|
BIG HEADLINE posted:I do kind of hope that John brings up the people who are trying to convince-by-protest enough liberal-leaning electors to 'install' Hillary. I despise Trump, and even *I* think these people need to shut the gently caress up and take their medicine, because even if they persuaded them, she'd have *no* authority or mandate whatsoever. None. Part of being an American means eating poo poo once in a while, if only to keep your immune system busy. And having to eat poo poo means the possibility of having to eat the Elector's poo poo. If you don't like that, what are you gonna do, abolish the EC and go with the popular vote? Okay, who won the popular vote? I'm not saying this is even remotely possible or likely, it's not. At all. The Electoral College will vote for Trump no matter what. But that doesn't mean you have to pretend that an arbitrary system is a law of physics. BIG HEADLINE posted:Left-wing white America liked a black guy doing all their work, and then had the audacity to call him a "lame duck" when he didn't have the mandate that they themselves could have given him. Slamhound fucked around with this message at 11:42 on Nov 13, 2016 |
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 11:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 12:50 |
|
|
Ausmund posted:That's exactly the point. Hate is universally toxic. Social progress, human decency, and empathy are good things. But getting angry and hating people that you perceive to not share those values the way you want them to doesn't accomplish anything positive. It backfired. Hard. Of course they don't mention he got assassinated. Or how armed white peacekeeperss kept the peace on the "mob".. uppity minorities got what was coming to them
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 11:31
|
|
|
At this point, if it was "stolen" from Trump and Hillary was made president on some technicality or the like, there would be a actual civil war and far reaching consequences.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 13:00
|
|
|
Ra Ra Rasputin posted:At this point, if it was "stolen" from Trump and Hillary was made president on some technicality or the like, there would be a actual civil war and far reaching consequences. I agree. Though I think the main thing stopping that from already happening is that the people on one side are in the cities and the people on the other side are in the rural areas. If the protesters were protesting in the suburbs/smaller towns it would be more of a powderkeg IMO. I mean, to half the country, the other half voted for a satanic, baby-killing (days from being born), military-hating, criminal who was smug about her crimes and who "the system" was "rigging" in favor of. And to the other half of the country, the first half voted for a fascist embodiment of white privilege who will say and do anything to get more people to like him and thus is unpredictable enough to fly off the rails at any given moment, and whose message of "drain the swamp" gets drowned out by the amount of career politicians still in office and whom he will appoint to his cabinet. There's a lot of dissent in America right now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 14:32
|
|
|
The Electoral College: How is This Still a Thing?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 14:43
|
|
|
Slamhound posted:The thing is, it's perfectly legal for the electors to vote in Hillary if they want, it's not "installing" poo poo. Hell, the only faithless elector in this election was anti-Hillary and there was gently caress-all in the way of general condemnations. And so what if it wouldn't give her a mandate? Who loving cares? she'd be President. Abolishing the EC and moving to a popular vote-based system would be a nightmare. As romantic as it sounds to 'make every vote count,' such a system invites multiple recounts in multiple states if the results are within 0.1-5%, as they are now. And I'm not calling the EC a 'law of physics,' I'm saying that people calling for electors to vote against the people they represent are making those of us who might not like yet respect the EC system look bad, and they should be reserving their energy for things like the Million Woman March, and placing pressure upon the DNC to throw out the old playbook and write a new one. Slamhound posted:This is the stupidest loving thing I've heard all week and Trump was elected on Tuesday. I'll grant I could've worded it better, but it still doesn't change the fact that the popular support of Obama in office was weak from those who elected him, and *being* in DC, it wasn't just Republicans and right-leaning centrists who were calling him a lame duck president while doing practically nothing from a populist standpoint to aid him.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 15:03
|
|
|
Just admit that the US is too large and too disparate to work as a single nation and split up already.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 17:07
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:I realize this, but it's getting things started on the wrong foot. I'm tired of seeing 'the opposition' tire themselves out on something that has no hope of succeeding, then letting apathy set in. Ah, yes. If there was one thing that we learned this election, is that trying to get stuff with no hope of succeeding is futile, what with all the very realistic and achievable goals Trump set up and the heavy price that republicans paid for their obstructionism trying to get impossible things. BIG HEADLINE posted:Abolishing the EC and moving to a popular vote-based system would be a nightmare. As romantic as it sounds to 'make every vote count,' such a system invites multiple recounts in multiple states if the results are within 0.1-5%, as they are now. Seriously now, this is incredibly stupid. You got it precisely backwards. EC makes it so that recounts in states are important. Without an electoral college, a particular state or two being within a few thousand votes is irrelevant.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 17:11
|
|
|
Hey, it's the second time in 16 years the EC has handed a win to the popular vote loser, but at least there aren't any long and painful recounts to contend with (except for the one that happened in Florida in 2000, which was coincidentally the previous time the electoral college handed a win to the popular vote loser).
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 17:43
|
|
|
Woebin posted:Just admit that the US is too large and too disparate to work as a single nation and split up already. Either that or we get a real Democratic socialist in office next to take resources from the cities/rich and redistribute them to these impoverished areas to convince the willing that Dems are not Actually Satan. If this doesn't happen after Trump, I believe things will fall apart.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 17:48
|
|
|
Woebin posted:Just admit that the US is too large and too disparate to work as a single nation and split up already. Even if you just break it into the fifty states you've got plenty of states where most of the state is red but the cities are blue, so the battle continues. In some weird way I actually like that the country was nearly 50/50 split, if you were a leader and half the country liked you and half of it hated you I'd say you found the mythical center
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 20:01
|
|
|
CrashCat posted:In some weird way I actually like that the country was nearly 50/50 split, if you were a leader and half the country liked you and half of it hated you I'd say you found the mythical center I don't think you have thought this through. If one wing likes you and the other hates you, it means you're sitting firmly on one side of the spectrum. Finding the center would mean that an equal portion of each party likes you, and the fringes don't.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
No worries, a friendly Russian professor already solved the split for you:
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 23:52
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:No worries, a friendly Russian professor already solved the split for you: Is that like an alt-history thing or someone's actual political theory? Because why would they all join other countries rather than just becoming new ones?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 00:00
|
|
|
This but China/Russia and no neutral zone.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 00:38
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:No worries, a friendly Russian professor already solved the split for you: split it at the susquehanna imo fake edit: fall back to the hudson if necessary
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 00:41
|
|
|
I'm the guy who repeatedly talked about the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact long before this election, and I find the fact that people are only complaining about the Electoral College now when Trump won to be very off-putting, and it kills any remote chance that Republicans might support the bill in the states it needs to get passed in. It's extra cynical for the Hillary-from-the-start supporters who are complaining now about the EC's arbitrary system, but not the Democratic nominating process' arbitrary rules.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 00:55
|
|
|
Echo Chamber posted:I'm the guy who repeatedly talked about the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact long before this election, and I find the fact that people are only complaining about the Electoral College now when Trump won to be very off-putting, and it kills any remote chance that Republicans might support the bill in the states it needs to get passed in. People only bitch about the EC after elections when it matters because there's no push to change archaic institutions that function invisibly. Same way you only care about your appendix when it bursts.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 01:38
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:No worries, a friendly Russian professor already solved the split for you: We'd take New England before we took Kansas.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 03:36
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:No worries, a friendly Russian professor already solved the split for you: the flyover states make out better than anyone
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 03:51
|
|
|
Gyges posted:People only bitch about the EC after elections when it matters because there's no push to change archaic institutions that function invisibly. Same way you only care about your appendix when it bursts. Trump ran his campaign to win states unfavorable to him that he stood a chance of winning. For example, Calforina the state Hillary won, wasn't visited once by Trump because the impossibility of him winning. So a lot of GOP sat on their asses and didn't vote at all, something they would have done if the EC didn't exist. This line of thinking is stupidn and is used to deflect larger issues of blame (the fact Hillary and establishment democrats are dumb as dogshit.)
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 04:38
|
|
|
NutritiousSnack posted:Trump ran his campaign to win states unfavorable to him that he stood a chance of winning. For example, Calforina the state Hillary won, wasn't visited once by Trump because the impossibility of him winning. So a lot of GOP sat on their asses and didn't vote at all, something they would have done if the EC didn't exist. This line of thinking is stupidn and is used to deflect larger issues of blame (the fact Hillary and establishment democrats are dumb as dogshit.) Why is this true for solid blue states but not solid red?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 04:42
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:Why is this true for solid blue states but not solid red? Hillary spent more money trying to get a single EV out of Nebraska than she spent in Wisconsin, despite the fact that people hate her in Wisconsin (and presumably Michigan)
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 04:50
|
|
|
NutritiousSnack posted:Trump ran his campaign to win states unfavorable to him that he stood a chance of winning. For example, Calforina the state Hillary won, wasn't visited once by Trump because the impossibility of him winning. So a lot of GOP sat on their asses and didn't vote at all, something they would have done if the EC didn't exist. This line of thinking is stupidn and is used to deflect larger issues of blame (the fact Hillary and establishment democrats are dumb as dogshit.) What if it's possible to have multiple conversations at once, one about how bad Hillary's campaign was, AND one about how stupid it is that Republicans have lost the popular vote in 4/5 of our 21st century elections and won the Presidency in 3/5? It's impossible to know exactly what the consequences of doing away with the EC on the popular vote results would be because, get this, the people who didn't vote didn't vote
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 05:40
|
|
|
CrashCat posted:A good snark but probably geographically impossible I think. I think within the next 2 years, 90% of the country is going to hate Trump (it happened to Bush at one point).
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 05:45
|
|
|
I said come in! posted:I think within the next 2 years, 90% of the country is going to hate Drumpf (it happened to Bush at one point). Almost certainly, once all the people that claim they voted on his "economic platform" and not because of all the racism and xenophobia realize they've been duped. With the naked corruption he's already displaying in choosing his transition team and trying to game his pending trials, I think there is a very real possibility of him being successfully impeached. Imagine, history before our very eyes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 06:38
|
|
|
I said come in! posted:I think within the next 2 years, 90% of the country is going to hate Trump (it happened to Bush at one point). Well he's probably going to be the first president with a favor-ability rating in the 30s- 40s before he's even sworn in. That is until Trump TV launches and it and Fox are the only two news channels allowed to cover press briefings. Macdeo Lurjtux fucked around with this message at 06:47 on Nov 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 06:44
|
|
|
Is there no way we can just get another 4 years of Obama?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 06:48
|
|
|
Maybe this is finally the catalyst for Obama to declare martial law and name himself president for life, just like the right has been fearing for eight years!
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 06:56
|
|
|
raditts posted:Almost certainly, once all the people that claim they voted on his "economic platform" and not because of all the racism and xenophobia realize they've been duped. He's already explained that everybody in DC is a lobbyist. The whole things a giant lobby. There's nobody else there to help him. He'll change the system AFTER these guys help him acclimatize to the job. I'd rather have Trump as President than Pence. And look, either Trump will be SO bad the general populace will fight back, or he won't be as bad as all that, and we just have to live with him. Of course, the environment's hosed regardless. If that fucker and piece of poo poo congress push through all the deregs then we won't be hosed, but our kids sure as heck will be. Drifter fucked around with this message at 07:08 on Nov 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 07:04
|
|
|
raditts posted:With the naked corruption he's already displaying in choosing his transition team and trying to game his pending trials, I think there is a very real possibility of him being successfully impeached. People I know have been saying that's exactly what the Republicans are planning to do: watch Trump like a hawk and bait him into making a mistake, then crucify him so we get President Pence.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 07:06
|
|
|
In that case I hope Pence pardons him and then only serves a single term like Ford.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 07:07
|
|
|
Drifter posted:I'd rather have Drumpf as President than Pence. Odds are, if we don't have literal President Pence, then we're going to have de facto President Pence anyway because I doubt Trump has either the capability or the attention span to actually do the job himself. He's already talking about wanting to split time with the White House and his gilded tower in New York.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 07:11
|
|
|
If any beloved celebrities are going to die soon, can you try and squeeze it in before the year ends? I don't want to start the first month of next year with a bunch of well known and liked celebrities dying like in 2016.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 07:56
|
|
|
Maybe Trump will be the presidential version of Richard Johnson. The Dollop - Richard Johnson, A Terrible Vice President Wikipedia posted:After the financial Panic of 1837, Johnson took a nine-month leave of absence, during which he returned home to Kentucky and opened a tavern and spa on his farm to offset his continued financial problems.[2][64] Upon visiting the establishment, Amos Kendall wrote to President Van Buren that he found Johnson "happy in the inglorious pursuit of tavern keeping – even giving his personal superintendence to the chicken and egg purchasing and water-melon selling department".[2]
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 08:07
|
|
|
John Oliver really should've mentioned that Stephen Bannon is a wife-beating anti-semite.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 10:44
|
|
|
raditts posted:Odds are, if we don't have literal President Pence, then we're going to have de facto President Pence anyway because I doubt Trump has either the capability or the attention span to actually do the job himself. He's already talking about wanting to split time with the White House and his gilded tower in New York. In addition to the fact Pence and the Congressional GOP are defacto going to be running poo poo anyway, at least if that fucker is made President instead of Trump we won't have to worry about suddenly declaring was with Britain because the Queen disses the Trump brand.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 12:52
|
|
|
Apoplexy posted:John Oliver really should've mentioned that Stephen Bannon is a wife-beating anti-semite. Good news! He has four (eight? probably eight.) years to make up for glossing over that tonight.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 12:56
|
|
|
Gyges posted:In addition to the fact Pence and the Congressional GOP are defacto going to be running poo poo anyway, at least if that fucker is made President instead of Trump we won't have to worry about suddenly declaring was with Britain because the Queen disses the Trump brand. Sure you do, Pence is just as much as an emotional gently caress up as Trump. I mean at least Trump never caused an HIV outbreak and refused to do anything to fix it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 13:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 12:50 |
|
|
Mulva posted:Sure you do, Pence is just as much as an emotional gently caress up as Trump. I mean at least Trump never caused an HIV outbreak and refused to do anything to fix it. As far as we know. He did party hard in the Eighties...
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 14:59
|
|
