People in France voted for François Hollande almost 5 years ago for change. "The change is now" was his slogan, and all of his voters believed this.

Right now, 4% of French people are happy with him. 4% only. Almost all of his voters abandoned him when he started to do the same things than before, or even worse, like passing laws without a vote in the Parliament. And not the laws he promised, the exact opposite: laws against the workers and for the companies, or recently a huge database with data about every citizen. One of his excuses is that he had to "grow up" and that some things he promised were unrealistic. The opposition (so, the guys the voters wanted to change) are pretty amazed about these things, because the "change champion" Hollande just passed what they wanted to do for years but never could because it was too unpopular. Hollande is now hated and his own party doesn't want him to run for his own succession. Anyone understand now that his "change" was a huge fraud.

Don't vote for "change", vote for a program. Understand the program you vote for. Understand if what you want to vote for is possible or not. Or it will be hard to wake up in a few years thinking that you were just lied to.

That's the biggest problem with democracy. It's just a popularity contest and most of the voters don't understand or don't want to understand what is said, what is promised, what is possible, what is realistic and what is good for the country. 

Example : If you voted for Trump for the Mexican-paid wall, yeah... Good luck with that.

Same in Greece. We voted a communist for the first time in ever(?) only because we wanted change and he did exactly what the previous goverment did. And I mean exactly. Now everyone hates him and he's going to lose the next election only for the next prime minister to do the exact same thing only with 10x more corruption. America, ufortunately, is not a special case. The only difference is that politicians can actually speak, instead of sounding like a spoilt brat, like Trump. His "debates" would have received an F from any teacher.

When read with a magnifying glass, they weren't all that different from standard Republican jargon. 

As a whole, I did it since I oppose the antagonizing of Russia, protecting countries who don't contribute to NATO and most importantly, Trump understands the US has no right to preach to other countries when they've never been an example... 

Sweden can preach to everyone because they've been one to almost everyone, same with Norway, but the US has a lot of skeletons in the closet that will make their leadership noxious to some extent until they've atoned for them. 

I am saying this as a foreigner of course, so it has no bearing in any discrepancies that might arise. Stuff that might hurt you might benefit me. 

Regardless, we do need change here. 

Clinton won with the educated but lost with people in all 4 of the income brackets above 50k.  Clinton only won with people that made under 50k.  I guess those rich/middle upper class people aren't educated so they aren't smart.

I supported Gary Johnson this election and did not do so out of protest. I agree with most of everything he says and he's got a track record of knowing how to govern and being honest, even if it means saying something that he knows a lot of his supporters won't like. He was for small government, fiscal responsibility, non-interventionism and the restoration of American liberties. He wanted to end government spying programs and he wanted to pardon Edward Snowden.

Another thing about Gary, a lot of people call his proposals crazy, but apparently, those within the government agree with him. He probably a large spending cut in national defense. Neocons consider that "unpatriotic". As it turns out, the Pentagon recently admitted that they had more military bases in the US than what was necessary and that a 20% cut in spending is easily doable. Gary then claimed that America's actions in the Middle East have made us less safer. Again, the Neocons would consider that "unpatriotic". Then the FBI recently released a report that was done in 2012 where they conducted a study of what causes terrorism and what motivates terrorists. They concluded that our presence over there is the main cause of terrorist attacks and the main motivating factor, just like what Gary was saying. So in those cases, the people who agreed with Gary Johnson were the experts. Those who disagreed with him were the politicians. Go figure.

The elections are over guys.

Can you define educated for me?

Did you know that Trump wrote a book where he exactly describes what he wants and how to get there? You should not read articles from the dishonest press but make your own picture and use your brain instead.

Trumps ideas are smart and very reasonable, and he could really make the country a better place for everyone. Especially if he succeeds with his Obamacare 2.0 healthcare plans.

This is the biggest issue of them all, this is exactly how it is today. Most people don't understand politics at all, it's all about the emotions for the majority of voters.

Did I say that?  I did not.  Stop with the strawman arguments, it does not win you points.

"The advantage Mr Trump had among whites without a college degree compared with whites who graduated from college was the largest seen in exit polls for a Republican since the surveys started in 1972."  Source

That's just a simple fact.  If you don't like it, too bad.