|
||||||||
American Politics Discussion Thread |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#501 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 4
|
Quote:
He shouldn't I agree with you there, but who is really going to tell the President "no, sorry sir, that is not the way we do things around here."??
If he wants things done his way, then I suppose people will follow his lead somewhat. however judging by the last couple of days i don't hold out much hope. the only silver lining is that the Republicans have complete control so nowhere to hide and no one else to blame . also looking forward to what Trumpcare will be |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#502 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 69,134
|
Quote:
Luckily this servile attitude isn't particularly commonplace in the US. He's a public employee, not a King.
I'm praying that people take notice of how wrong he is at every turn (though his base is stunningly ignorant, so I'm not hopeful). I think he will be in for a very rude awakening when his ideas start to get questioned by the House and the Senate, as despite being Republican controlled, that doesn't mean everything will go through smoothly, that is when the angry tweets will appear at 3am! ![]() Still it should make for a compelling watch this side of "the pond"!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#503 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 69,134
|
Quote:
someone with integrity
however judging by the last couple of days i don't hold out much hope. the only silver lining is that the Republicans have complete control so nowhere to hide and no one else to blame . also looking forward to what Trumpcare will be |
|
|
|
|
|
#504 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Norwich, Norfolk, UK
Posts: 14,282
|
Quote:
Still it should make for a compelling watch this side of "the pond"!
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#505 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: usa
Posts: 2,425
|
Quote:
Is there a US equivalent of Sir Humphrey Appleby?
When there's a change of presidents in the USA, is there also a change of top civil servants? |
|
|
|
|
|
#506 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 40,288
|
Quote:
You're still getting that wrong, despite being reminded about it umpteen times by several posters.
In fact far more Americans voted for Hillary than for Trump. Trump only won because of the distortions created by the Electoral College system. Trump won under the electoral process which everyone knew was the case before the process started. All the networks talked constantly about the road to 270 - not the popular vote. An election based on the popular vote would be a totally different election requiring consistent voting processes and timings across all 50 states - and might well result in a totally different outcome. There was no point in Republicans turning out in New York or California as there was no chance Trump could win and in the latter the final two Senate candidates were both Democrats - same with Democrats in Kentucky or North Dakota. Each state had different poll closing and opening times Some had early voting some all on the day Some needed photo or voter ID - some like California required no ID at all Some let felons vote some don't The only consistent measure is who won each state - as the processes within each state were all broadly the same. Maybe if Hillary and her team had understood the electoral college and spent more time and money on tv ads in Wisconsin and Michigan than California she might have won. |
|
|
|
|
|
#507 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Norwich, Norfolk, UK
Posts: 14,282
|
Quote:
Are we going to keep this up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#508 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: usa
Posts: 2,425
|
Quote:
Are we going to keep this up.
Trump won under the electoral process which everyone knew was the case before the process started. All the networks talked constantly about the road to 270 - not the popular vote. An election based on the popular vote would be a totally different election requiring consistent voting processes and timings across all 50 states - and might well result in a totally different outcome. There was no point in Republicans turning out in New York or California as there was no chance Trump could win and in the latter the final two Senate candidates were both Democrats - same with Democrats in Kentucky or North Dakota. Each state had different poll closing and opening times Some had early voting some all on the day Some needed photo or voter ID - some like California required no ID at all Some let felons vote some don't The only consistent measure is who won each state - as the processes within each state were all broadly the same. Maybe if Hillary and her team had understood the electoral college and spent more time and money on tv ads in Wisconsin and Michigan than California she might have won. He clearly knew the rules better or played the geography game better, and he won as a result. But please get that populist 'will of the people' crap outta here. |
|
|
|
|
|
#509 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 69,134
|
Anyone got a bet on what time his next Tweet will be?!
It surely cannot be too long from now!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#510 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,741
|
Quote:
Sorry I thought I heard on the news that a certain Donald Trump had won the election - are you telling me that it was just some horrible nightmare and it was really Hillary Clinton?
![]() The two things are not the same - running a campaign is one thing, but once you are in a position to make a decision - then it is important that such decisions are not to be based on personal enrichment or patronage - so far Trump has not said how he will avoid this. Had she won do you really think that they would have been bothered? |
|
|
|
|
|
#511 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,741
|
Quote:
Uncertainty in the office, and an inability to let go of one's narcissism to the point of having to conform everything to the familiar, are not good things.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#512 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Lothlórien
Posts: 19,736
|
Sean Hannity went to the Ecuadorian Embassy to interview Julian Assange:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGlYf7UPTM4 whereby Julian reiterates once more that Russia is not the source of the leaks. I know who I believe in all this. ![]() It's a very good interview. Now that we've seen Julian, where's the gorgeous @embassycat at? |
|
|
|
|
|
#513 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,741
|
Quote:
You're still getting that wrong, despite being reminded about it umpteen times by several posters.
In fact far more Americans voted for Hillary than for Trump. Trump only won because of the distortions created by the Electoral College system. I'm sure that you are the sort of person who arrives at the truth based on how many people agree with something. I'd imagine that you'd been told something 'umpteen times' and thought that must make it true. Hillary winning the popular vote means jack shit. That's not how the American system, operates. It's not a direct democracy, it's a representative republic. Their system is designed to prevent a tyranny of the majority. America is a huge place and it's deemed to be unfair that one or two big city states should rule over the affairs of the entire nation. Many states are very independent and the idea of the electoral college is for those states to not be dictated to by the big cities. It's not like the UK, there is good reason for it to be the way it is. As it goes earlier last year two Republicans tried to change the system to more of a direct democracy and were turned down....by Democrat judges. If they had won their case then things may be very different now. But as it stands America is a representative republic and this is their system. Winning the popular vote and not winning the presidency is entirely fair according to the system that has been agreed upon. It's not even the first time it's happened. |
|
|
|
|
|
#514 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,741
|
Quote:
It matters because you claim he has the support of the people, which he doesn't. He won a game of geography, and not an overwhelming mandate of public opinion.
You use the two concepts interchangeably but they are not the same. There's also the matter that if people voted under a different electoral system then the approaches to the campaigns would be completely different. As it stands the candidates played the game according to the rules of the game they understood at the time they approached their respective campaigns. If Hillary Clinton thought the best approach was to simply appeal to the apparently safe blue states who she knew had cities with high populations and alienate everybody else, then it looks like she took the wrong approach. She knew the rules of the game and she chose how to play her hand according to those rules. You can't blame the game just because you played it badly. |
|
|
|
|
|
#515 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 65,741
|
Quote:
Well sorry to interupt but in other news the US deficit grew to a trillion dollars.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#516 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 21,645
|
Quote:
No, they're getting it right. It's you who are getting it wrong.
Quote:
Hillary winning the popular vote means jack shit.
So why was the tweeter-in-chief so exercised by this inconvenient truth that he claimed he only lost the popular vote because of fraud?Quote:
Their system is designed to prevent a tyranny of the majority.
That's an interesting new take on democracy. Presumably it must be enshrined in their constitution. Where can I read about it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#517 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 40,288
|
Quote:
That's an interesting new take on democracy. Presumably it must be enshrined in their constitution. Where can I read about it?
Who are we to doubt the reasoning of Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jeffersons or their motives! They also wanted to protect the interests of all states and small states. If you exclude the votes of just one state Trump won the popular vote by 3 million. Back then the founding fathers didn't want New York and Massachusetts deciding the President all the time - now we have California with it's lax voting laws - if we had a popular vote system - overturning the result in the other 49. The electoral college served its purpose - preventing a demagogue like Hillary Clinton winning on the back of Californian Populism. ![]() https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority |
|
|
|
|
|
#518 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 21,748
|
there is any interesting quote from Hamilton in that article Marty that suggests the system failed miserably this year Quote:
"that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications."
|
|
|
|
|
|
#519 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 21,748
|
this whole argument about the electoral college is fascinating to a degree
people actually arguing that the system is MORE democratic because all votes are not equal and depending where you live its ok for your vote to have a varying amount of influence on the outcome of the election |
|
|
|
|
|
#520 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,494
|
Quote:
Sean Hannity went to the Ecuadorian Embassy to interview Julian Assange:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGlYf7UPTM4 whereby Julian reiterates once more that Russia is not the source of the leaks. I know who I believe in all this. ![]() It's a very good interview. Now that we've seen Julian, where's the gorgeous @embassycat at?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#521 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Dublin
Posts: 51,606
|
Quote:
Anyone got a bet on what time his next Tweet will be?!
It surely cannot be too long from now! ![]() ![]() They don't sound remotely like they're coming from a President Elect though, more like a slightly inarticulate pop singer or reality show contestant
|
|
|
|
|
|
#522 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,494
|
Quote:
His tweets are strangely compelling
![]() They don't sound remotely like they're coming from a President Elect though, more like a slightly inarticulate pop singer or reality show contestant ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#523 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 69,134
|
Quote:
His tweets are strangely compelling
![]() They don't sound remotely like they're coming from a President Elect though, more like a slightly inarticulate pop singer or reality show contestant ![]() ![]() ![]() Plus the reaction from the Democratic Party politicians! ![]() ![]() Just pure gold all round really!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#524 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 40,288
|
Quote:
this whole argument about the electoral college is fascinating to a degree
people actually arguing that the system is MORE democratic because all votes are not equal and depending where you live its ok for your vote to have a varying amount of influence on the outcome of the election The electoral college is the system used as presecribed in the US constitution. And the US hasn't done too badly by it. Systems where all votes counted equally ended up delivering Chancellor Adolf Hitler and Mussolini. So no system is perfect. |
|
|
|
|
|
#525 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 40,288
|
Quote:
there is any interesting quote from Hamilton in that article Marty that suggests the system failed miserably this year
![]() |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 20:06.





