t insane with politics, even for the fact that he falls for every move and yet nobody gives a sh*t.

There is. The ones currently running are Jill Stein and Gary Johnson although Bernie could be considered a 3rd party candidate.


They interviewed and brought attention to Gary Johnson on Full Frontal with Samantha Bee. Apparently, he has actually been pulling pretty decent numbers for a third-party candidate. It's likely he'll be 2016's Ross Perot, depending on how much momentum he continues to accumulate.

I could see this being a year where a third party candidate does better than usual, since both of the major party nominees have such high negatives.

It would be interesting to see Gary Johnson in a debate with Hillary and Trump, but I'm not convinced it will happen. Remember, in order for a third party candidate to be included in the debates, they must reach at least 15% support in the polls. No one has been able to do that since Perot in 1992.