Glaude is the chair of the Department of African American Studies at Princeton University and the author of Democracy in Black.Televison ratings are a form of protest Trump might understandJanuary 20, 2017, will be a pivotal day in American history. Donald J. Trump, the people’s billionaire, will be sworn in as the 45th president of the United States. I do not expect the heavens to cry out or the four horsemen of the apocalypse to appear as he raises his right hand. Elections are what they are, and they often leave us with bad outcomes and questionable people. But I do believe his inauguration will signal a dramatic and dark shift in the direction of the country.That’s about as nice as I can put it. My mother, who lives on the coast of Mississippi and doesn’t talk politics often, says it more baldly: “the country is going straight to hell.”Trump will enter office with the lowest approval rating in four decades. In The Wall Street Journal, Janet Hook detailed the unprecedented opposition that awaits him after the inauguration. More than 200,000 women will march in Washington the day after he takes the oath of office. Progressives throughout the country are mobilizing to resist what they see, with every cabinet nomination and senseless tweet, as a radical attempt to undermine any substantive idea of the public good. Millions of dollars are flowing to grassroots and established organizations to resist Trumpism.

Source: Why You Shouldn’t Watch Donald Trump’s Inauguration on TV | TIME

A motorcycle group led by a South Carolina chainsaw artist will ride into the nation’s capital on Inauguration Day in support of the 45th President of the United States.Bikers for Trump, a group of motorcycle enthusiasts, will likely be toeing the line with protesters, who are also expected to be at the event.“The bikers are certainly used to being outnumbered and we are prepared to form a wall of meat,” Chris Cox, the founder of the organization, told the FOX Business Network.However, Cox said he doesn’t foresee any problems occurring during the event, especially after the group’s experience at the Republican National Convention in Cleveland, where police successfully maintained order between Trump’s supporters and protesters.“We’re anticipating a celebration here. We don’t anticipate any problems. We have a strict code of conduct where we don’t condone violence. But again in the event that we’re needed, you can certainly count on the Bikers for Trump,” Cox said.He added: “The backbone of the biker community is the veteran. So these are guys that aren’t really used to backing down. You certainly won’t see bikers out there screaming, calling for destruction of private property or the death of police officers.”Cox said he and other members of his group support the President-elect because he is not an establishment politician and also because of his outspoken nature on the issues that concern them most.“[The bikers looked for] someone who was going to stand up and call it what it is,” Cox explained. “Radical Islam is one of the biggest talking points of Bikers for Trump. Illegal immigration and one of our sweet spots is getting behind the American veteran. We believe it’s incumbent upon all who understand the value and the sacrifice of our servicemen and women that we are there for them. And we’ve got to change these policies now.”According to Cox, the bikers’ rally at John Marshall Park will begin “shortly after Donald Trump exits the stage to go into the Capitol. And it will end shortly before the parade on Pennsylvania Ave.”

Source: Bikers for Trump Ready to Stand up to Protesters | Fox Business

The U.S. Army general who heads the D.C. National Guard and is an integral part of overseeing the inauguration said Friday he will be removed from command effective Jan. 20 at 12:01 p.m., just as Donald Trump is sworn in as president. Maj. Gen. Errol R. Schwartz’s departure will come in the midst of the presidential ceremony — classified as a national special security event — and while thousands of his troops are deployed to help protect the nation’s capital during an inauguration he has spent months helpi

Source: Head of D.C. National Guard to be removed from post in middle of inauguration – The Washington Post

New York may look like it’s booming, but the city’s finances are skating on thin ice, according to a report.The Fiscal Times put out a list of America’s large cities ranked by their fiscal stability — and New York came in ahead of only troubled Chicago.The Big Apple finished 115th on the list — even though revenue grew from $60 billion in 2009 to $81 billion in 2015 — because so much of its growth is dependent on a surging stock market and skyrocketing real-estate prices.Because the city has been spending so much, including on pensions, and has so much debt, a downturn could be disastrous.“A bear market could place the city in jeopardy,” the report said.The top city in the US was Irvine, Calif.

Source: NYC’s fiscal stability no sure thing | New York Post

It seems unlikely — but the idea’s been floating around for several days now, and so far she’s not rejecting it. For what it’s worth, Secretary Clinton, we’d love to see you run for mayor. New York City needs you.Yes, we were highly critical of Hillary Clinton in the runup to Election Day. But that was the race for the White House, where she offered a program far to the left of the nation’s center.Not so in New York, where she’d be dead-center in the city’s Democratic majority. Progressive, but not obsessed with proving it — nor with trying to use the mayoralty to become a national leader. Passionate for social justice, but not an ideologue who’ll stick by homeless or affordable-housing policies that are clearly failing.Above all else, she’d actually focus on doing the job. Clinton is a famously diligent worker — one who shows up on time and puts in the hours. And New York needs a mayor who’ll run herd on city government.The incumbent has handed the work of running the city off to one or two deputies, while he spends his time on politics and p.r. stunts. And it shows — in the details those overworked deputies let slip, like that Rivington Street nursing-home flip, and in the crises that go too long unacknowledged, from the Bronx outbreak of Legionnaire’s disease to the surge in street homelessness.Clinton is a fighter and a problem-solver. For eight years, she was a fine senator for this state, working relentlessly on 9/11 recovery and also for constituents in areas far from the media spotlight.Sure, she’d need to become a city resident, and spend months building ties to Gotham’s neighborhoods. But she’s hardly a stranger to the city, nor it to her.Nor does any local Democrat seem both willing and able to seriously challenge Mayor de Blasio for reelection — yet he needs to be challenged, indeed needs to be replaced.Plus, her national stature would bring serious benefits: She’d be a lot harder for Gov. Cuomo to bully than the current mayor — and tougher for Washington to ignore.Nor would she need to sell herself to the city’s special interests to win the job — another huge improvement over the incumbent.What’s in it for her? Well, her presidential run shows her appetite for continued public service. And while Gracie Mansion isn’t the White House, it’s no consolation prize: New York’s mayor is famously “the second-toughest job in America” — and you traditionally have your own foreign policy, too.While it’s not the glass ceiling she hoped to break, New York has never had a woman mayor. Isn’t it past time for that to change?

Source: New York City needs Hillary Clinton to run for mayor | New York Post

Run, Hillary, run — for mayor.Local Democratic activists said they would rally to Clinton’s side if she decided to take on Mayor de Blasio in a ­primary this year.“If Hillary entered the race, she would be the best candidate. I would support her because we need a change in New York City,” said Gregory Floyd, president of Teamsters Local 237.Floyd, who represents school safety officers and Housing Authority workers, has clashed repeatedly with City Hall over policy.“Hillary would be a better mayor than de Blasio. Every week we hear about investigations about fund-raising and city property being given away to real estate developers,” he said.Clinton captured 79 percent of the vote in the five boroughs during her failed November presidential run.The Rev. Patrick Young, pastor of First Baptist Church in East Elmhurst, Queens, said Clinton could make history by shattering the mayoral glass ceiling in Gotham.“Hillary would have been the first female president. She would be the first woman mayor in the history of New York City,” he said.“She would be better at working with people and engaging people. She would be a breath of fresh air. We have a cloud over our leadership right now.”The Rev. Johnny Green, pastor of Harlem’s Mount Neboh Baptist Church, said Clinton would have his vote.“Hillary over de Blasio. Anybody against de Blasio. De Blasio is a repeat offender when it comes to stupidity,” Green said.One de Blasio critic claimed de Blasio would be toast if Clinton runs.“I’m not sure she would have an opponent. De Blasio would have to drop out if she ran,” said former Mike Bloomberg campaign manager Bradley Tusk, who is hunting for a viable foe against the mayor.The Clinton-for-mayor rumors lit up social media.“Ummm, this may be the BEST news of 2017 yet!!! I’m fine with a pantsuit city,” ­Ladychampagneb posted on Instagram.Clinton allies are pushing talk of her possibly running for mayor to “torture” de Blasio for waiting so long to back Clinton in the presidential race, according to one Democratic Party official.“Trust me. People don’t forget,” said a Clinton Democratic National Committee delegate from New York.A source said Clinton did not discourage her backers from discussing a City Hall bid.“She wants to remain relevant,” the source said.

Source: Local Democrats practically begging Hillary to run for mayor | New York Post

At least 20 GOP Electoral College voters are considering voting against President-elect Donald Trump next week, according to a Harvard constitutional law professor who’s offering legal aid to “faithless electors” who betray their party.Harvard University Professor of Law and Leadership Larry Lessig did not offer evidence to support his claim. But, if true, the figure would put the anti-Trump movement’s goal of scuttling his election win much closer to becoming reality when 538 members of the Electoral College vote in their state capitals on Monday.“Obviously, whether an elector ultimately votes his or her conscious will depend in part upon whether there are enough doing the same,” Lessig told Politico. “We now believe there are more than half the number needed to change the result seriously considering making that vote.”On Monday, 10 members of the Electoral College – nine Democrats and one Republican – demanded an intelligence briefing on Russian interference in the presidential election. In a letter to the director of national intelligence, the electors said they wanted information on whether Trump and his associates have ties to Russia, saying the topic directly impacted the “core factors in our deliberations” as to whether Trump is fit for the White House.Chris Suprun, an outspoken critic of Trump, was the only GOP elector to sign the letter.Lessig, who briefly ran for president in 2016 as a Democrat, provides free and confidential legal support to electors wishing to exercise their “independent and nonpartisan judgment,” according to his website.“We will defend you against any fines or legal claims that might threaten the freedom of your vote,” the website reads. “If you are an Elector, we will also allow you to know how many others like you there are. How many, not who. Because we will never reveal any Elector’s views, to anyone, ever.”It’s unclear whether any of the electors considering voting against Trump live in states with laws that legally bind them to voting for the candidate who won the state’s popular vote or be replaced by an alternate with supports Trump. It’s also unclear whether any Republicans in those states who did not vote for Trump would actually be counted, although similar laws are now being challenged in court, Politico reports.Trump won 306 electors to win the presidency last month; Hillary Clinton took home 232. If all of those Republican electors vote for Trump, he will easily surpass the threshold of 270 needed to win the White House. But if 37 Republicans decided to vote against the president-elect, that would leave Trump one vote short at 269.Lessig told MSNBC that he’s confident there’s at least 20 “faithless electors” right now – and the number could grow.“There are a bunch of groups that are working to advise and support Republican electors who are interesting in exercising a constitutional freedom to vote their conscience,” Lessig said. “That freedom comes from the federal constitution … these are federal officials.”Lessig said he believes at least 37 GOP electors will ultimately decide not to back Trump, creating a “very interesting” dynamic. The number could already be as high as 30, he told MSNBC.“Our goal is to let the electors exercise their judgment, and what we believe is that at least 37 electors will make the judgment not to support Donald Trump,” he said. “And if that happens, then of course, it goes to the House and the House has to pick among the top three candidates.”In 1808, six Democratic-Republican electors rejected James Madison, the most ever to reject a presidential nominee.

Source: At least 20 electors could turn on Trump, Harvard prof claims | New York Post

Details of the sinister and sometimes cult-like atmosphere around the ‘artist’ who ran the Oakland warehouse can be revealed.Derick Ion Almena was in charge of the illegal enclave, described variously as a collective or a commune, where 36 died in Friday night’s devastating fire.He is facing a criminal investigation into the lead-up to the fire, which happened in a warehouse filled with junk and where Almena was raising his three children with his wife, Micah Allison.Now details can be disclosed of the power Almena exercised over those who lived in the space he illegally rented to them, to the extent that one described him as ‘a cult leader’.Almena, who appeared on NBC’s Today Show on Tuesday in a testy exchange with Matt Lauer in which he ranted about being ‘sorry’ but offered no explanations for the conditions in the warehouse, was accused of using threats of violence to get his way, and being able to flip from charming to threatening in a heartbeat.SCROLL DOWN FOR VIDEO

Source: Oakland warehouse organizer Derick Ion Almena’s ‘cult like life’ revealed | Daily Mail Online

The shock and anger over Donald Trump’s ascension to the White House has triggered a flood of calls on Twitter and other social media outlets for the president-elect to be assassinated — and authorities will investigate all threats deemed to be credible, The Post has learned.Trump met Thursday with President Obama in the Oval Office, with the Republican businessman calling the hour-plus session a “great honor.” Obama said they had an “excellent” and “wide-ranging” conversation, while urging all people to “now come together.”But that message of inclusion was apparently lost in social media circles, particularly Twitter, where a simple search can reveal dozens and dozens of calls to gun down the next leader of the free world. Some posts called for both Trump and Vice President-elect Mike Pence to be assassinated, and there’s even an #AssassinateTrump hashtag.“Trump chose the literal worst case scenario as VP so nobody would try to impeach or assassinate him,” one user posted on Twitter.Another user wrote that the “only” remaining question after Tuesday’s historic and polarizing election is who will “assassinate” Trump, who will be inaugurated on Jan. 20. Some users even cited that date as a deadline for the assassination.Other postings called for users who used the inflammatory hashtag to be contacted by authorities.

Source: Assassination threats against Trump flood Twitter | New York Post

The Facebook page “Michell Obama for 2020” posted a video of a woman shaming a young boy — presumed to be her son — and kicking him out of the house for voting for Donald Trump in his elementary school’s mock election.

Source: VIDEO: Mother Kicks Kid Out Of House For Voting For Trump | The Daily Caller

Shocking video out of Chicago shows a mob of young black men viciously beating an older white man because he voted for Donald Trump, dragging him through the streets as he hangs out of the back of his car.

Source: Shock Video: Black Mob Viciously Beats White Trump Voter » Alex Jones’ Infowars: There’s a war on for your mind!

Prominent attorney Rosemarie Arnold owns a personal-injury law firm. Here, she explains why she cast her ballot for Donald Trump.I am not a racist or a bully. I have no prejudice against lesbian, gay or transgender people.I am a staunch supporter of women. In fact, I own a law firm full of women lawyers and paralegals who help victims of disability, sexual and other discrimination everyday.I am also a diehard Donald Trump supporter, and I proudly voted for him because he was the better candidate.Donald Trump is intelligent, successful, commanding and well-spoken. He has built an empire.He has no political agenda, and actually hears what his constituents say.His ability to act without owing favors to special-interest groups will aid our economy and our health-care system.I, too, have been offended by some of the words Trump has spoken in the past, before he had political aspirations — but most of us can admit we’ve said things in private that we wouldn’t want made public.Donald Trump will excel as a president when he surrounds himself with experienced, intelligent people.I know that women worry about their right to choose. Trump does not advocate outlawing those rights. He simply wants to put that decision in the states’ hands.I could not vote for Hillary Clinton, although I believe that a woman one day should be president.She’s dishonest and feels that she’s above the law. She’s a career politician and her personal agenda outweighs the good of the country.She has been a public servant for more than 30 years, and during that time I have disagreed with many of her decisions, including her support of the Affordable Care Act.But even beyond her policies, Hillary’s use of her private e-mail server and attempted cover-up, was criminal (in my personal and legal opinion), regardless of whether or not she understood that “C” meant Classified.

Source: I’m a woman — and this is why I voted for Donald Trump | New York Post

Los Angeles street artist Sabo didn’t waste any time celebrating Donald Trump’s victory on Tuesday night.He took to the streets to post parody Sotheby’s ads for celebrity “Election Day Sales” overnight.Several leftist entertainers have vowed to move out of the country if Trump won the presidency, and Sabo is doing his part to help them keep their word.From his Facebook page, Cher will be jetting to Jupiter:

Source: PHOTOS: L.A. street artist ‘moving sale’ posters for anti-Trump celebrities – The American MirrorThe American Mirror

It’s easy to glance at Tuesday’s popular vote — which, with 92 percent of all precincts reporting, shows Hillary Clinton with six million fewer votes than Barack Obama won in 2012 – and reach the conclusion that Clinton lost the White House because she failed to turn out the Democratic base. But the truth is much more complicated.While she underperformed relative to Obama’s 2012 totals in several Midwestern states — Ohio, Michigan, Iowa, and Wisconsin — Clinton ran virtually even with Obama in the battlegrounds of Pennsylvania, North Carolina, Virginia, Nevada, and New Hampshire. What’s more, she far surpassed Obama’s 2012 vote total in Florida, the country’s biggest swing state. Yet somehow, while Obama carried Florida, Clinton lost it. Which brings us to an important question: Was Donald Trump just good enough to beat a bad Democratic opponent on Tuesday, or does he deserve far more credit? Could he, for instance, have competed with the vaunted Obama machine? The answer, somewhat shockingly, is yes. A review of vote totals in the past two elections reveals that Trump 2016 would have defeated Obama 2012 in the electoral college.(Disclaimer: This obviously is an apples-to-oranges exercise because no two elections are the same, nor are any two electorates. Still, unlike debating whether the 2016 Cubs would defeat the 1927 Yankees, this is not an entirely abstract argument; a comparison of their respective performances in the country’s most competitive states shows Trump edging Obama in a hypothetical head-to-head matchup.)The math might seem impossible. After all, Obama won nearly 66 million votes in 2012; Trump is currently at 59.5 million and should finish around 60 million, which will actually be one million fewer votes than Mitt Romney won. How, then, could Trump have topped Obama in the electoral college? The answer: Republican turnout lagged in certain parts of the country but shot through the roof in the nation’s most critical battleground states.Let’s look at them individually, in descending order by population, and do the electoral-vote math. The 2016 totals aren’t yet final because not all precincts have reported.FLORIDA — 29 EVs — 98 percent reportingObama 2012: 4,235,270Clinton 2016: 4,485,745 Romney 2012: 4,162,081Trump 2016: 4,605,515Conclusion: Trump beats Obama by some 370,000 votes and wins Florida. (Note: Clinton herself won 250,000 more votes in Florida than Obama did in 2012.) PENNSYLVANIA — 20 EVs — 97 percent reportingObama 2012: 2,907,448Clinton 2016: 2,844,705 Romney 2012: 2,619,583Trump 2016: 2,912,941 Conclusion: Trump squeezes past Obama by a margin of some 5,000 votes and wins Pennsylvania. (Note: Clinton runs about 60,000 votes behind Obama, but would’ve had more than enough to defeat Romney in 2012.) OHIO — 18 EVs – 94 percent reportingObama 2012: 2,697,260Clinton 2016: 2,317,001 Romney 2012: 2,593,779Trump 2016: 2,771,984 Conclusion: Trump edges Obama by roughly 75,000 votes and wins Ohio. (Note: Clinton’s worst battleground state showing was Ohio, winning 380,000 [!] fewer votes than Obama.) Stop right there and crunch the numbers: Florida (29) + Pennsylvania (20) + Ohio (18) = 67 EVs.Romney finished with 206 EVs. By protecting all of those, and then taking 67 from Obama, Trump would hit 273 and win the presidency. The question: Did Trump 2016 defeat Obama 2012 in all of the states Romney won? Yes. Here’s a look at the competitive ones:– NORTH CAROLINA (98 percent reporting): Trump 2,339,603 … Obama 2,178,388– ARIZONA (73 percent reporting): Trump 947,284 … Obama 930,669– GEORGIA (93 percent reporting): Trump 2,068,623 … Obama 1,761,761– UTAH (78 percent reporting): Trump 360,634 … Obama 229,463A review of the Romney 2012 states confirms that Trump, in this hypothetical matchup, would have carried every single one against Obama.It doesn’t matter that Obama would have trounced Trump by nearly 300,000 votes in Michigan; by more than 200,000 in Wisconsin; by 175,000 in Virginia; and by 160,000 in Colorado. It’s similarly meaningless that Obama would have narrowly defeated Trump in Iowa, Nevada, and New Hampshire. The 44th president carried all of those states in 2012, and in this hypothetical contest, he would successfully defend all of them. But it wouldn’t be enough.The electoral college would produce a razor-thin margin: Trump 273, Obama 265.Again, this is an apples-to-oranges exercise. It’s impossible to know how the Obama campaign might have targeted certain voters in a contest against Trump, or whether Trump would have the same success in the three big battleground states against a more formidable opponent. But that’s not the point here; the point is that it’s not entirely fair to blame Clinton for depressing Democratic turnout when she ran even with him in five of the country’s most competitive states and ahead of him in a sixth, Florida, the single biggest swing state — and still lost the electoral college.

Source: The Math: Trump 2016 Would’ve Beaten Obama 2012 | National Review