Hypocrisy Run Rampant

[kutter]

Clinton campaign: We are taking part in the recount

http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/26/politics/clinton-campaign-recount/index.html

So everyone complained that Trump would not accept the results of the election and all the other side has done, is, wait for it.....not accept the results of the election.

She cannot possibly think all three states will flip with a recount, so all she is doing is tarnishing her already shitty image, but I guess when things are as bad as they are, what is a little more.

[Gnomad]

I don't think the states will flip, I don't care if they flip, but I'm glad they're doing a recount, just to push more states to move to systems with a voter-verified paper trail.

We shouldn't have anywhere doing unverifiable electronic balloting.

[Androidpk]

http://i.imgur.com/gpaDR2t.jpg

[Archigeek]

States have laws for recounts, probably some better than others. Follow those laws and everything should be fine.

[Androidpk]

Or it could get really ugly.

[rolfard]

http://www.readsleeprepeat.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Joker-According-To-Plan.gif

[Tgo01]

I think this should be a lesson for all states to limit recounts.

I mean come on, I can somewhat understand if Hillary was calling for a recount, not really, but somewhat.

But Jill Stein and some nobody no one has ever heard of who got something like 2000 votes can call for a recount? Yeah sure they have to "pay" for it but that doesn't change the fact that all small towns (and even large ones) have to devote resources to do a recount for a candidate who has no chance in hell of winning that state.

Shit is really going to hit the fan if even a single state ends up flipping due to the recount. Can you imagine the howling from Democrats if one state flipped?

Or worse if all three states flipped. I'll admit even I would be buying into conspiracy theories saying the RECOUNT is the one that was rigged, not the original count. If that happened, what the hell is Trump and his more dangerous supporters going to think when they have very strong reasons to believe the election was literally stolen from them?

[Candor]

OK libbies...reality check...

Trump won the election and Clinton lost.
Yes Clinton won the popular vote. That doesn't mean squat.
If you want to change the US election process to a popular vote, you have to do that before an election, not after.
Trump, as of January 20th 2017, *IS* your President, whether you think he is or not.
Harassing Trump electors to change their vote to Clinton (or anyone else) is not going to be successful.
The US is more conservative than you think it is.
If you want to leave the country, please stop talking about it and just leave.

[Warriorbird]

OK libbies...reality check...

Trump won the election and Clinton lost.
Yes Clinton won the popular vote. That doesn't mean squat.
If you want to change the US election process to a popular vote, you have to do that before an election, not after.
Trump, as of January 20th 2017, *IS* your President, whether you think he is or not.
Harassing Trump electors to change their vote to Clinton (or anyone else) is not going to be successful.
The US is more conservative than you think it is.
If you want to leave the country, please stop talking about it and just leave.

"Cannie" this was Jill Stein.

It's sort of like Julian Assange flipping back and forth.

There's only one state with actual flipping potential. It won't matter.

[Thondalar]

OK libbies...reality check...

Trump won the election and Clinton lost.
Yes Clinton won the popular vote. That doesn't mean squat.
If you want to change the US election process to a popular vote, you have to do that before an election, not after.
Trump, as of January 20th 2017, *IS* your President, whether you think he is or not.
Harassing Trump electors to change their vote to Clinton (or anyone else) is not going to be successful.
The US is more conservative than you think it is.
If you want to leave the country, please stop talking about it and just leave.

This is counter-productive.

30 States voted for Trump, only 20 States voted for Hillary. There is your "popular vote majority".

To any logical person, this should be the extent of the breakdown of the National vote. All States are relatively equal in their "say", even if not relatively equal in their population. This is one of the very few phantoms left from our previous Republic, and one that any "average" person, left or right, would be supportive of if framed in a neutral question.

If you want to take it beyond that, and count actual registered voters, 140 million registered voters chose NOT to vote for Hillary. That's a pretty resounding majority.

[time4fun]

This is counter-productive.

30 States voted for Trump, only 20 States voted for Hillary. There is your "popular vote majority".

To any logical person, this should be the extent of the breakdown of the National vote. All States are relatively equal in their "say", even if not relatively equal in their population. This is one of the very few phantoms left from our previous Republic, and one that any "average" person, left or right, would be supportive of if framed in a neutral question.

If you want to take it beyond that, and count actual registered voters, 140 million registered voters chose NOT to vote for Hillary. That's a pretty resounding majority.

There are actually very good reasons for a recount. Among them are:

1) There was serious Russian interference-including hacking into voter databases. A recount helps rule out the possibility that they used that vote information to change votes.

2) As mentioned before, hopefully this will help get enough awareness to get some of the more hack-prone voting machines out of commission as CA has done.

3) This isn't likely to change anything, but in this case the result is actually going to have the effect of giving voters *more* confidence in this past election, not less. Right now, that's a good thing.


And let's be clear here- Trump may have won the election, but Clinton got over 2 million more votes than he did. The people of this country wanted her, not him.

[Tgo01]

There are actually very good reasons for a recount. Among them are:

1) There was serious Russian interference-including hacking into voter databases. A recount helps rule out the possibility that they used that vote information to change votes.

2) As mentioned before, hopefully this will help get enough awareness to get some of the more hack-prone voting machines out of commission as CA has done.

3) This isn't likely to change anything, but in this case the result is actually going to have the effect of giving voters *more* confidence in this past election, not less. Right now, that's a good thing.

So clearly we should focus on 3 states Hillary lost which, if they somehow all went her way after a recount, would make her the next president.

Let's not focus on any states Hillary just barely won like New Hampshire where she carried the state with less than 3,000 votes. Or even Nevada where she won with 27,000 votes.

No no. To rule out the possibility of hacking we have to focus on just states Hillary lost.

The new Democrat party under Obama's leadership is such a fucking mess, actually sitting here justifying this garbage when before the election when everyone was so sure Hillary was going to win they were making fun of Trump and Republicans for just suggesting doing what the Democrats are now actively doing.

[Warriorbird]

So clearly we should focus on 3 states Hillary lost which, if they somehow all went her way after a recount, would make her the next president.

Let's not focus on any states Hillary just barely won like New Hampshire where she carried the state with less than 3,000 votes. Or even Nevada where she won with 27,000 votes.

No no. To rule out the possibility of hacking we have to focus on just states Hillary lost.

The new Democrat party under Obama's leadership is such a fucking mess, actually sitting here justifying this garbage when before the election when everyone was so sure Hillary was going to win they were making fun of Trump and Republicans for just suggesting doing what the Democrats are now actively doing.

I expect Trump will promptly do just that if Hillary flips even just one of these.

[Tgo01]

I expect Trump will promptly do just that if Hillary flips even just one of these.

I don't blame him if he does, but Democrats are the ones who are laughably trying to say this isn't about trying every desperate move in the book to get Hillary in the White House, it's about making sure the election isn't rigged and no hacks happened. Of course they just so happen to only be concerned about vote rigging in states that Hillary lost.

I'd have more respect for Democrats if they just came right out and said they are so pathetic that they refuse to accept the election results and are going to go down fighting, no matter how childish it makes them look. But no, as usual, they have to claim they are doing this for the good of the country.

[Thondalar]

There are actually very good reasons for a recount. Among them are:

1) There was serious Russian interference-including hacking into voter databases. A recount helps rule out the possibility that they used that vote information to change votes.

2) As mentioned before, hopefully this will help get enough awareness to get some of the more hack-prone voting machines out of commission as CA has done.

3) This isn't likely to change anything, but in this case the result is actually going to have the effect of giving voters *more* confidence in this past election, not less. Right now, that's a good thing.


And let's be clear here- Trump may have won the election, but Clinton got over 2 million more votes than he did. The people of this country wanted her, not him.

I agree with you on all counts except the last.

The majority of registered voters did NOT vote for Hillary.

[Warriorbird]

I don't blame him if he does, but Democrats are the ones who are laughably trying to say this isn't about trying every desperate move in the book to get Hillary in the White House, it's about making sure the election isn't rigged and no hacks happened. Of course they just so happen to only be concerned about vote rigging in states that Hillary lost.

I'd have more respect for Democrats if they just came right out and said they are so pathetic that they refuse to accept the election results and are going to go down fighting, no matter how childish it makes them look. But no, as usual, they have to claim they are doing this for the good of the country.

This wouldn't have happened if not for Jill Stein. Green Party guilt, hey.

[Tgo01]

This wouldn't have happened if not for Jill Stein. Green Party guilt, hey.

Yeah right. Then as soon as Jill Stein got the recount going the Clinton campaign said they would get involved in the recount.

This has Hillary's stink all over it. Jill Stein was bought off.

[Warriorbird]

Yeah right. Then as soon as Jill Stein got the recount going the Clinton campaign said they would get involved in the recount.

This has Hillary's stink all over it. Jill Stein was bought off.

Have the hackers gotten proof yet?

Here's the site if you want to let them know.

https://jillstein.nationbuilder.com/recount

[Thondalar]

Yeah right. Then as soon as Jill Stein got the recount going the Clinton campaign said they would get involved in the recount.

This has Hillary's stink all over it. Jill Stein was bought off.

This assumes Stein needed to be "bought".

This was going to happen regardless.

[Androidpk]

And let's be clear here- Trump may have won the election, but Clinton got over 2 million more votes than he did. The people of this country wanted her, not him.

The idiots in California wanted her, not the country.

[Tgo01]

Have the hackers gotten proof yet?

That Jill Stein was bought? The same amount of proof that these so called experts provided that the elections were hacked, that is to say none at all.


This assumes Stein needed to be "bought".

This was going to happen regardless.

Stein is just desperate to remain relevant.

[Thondalar]

Stein is just desperate to remain relevant.

This assumes previous relevance.

[Androidpk]

Third party relevance this election cycle was 0 again.

[Thondalar]

Third party relevance this election cycle was 0 again.

Yeah, which kinda irked me a bit.

I said quite some time ago, if ever there was a time for a third party, it was now...two most-disliked candidates ever...

I think the highest third-party turnout in any State was like 3%?

Fucking Ross Perot beat that. Wake up, America!

[Soulance]

The people of this country wanted her, not him.
I sure didn't.

[Neveragain]

There are actually very good reasons for a recount. Among them are:

1) There was serious Russian interference-including hacking into voter databases. A recount helps rule out the possibility that they used that vote information to change votes.

2) As mentioned before, hopefully this will help get enough awareness to get some of the more hack-prone voting machines out of commission as CA has done.

3) This isn't likely to change anything, but in this case the result is actually going to have the effect of giving voters *more* confidence in this past election, not less. Right now, that's a good thing.


And let's be clear here- Trump may have won the election, but Clinton got over 2 million more votes than he did. The people of this country wanted her, not him.


1. There's probably a 0% chance that the Russians would tamper with the actual vote, the propaganda created by the released e-mail content was powerful enough. This whole idea that the Russians influenced our elections by exposing the criminality of the Democrat party is rubbish, they did the American people a favor.

2. The awareness was already there. Idiots like you poo pooed the very mention of the idea and called it unamerican.

3. You're right, it's not going to change anything. Trump winning helped restore the voters confidence, you live in a bubble, I told you this back in January.

Let's do be clear here, Trump won the election, Clinton's 2 million popular vote lead is .7% of the US population. You have no idea what the people of this country want. I can tell you what they don't want, they don't want to have to pay to take care of your vagina.

[jumbodog]

1. There's probably a 0% chance that the Russians would tamper with the actual vote, the propaganda created by the released e-mail content was powerful enough. This whole idea that the Russians influenced our elections by exposing the criminality of the Democrat party is rubbish, they did the American people a favor.

2. The awareness was already there. Idiots like you poo pooed the very mention of the idea and called it unamerican.

3. You're right, it's not going to change anything. Trump winning helped restore the voters confidence, you live in a bubble, I told you this back in January.

Let's do be clear here, Trump won the election, Clinton's 2 million popular vote lead is .007% of the US population. You have no idea what the people of this country want.

1) to pretend that this criminality doesn't exist on both sides is asinine. See also Lindsey Graham on investigation of the DNC hacks.
2) When groups of computer scientists speak about statistical anomolies in relatively new technology I pay attention. Don't care who motivates it.
3) Nothing more to say here. The advancement of the minority in recent history stirred and angered the majority. They voted. Minority got complacent. 'Nuff said.

Agreed. 2 million people is a very close election. But its .7%, not .007% (2/300 * 100 = percentage).

[Neveragain]

1) to pretend that this criminality doesn't exist on both sides is asinine. See also Lindsey Graham on investigation of the DNC hacks.
2) When groups of computer scientists speak about statistical anomolies in relatively new technology I pay attention. Don't care who motivates it.
3) Nothing more to say here. The advancement of the minority in recent history stirred and angered the majority. They voted. Minority got complacent. 'Nuff said.

Agreed. 2 million people is a very close election. But its .7%, not .007% (2/300 * 100 = percentage).

1. That's why the Republicans didn't run a politician.
2. That's what the Republicans were saying before election night.
3. The idiocracy of the far left has left the Democrat party in shambles, the majority wants nothing to do with their empty policies.

Agreed, my weed is better than your weed.

[Parkbandit]

Have the hackers gotten proof yet?

Here's the site if you want to let them know.

https://jillstein.nationbuilder.com/recount


This all stinks to be honest. At first, the goal was 2.5 million dollars for this recount.. then 4 million.. then 5.. then 6.. it's up to 7 now.. when it hits that.. it'll be 8.

Where is this money actually going? Who keeps raising their prices?

Who's profiting from this "OMG WE NEED A RECOUNT!"?

I'm guessing some scumbag lawyers somewhere.

[Parkbandit]

1) to pretend that this criminality doesn't exist on both sides is asinine. See also Lindsey Graham on investigation of the DNC hacks.
2) When groups of computer scientists speak about statistical anomolies in relatively new technology I pay attention. Don't care who motivates it.
3) Nothing more to say here. The advancement of the minority in recent history stirred and angered the majority. They voted. Minority got complacent. 'Nuff said.

Agreed. 2 million people is a very close election. But its .7%, not .007% (2/300 * 100 = percentage).

1) Honestly, you would have to be naive to the 10th degree to believe that the Russians hacked the for Trump. Oh hey!
2) But Nate Silver explained it as something else. This is Nate Silver.. the greatest Presidential predictor of all times in the entire universe!
3) More minorities voted for Trump than voted for Romney. But because the result wasn't to your liking.. it's the minorities fault because they got complacent. Very white of you.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

Me IRL reading this thread

http://i.imgur.com/DLetSkZ.gif

[Taernath]

This all stinks to be honest. At first, the goal was 2.5 million dollars for this recount.. then 4 million.. then 5.. then 6.. it's up to 7 now.. when it hits that.. it'll be 8.

Where is this money actually going? Who keeps raising their prices?

Who's profiting from this "OMG WE NEED A RECOUNT!"?

I'm guessing some scumbag lawyers somewhere.

It goes to Jill Stein and the Green Party. It's a scam.


We cannot guarantee a recount will happen in any of these states we are targeting. We can only pledge we will demand recounts in WI and MI and support the voter-initiated effort in PA.

If we raise more than what's needed, the surplus will also go toward election integrity efforts and to promote voting system reform. This is what we did with our surplus in 2004.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

It goes to Jill Stein and the Green Party. It's a scam.

I am legitimately pissed off with Jill Stein to a degree that can't be functionally articulated but yeah, this is the god damn truth.

I've wanted to rip my hair out this entire election cycle when people were like "Vote for Jill Stein, she has morals"

Lol no

I've been a vegan since April this past year (no, it's not fun, yes I miss eating meat, no, I don't hate you for eating meat). She attempted an AMA on the Vegan subreddit and like the sharks we are we immediately were like "What do you mean when you say you're vegan?" and she meant she ate fish, eggs, and dairy but no red meat, pork, or chicken. Because she was on OUR turf we all pointed out, that shit ain't vegan so please stop calling yourself that. When people asked her specific plans re: dairy and egg farming and about the tie between the dairy and veal industries she basically gave really shitty vague platitudes and then when people started being mean (vegans are fucking vicious, yo) tried to be like "BUT FOR HEALTH!!!" to justify herself. When we started really grilling her, she just up and deleted her thread. Then she had the fucking audacity to start a general AMA and refer to herself as eating a "plant based diet" and pointedly ignored when we were like how the fuck can you claim to champion the environment but still eat meat, AND be a raging hypocrite and pretend you don't? At least Bernie Sanders just openly admitted he knew it was bad but pork and bacon in particular was his vice so it was something he had to work on.

I know I probably seem cynical and pissy as fuck, and I fucking am. My "party" has failed me so spectacularly I just don't even want to be connected at this point. Don't pander to me like I'm some 3 year old you can trick. Don't fucking insult my intelligence like that. Looking into this, this fundraising is more of the same exact shit. There is NO guarantee it's going to actually go to a recount. She's capitalizing on heartbreak and people behaving like fucking idiots.

[time4fun]

I agree with you on all counts except the last.

The majority of registered voters did NOT vote for Hillary.

What are you talking about? The current popular vote totals have her up by over 2 million. It's estimated that it may go up to 2.5m.

Far more people voted for her. The American people wanted Clinton. Trump won by what is effectively a technicality, not by majority vote.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

What are you talking about? The current popular vote totals have her up by over 2 million. It's estimated that it may go up to 2.5m.

Far more people voted for her. The American people wanted Clinton. Trump won by what is effectively a technicality, not by majority vote.

That is the way our election process functions though. The electoral college is to prevent ruling en masse. Yes, you can win a popular vote and still lose the election. The system is so that people get a fair "say" in who wins. I'm not opposed to looking at our current electoral college and revising things, but love it or hate it our democracy functioned exactly like it should have this past cycle.

[time4fun]

That is the way our election process functions though. The electoral college is to prevent ruling en masse. Yes, you can win a popular vote and still lose the election. The system is so that people get a fair "say" in who wins. I'm not opposed to looking at our current electoral college and revising things, but love it or hate it our democracy functioned exactly like it should have this past cycle.

No one is questioning that the electoral college system is real, but it was set up in order to prevent someone like Trump from getting into office. Unfortunately, it is now serving to do the opposite of what was intended.

But the point of my post was to correct Thondalar's misconception that the majority of voters wanted Trump elected.

This is not governing by the will of the people.

[Parkbandit]

What are you talking about? The current popular vote totals have her up by over 2 million. It's estimated that it may go up to 2.5m.

Far more people voted for her. The American people wanted Clinton. Trump won by what is effectively a technicality, not by majority vote.

So, you can't do math and you aren't familiar with the election laws of our country.

Please illustrate your ignorance a little more. It's highly entertaining.

[Parkbandit]

No one is questioning that the electoral college system is real, but it was set up in order to prevent someone like Trump from getting into office. Unfortunately, it is now serving to do the opposite of what was intended.

But the point of my post was to correct Thondalar's misconception that the majority of voters wanted Trump elected.

This is not governing by the will of the people.

Oh.. and English must be a secondary language for you. Re-read what Thondalar posted. Slowly. Sound out the big words you clearly missed.. like "registered"

And governing by the will of the people would better describe a democracy. If only our system was set up like that!

[Gelston]

There are actually very good reasons for a recount. Among them are:

1) There was serious Russian interference-including hacking into voter databases. A recount helps rule out the possibility that they used that vote information to change votes.

2) As mentioned before, hopefully this will help get enough awareness to get some of the more hack-prone voting machines out of commission as CA has done.

3) This isn't likely to change anything, but in this case the result is actually going to have the effect of giving voters *more* confidence in this past election, not less. Right now, that's a good thing.


And let's be clear here- Trump may have won the election, but Clinton got over 2 million more votes than he did. The people of this country wanted her, not him.

Your thoughts and opinions have zero value on these particular forums. You've proven yourself ignorant and racist on almost every occasion. You, by your own admission, don't want Trump because of your continuous violation of federal law. You should keep them to yourself.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

No one is questioning that the electoral college system is real, but it was set up in order to prevent someone like Trump from getting into office. Unfortunately, it is now serving to do the opposite of what was intended.

But the point of my post was to correct Thondalar's misconception that the majority of voters wanted Trump elected.

This is not governing by the will of the people.

No it wasn't. It was set up to prevent ruling en masse. It is absolutely working as intended, even if some of us find it pretty damn upsetting what the outcome is.

This IS governing by the will of the people the way our democracy is set up. This IS how it works. It's neither here nor there who won the popular vote, which ok fine, we can argue about, but that didn't stop Bush from taking his second term did it? All that matters is getting the EC votes. This is the America and the President Elect we are working with. This is how our system has always functioned.

[Parkbandit]

No it wasn't. It was set up to prevent ruling en masse. It is absolutely working as intended, even if some of us find it pretty damn upsetting what the outcome is.

This IS governing by the will of the people the way our democracy is set up. This IS how it works. It's neither here nor there who won the popular vote, which ok fine, we can argue about, but that didn't stop Bush from taking his second term did it? All that matters is getting the EC votes. This is the America and the President Elect we are working with. This is how our system has always functioned.

BUT BUT BUT THE RESULT ISN'T WHAT I WANTED! IT'S THE SYSTEM'S FAULT! IT'S RUSSIA'S FAULT! IT'S A FAR RIGHT WING CONSPIRACY TO NOT ELECT A WOMAN!!!

[Warriorbird]

No it wasn't. It was set up to prevent ruling en masse. It is absolutely working as intended, even if some of us find it pretty damn upsetting what the outcome is.

This IS governing by the will of the people the way our democracy is set up. This IS how it works. It's neither here nor there who won the popular vote, which ok fine, we can argue about, but that didn't stop Bush from taking his second term did it? All that matters is getting the EC votes. This is the America and the President Elect we are working with. This is how our system has always functioned.

That's a take. An alternate claim is that it was to allow rural elites to maintain their power while balancing that through the 3/5ths Compromise.

It has, indeed, functioned like this since the Civil War though.

I don't think any of these recounts are going to get anywhere. I think Jill Stein fundraising higher than the actual required total is more than a bit creepy. I don't doubt that Trump would've asked for recounts if he'd lost though. I think Stein is doing this to cover her losses on the campaign rather than being secretly manipulated by Clinton, however.

[Neveragain]

She's capitalizing on heartbreak and people behaving like fucking idiots.

This is the standard Democrat playbook, has been for a loooooong time. It enables their fear mongering to get votes.

[Neveragain]

No one is questioning that the electoral college system is real, but it was set up in order to prevent someone like Trump from getting into office. Unfortunately, it is now serving to do the opposite of what was intended.

But the point of my post was to correct Thondalar's misconception that the majority of voters wanted Trump elected.

This is not governing by the will of the people.

Please get it out of your head that our system was to prevent someone like Trump from becoming president. For fuck sake he hasn't even taken his oath and you retards act like he just started some fucked up forced healthcare plan. Clinton was a POS candidate and her supporters are moon bats. Get your head out of your ass and quit making your party focus on bathroom rules.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

This is the standard Democrat playbook, has been for a loooooong time. It enables their fear mongering to get votes.

Both parties do. It's just that most people are like "As long as I get my way, might as well cover my eyes and yell LALALALA"

People are in general incredibly idiotic and both parties do whatever they can to get the most out of it. The last thing any party wants is an educated electorate who asks questions.

[Ardwen]

Actually according to Hamilton, this situation is more or less why the college exists. Of course, the majority of his argument is nullified by the fact that parties select the electors nowadays

[Parkbandit]

That's a take. An alternate claim is that it was to allow rural elites to maintain their power while balancing that through the 3/5ths Compromise.

It has, indeed, functioned like this since the Civil War though.

The rural elites.. lol. Adorable.

Also, slavery!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!


I don't think any of these recounts are going to get anywhere. I think Jill Stein fundraising higher than the actual required total is more than a bit creepy. I don't doubt that Trump would've asked for recounts if he'd lost though. I think Stein is doing this to cover her losses on the campaign rather than being secretly manipulated by Clinton, however.

It's probably more to do with making money or recovering from her losses and less to do with recounts.. but you can guarantee that Hillary is attempting to manipulate it.

[Warriorbird]

The rural elites.. lol. Adorable.

Also, slavery!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!



It's probably more to do with making money or recovering from her losses and less to do with recounts.. but you can guarantee that Hillary is attempting to manipulate it.

http://time.com/4558510/electoral-college-history-slavery/


At the Philadelphia convention, the visionary Pennsylvanian James Wilson proposed direct national election of the president. But the savvy Virginian James Madison responded that such a system would prove unacceptable to the South: “The right of suffrage was much more diffusive [i.e., extensive] in the Northern than the Southern States; and the latter could have no influence in the election on the score of Negroes.” In other words, in a direct election system, the North would outnumber the South, whose many slaves (more than half a million in all) of course could not vote. But the Electoral College—a prototype of which Madison proposed in this same speech—instead let each southern state count its slaves, albeit with a two-fifths discount, in computing its share of the overall count.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-amar-electoral-college-explainer-20161007-snap-story.html

It'll be interesting to see how far ahead Jill Stein comes out on her campaign debts.

[time4fun]

Yeah right. Then as soon as Jill Stein got the recount going the Clinton campaign said they would get involved in the recount.

This has Hillary's stink all over it. Jill Stein was bought off.

You're an idiot, as usual. The Green Party has been involved in these situations for years. They also requested recounts during Bush v Gore.

[Neveragain]

Both parties do. It's just that most people are like "As long as I get my way, might as well cover my eyes and yell LALALALA"

People are in general incredibly idiotic and both parties do whatever they can to get the most out of it. The last thing any party wants is an educated electorate who asks questions.

Oh for sure, but how they scare people is very different as well as the sector of the population they target. Democrats use the threat of taking away from you what the Government supplies, Republicans use the threat that the government is coming to take what you earned.

Normally I don't give the wacky protesters to hard of a time, the 60's protester had legitimate gripes. These people out there today....talk about first world problems, honestly it seems like they are trying to be hip 60's wannabes without anything to protest about.

[Neveragain]

Rural Elites:

8252

[Warriorbird]

Rural Elites:

8252

Little bit off:

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/8b/b9/44/8bb94408e4cffaa5892a1e6f0a515d76.jpg

[Neveragain]

Little bit off:

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/8b/b9/44/8bb94408e4cffaa5892a1e6f0a515d76.jpg

Oh, you meant pirates?

[jumbodog]

1) Honestly, you would have to be naive to the 10th degree to believe that the Russians hacked the for Trump. Oh hey!
2) But Nate Silver explained it as something else. This is Nate Silver.. the greatest Presidential predictor of all times in the entire universe!
3) More minorities voted for Trump than voted for Romney. But because the result wasn't to your liking.. it's the minorities fault because they got complacent. Very white of you.

1) I don't think Russia hacked the DNC to Trump, nor did I claim that. I stated that Russia hacked the DNC. Again, Lindsey Graham said it best. Regardless of if the outcome suited the RNC's goals, its still concerning and should be investigated.
2) Nate silver is s statistician. On the eve of the election fivethrityeight.com called it as 77% for Clinton, 23% for Trump. That's essentially 1 in 4 times that their simulation ran, Trump won. So yeah... What's wrong with what Nate Silver said?
3) I'll "check my privileged, bro." Thanks. Oh, and I didn't say, "Minorities" I said "the minority." Which in the context of this conversation meant the Democratic Party, which will hold the minority in the house and senate and is referred to in the political context as "the minority." Just as in the current senate and house the Democrats are referred to as "The minority." I perhaps should have been more clear and said "The minority party."

[jumbodog]

No one is questioning that the electoral college system is real, but it was set up in order to prevent someone like Trump from getting into office. Unfortunately, it is now serving to do the opposite of what was intended.

But the point of my post was to correct Thondalar's misconception that the majority of voters wanted Trump elected.

This is not governing by the will of the people.

Actually, it was setup to ensure that the outcome of this election was exactly the outcome of this election. The electoral college is a system which balances, for better or worse, the will of the simple popular vote vs. the will of the states considered (relatively) equally. Clinton lost the popular vote. The electoral college worked.

[Neveragain]

1) I don't think Russia hacked the DNC to Trump, nor did I claim that. I stated that Russia hacked the DNC. Again, Lindsey Graham said it best. Regardless of if the outcome suited the RNC's goals, its still concerning and should be investigated.
2) Nate silver is s statistician. On the eve of the election fivethrityeight.com called it as 77% for Clinton, 23% for Trump. That's essentially 1 in 4 times that their simulation ran, Trump won. So yeah... What's wrong with what Nate Silver said?
3) I'll "check my privileged, bro." Thanks. Oh, and I didn't say, "Minorities" I said "the minority." Which in the context of this conversation meant the Democratic Party, which will hold the minority in the house and senate and is referred to in the political context as "the minority." Just as in the current senate and house the Democrats are referred to as "The minority." I perhaps should have been more clear and said "The minority party."

1. It is concerning, that's why we have rules in place, like not using private servers in our basement to store classified government information on.
2. I should be getting paid for this, I have consistently said Trump would win since Cruz dropped out. Hell I even said Trump would win Wisconsin....Michigan briefly crossed my mind but I didn't think it was that bad for the Democrats.
3. I thought you were talking about the losers being the minority.

[Latrinsorm]

No it wasn't. It was set up to prevent ruling en masse. It is absolutely working as intended, even if some of us find it pretty damn upsetting what the outcome is. This IS governing by the will of the people the way our democracy is set up. This IS how it works. It's neither here nor there who won the popular vote, which ok fine, we can argue about, but that didn't stop Bush from taking his second term did it? All that matters is getting the EC votes. This is the America and the President Elect we are working with. This is how our system has always functioned.Don't you think the Electoral College is explicitly intended NOT to govern by the will of the people? I'm not arguing with the result of the electoral congress, I just find some of the phrasing people are using odd.
Oh for sure, but how they scare people is very different as well as the sector of the population they target. Democrats use the threat of taking away from you what the Government supplies, Republicans use the threat that the government is coming to take what you earned.In which category would you put defense spending, specifically that spending on defense that the Department of Defense explicitly says it does not want?
Normally I don't give the wacky protesters to hard of a time, the 60's protester had legitimate gripes. These people out there today....talk about first world problems, honestly it seems like they are trying to be hip 60's wannabes without anything to protest about.Suppose your wife was dying in the hospital and I said you weren't allowed to visit her because of my religion. What would your response be?

[jumbodog]

1. It is concerning, that's why we have rules in place, like not using private servers in our basement to store classified government information on.
2. I should be getting paid for this, I have consistently said Trump would win since Cruz dropped out. Hell I even said Trump would win Wisconsin....Michigan briefly crossed my mind but I didn't think it was that bad for the Democrats.
3. I thought you were talking about the losers being the minority.

1. That's not what anyone is suggesting get investigated. Its the russian hacking of the DNC, not Clinton's private email server, that needs to be investigated. I'm not defending the email server.
2. Good for you. Seriously. Bottle and sell that shit if you can. I knew the Dems were going to lose the second they put a non-charismatic 70 year old woman who isn't relatable on the ballot.
3. Probably time to end #3 ;)

[time4fun]

Actually, it was setup to ensure that the outcome of this election was exactly the outcome of this election. The electoral college is a system which balances, for better or worse, the will of the simple popular vote vs. the will of the states considered (relatively) equally. Clinton lost the popular vote. The electoral college worked.

WTF? Clinton WON the popular vote. Do none of the Conservatives of PC read?

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

1. Lists

2. More lists

3. A list.

[jumbodog]

WTF? Clinton WON the popular vote. Do none of the Conservatives of PC read?

I'm neither 'conservative' nor 'liberal'. Its all relative. If I had to classify myself, I would be a left/leaning moderate. I'm of the mindset that one shouldn't have to be forced to vote against planned parenthood if they also want to own a gun. That is the real problem in our government today.

California should not chose the President. The electoral college gives states a larger say based on their population. If the popular vote was all that counted we wouldn't have the senate.

[Neveragain]

WTF? Clinton WON the popular vote. Do none of the Conservatives of PC read?

No, because you don't score points in football by hitting home runs.

[Tgo01]

You're an idiot, as usual. The Green Party has been involved in these situations for years. They also requested recounts during Bush v Gore.

It's amazing how mentally deficient you continue to prove yourself to be. So because the Green Party has supposedly been "involved in these situations for years" means Jill Stein couldn't have been bought off this time? Considering Jill Stein just so happens to be contesting 3 entire states, which if they all flipped would give Hillary the win? All based on the word of 2 guys who admitted themselves they have no proof of hacking? Seriously, how did you ever get a job teaching logic? You were just fucking with us when you said that right? It's the only possible answer.

I also like how your only example is the 2000 election which again was when a Republican won and the Democrats were desperate to get the results overturned. Yeah, you sure proved me wrong! Jill Stein IS impartial!

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

No, because you don't score points in football by hitting home runs.

Correct. You do it by slam dunking and fucking the prom queen.


Wait, what are we talking about?

[Ardwen]

Its really irrelevant why Stein is doing it, the system is in place for it and she and her donors are doing so. Its part of the accepted process, guess what, the process could have been changed and never has been and likely never will be. Hell in just 3 districts 17 percent of Trump's lead was erased due to clerical errors. I am all for recounts if they actually do correct errors, in either directions. I personally think the dems screwing Sanders cost them the election as he likely would have pulled a large block of the outsider votes trump received, but this is what we have for now, we deal with it for the moment.

[jumbodog]

Correct. You do it by slam dunking and fucking the prom queen.


Wait, what are we talking about?

Isn't that only in water polio? (Not a typo)

[Ardwen]

Also you may want to read the Trumpsterfires most recent tweet. Apparently he thinks more then 2 million people voted illegally now.

I think I should trade mark that!

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

Its really irrelevant why Stein is doing it, the system is in place for it and she and her donors are doing so. Its part of the accepted process, guess what, the process could have been changed and never has been and likely never will be. Hell in just 3 districts 17 percent of Trump's lead was erased due to clerical errors. I am all for recounts if they actually do correct errors, in either directions. I personally think the dems screwing Sanders cost them the election as he likely would have pulled a large block of the outsider votes trump received, but this is what we have for now, we deal with it for the moment.

QFT

[Androidpk]

1. Lists

2. More lists

3. A list.

This list sums it up.

[Archigeek]

Its really irrelevant why Stein is doing it, the system is in place for it and she and her donors are doing so. Its part of the accepted process, guess what, the process could have been changed and never has been and likely never will be. Hell in just 3 districts 17 percent of Trump's lead was erased due to clerical errors. I am all for recounts if they actually do correct errors, in either directions. I personally think the dems screwing Sanders cost them the election as he likely would have pulled a large block of the outsider votes trump received, but this is what we have for now, we deal with it for the moment.

My thoughts as well. States have systems in place for this, at least the ones with well run voting do. The laws of the state(s) need to be followed if we want a system with integrity.

[Neveragain]

Don't you think the Electoral College is explicitly intended NOT to govern by the will of the people? I'm not arguing with the result of the electoral congress, I just find some of the phrasing people are using odd.In which category would you put defense spending, specifically that spending on defense that the Department of Defense explicitly says it does not want?Suppose your wife was dying in the hospital and I said you weren't allowed to visit her because of my religion. What would your response be?

The rolls definitely switch, of course the military is one responsibility of the federal government that we all get an equal return on. As far as government waste, it sucks no matter which party is pissing your money away.

I would first assume my wife is the same religion as I so she probably wouldn't be there either. But if it were the case that she wasn't the same religion as I, which she wouldn't, I would ask that my wife be transferred to a different hospital. If it went to the extreme that she could not be treated I would demand the return of my dying wife, hold her in my arms and pray to my creator until she passed.

[Candor]

What bothers me most about this election is the number of people who would not hesitate to break the law if it meant helping their candidate get elected (and I am not speaking about just one party).

[Neveragain]

What bothers me most about this election is the number of people who would not hesitate to break the law if it meant helping their candidate get elected (and I am not speaking about just one party).

This should be of no surprise, the character of a countries leaders will always mirror the character of it's people. Trump and Clinton are poster children of the American culture.

[Latrinsorm]

The rolls definitely switch, of course the military is one responsibility of the federal government that we all get an equal return on. As far as government waste, it sucks no matter which party is pissing your money away.We don't get a return on it if the defense spending in question is superfluous, though, the only people who get a return on it are the factory workers making useless widgets, and of course the politicians who rely on the votes of those workers.
I would first assume my wife is the same religion as I so she probably wouldn't be there either. But if it were the case that she wasn't the same religion as I, which she wouldn't, I would ask that my wife be transferred to a different hospital. If it went to the extreme that she could not be treated I would demand the return of my dying wife, hold her in my arms and pray to my creator until she passed.The salient points of the analogy have gotten a little muddled, but if you would honestly not seek reprisal against a hospital not treating your wife because of her religion there's no point in going any further with it.

[Neveragain]

We don't get a return on it if the defense spending in question is superfluous, though, the only people who get a return on it are the factory workers making useless widgets, and of course the politicians who rely on the votes of those workers.The salient points of the analogy have gotten a little muddled, but if you would honestly not seek reprisal against a hospital not treating your wife because of her religion there's no point in going any further with it.

Your return is having a strong defense protecting your home, every citizen enjoys this comfort.

Your question is a red herring, your attempt at trying to prime me for an answer you wanted was pretty lame.

[Gelston]

Haha, you're trying to debate with Latrin.

[Jeril]

Haha, you're trying to debate with Latrin.

I think we all have been there at least once.

[Thondalar]

I think we all have been there at least once.

Once, twice, a hundred times.

"Debating" with Latrin is actually fun, a lot of times. Mostly when I'm drunk.

[Neveragain]

Correct. You do it by slam dunking and fucking the prom queen.


Wait, what are we talking about?

Normally I would agree but in this case the prom queen was Hillary Clinton, so the team would have to settle for ale matrons and blow.

[Thondalar]

Don't you think the Electoral College is explicitly intended NOT to govern by the will of the people? I'm not arguing with the result of the electoral congress, I just find some of the phrasing people are using odd.

When viewed through the lens of our Republic, the Electoral College is, in fact, explicitly intended to govern by the will of the people. States are not equal by population, but they are (more, relatively) equal in vote. This is the correct way to do things, in a Republic. You know it, everyone else knows it. The alternatives are worse both in reality and potential.


In which category would you put defense spending, specifically that spending on defense that the Department of Defense explicitly says it does not want?

I would put that in the category of "something that needs to be addressed, regardless of which side of the aisle you're on." We all want a robust military; we all want to limit wasteful spending.


Suppose your wife was dying in the hospital and I said you weren't allowed to visit her because of my religion. What would your response be?

This...doesn't even make any sense.



Originally Posted by Jeril
I think we all have been there at least once.


Once, twice, a hundred times.

"Debating" with Latrin is actually fun, a lot of times. Mostly when I'm drunk.

Well, guess you know where I'm at right now.

[Latrinsorm]

Your return is having a strong defense protecting your home, every citizen enjoys this comfort. Your question is a red herring, your attempt at trying to prime me for an answer you wanted was pretty lame.I'm not trying to prime anything, my man. Quite to the contrary, your reaction is exactly what the politicians want when they say "defense spending". We count as defense spending that spending which the actual military actually says it doesn't want. It has literally no impact on the protection of my or anyone else's home... except those offices of Washington D.C. paid for by taxpayer dollars. Think it through. Why do you suppose those politicians don't devote those dollars to something like pay for service members? Follow the money, and you will see the truth.
When viewed through the lens of our Republic, the Electoral College is, in fact, explicitly intended to govern by the will of the people. States are not equal by population, but they are (more, relatively) equal in vote. This is the correct way to do things, in a Republic. You know it, everyone else knows it. The alternatives are worse both in reality and potential.A republic is explicitly not the will of the people - that would be a democracy. For our republic in particular, I encourage you to reread Fed. 68.
This...doesn't even make any sense.Ah, I take it you are unfamiliar with the First Amendment Defense Act (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_Defense_Act), or perhaps President-Elect Trump's stated support of it. We all agree here that gay marriage is settled. There will I think be quite significant comedy when people of your ilk find that whoops, the GOP actually is still trying to get rid of it. Ha! Ha! Parkbandit will surely be entertained, at least.

[Tgo01]

WTF? Clinton WON the popular vote.

We can't say that for sure until we do a recount in California and New York.

[Thondalar]

A republic is explicitly not the will of the people - that would be a democracy.

And unfettered Democracy has proven time and again to be the catalyst for oppression of minorities. This is why we are, technically anyway, a Republic, and not, technically, a Democracy.

For national elections, we simply cannot allow a handful of States to make the decisions for the rest of the Republic. Again, you're looking at this as a strictly Republic vs. Democracy scenario, when it is not. WE are a Republic. There is no Republic vs. Democracy, because we're not choosing between the two. Under our Republic, the "will of the people" is represented by their State's vote, not their individual vote. That's how the system works. The Majority of States voted for Trump, so he won the election.

You're capable of grasping much more complicated concepts than this, I've seen it. This should be relatively easy for you.


For our republic in particular, I encourage you to reread Fed. 68.

You know very well my familiarity with "the papers". I must admit I'm a bit confused by your reference here...nothing there disputes what I said. In fact, it reaffirms it, and explains why we have the Electoral College. Perhaps you should read it?



Ah, I take it you are unfamiliar with the First Amendment Defense Act (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_Defense_Act), or perhaps President-Elect Trump's stated support of it. We all agree here that gay marriage is settled. There will I think be quite significant comedy when people of your ilk find that whoops, the GOP actually is still trying to get rid of it. Ha! Ha! Parkbandit will surely be entertained, at least.

I'm familiar with it, and I see nothing wrong with it, other than it should only apply to private sector citizens, and not government employees. If you want to object to giving a marriage certificate to a gay couple, that's great, but your job is to give marriage certificates to legally qualified couples. If you can't do your job, then you need to find another job. I'm all for adding some sort of clause that states Government employees are required to follow the law. There's your "middle ground".

[time4fun]

And unfettered Democracy has proven time and again to be the catalyst for oppression of minorities. This is why we are, technically anyway, a Republic, and not, technically, a Democracy.

For national elections, we simply cannot allow a handful of States to make the decisions for the rest of the Republic. Again, you're looking at this as a strictly Republic vs. Democracy scenario, when it is not. WE are a Republic. There is no Republic vs. Democracy, because we're not choosing between the two. Under our Republic, the "will of the people" is represented by their State's vote, not their individual vote. That's how the system works. The Majority of States voted for Trump, so he won the election.

You're capable of grasping much more complicated concepts than this, I've seen it. This should be relatively easy for you.



You know very well my familiarity with "the papers". I must admit I'm a bit confused by your reference here...nothing there disputes what I said. In fact, it reaffirms it, and explains why we have the Electoral College. Perhaps you should read it?




I'm familiar with it, and I see nothing wrong with it, other than it should only apply to private sector citizens, and not government employees. If you want to object to giving a marriage certificate to a gay couple, that's great, but your job is to give marriage certificates to legally qualified couples. If you can't do your job, then you need to find another job. I'm all for adding some sort of clause that states Government employees are required to follow the law. There's your "middle ground".

.... Oppression of minorities? Seriously? NOW you care?

[jumbodog]

Agree with Thondalar here, even though it wasn't my desired outcome of the election. He's right. We DO NOT live in a democracy. We live in a republic. America has NEVER been a democracy and it was not intended to be. Its a republic where each state's voice is treated relatively equally. Cool. Trump won. Move. On.

However your numbers are inaccurate. There are only 146 million registered voters in the United States (http://www.statisticbrain.com/voting-statistics/). From the same source there are 218 million voting aged citizens in the U.S., many of whom are not registered to vote. That means that roughly 82 million voters did not vote for Clinton, and no matter how you spin that number, more people chose not to vote for Trump. So the substantial majority of our country chose "none of the above." But this whole part of the discussion is irrelevant. When voter turnout is only 55% we end up with lesser of two evils candidates. Which is just a fucking shit show. I think we can all agree that this whole election was a shit show regardless of the outcome.

In other news, Trump will raise your taxes according to analysis by Fox news:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/11/28/analysis-for-some-in-middle-class-trump-plan-would-mean-tax-increase.html
(http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/11/28/analysis-for-some-in-middle-class-trump-plan-would-mean-tax-increase.html)

Just putting that here because it fits the title of the thread.

[Tolan]

I hear Trump won the election in Michigan....AGAIN! Pretty soon we are all going to be calling the White House like, "Mr. President, please...Mr. President...we are so tired of winning."