independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Mon 9th Dec 2019 7:21am
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Politics & Religion > Can Trump become a holy Reagan-esque right wing Messiah?
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 4 of 7 <1234567>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Reply #90 posted 06/11/19 11:21am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

guitarslinger44 said:

jjhunsecker said:

guitarslinger44 said: It's not an excuse, it's a fact. More voters chose her


Well, that isn't how the game is played at a presidential level, so it doesn't matter if they did. Bringing it up over and over again just seems like sour grapes.

It is not sour grapes... sour grapes would be the sore losers saying "being president would suck anyway..." (Sour Grapes is really putting down the desired object or outcomes after failing to obtain it... the FOX wanted the grapes but failed so he deemed them sour)

they are just bitter over losing: Period.

No one is coming for your abortion: they just want common-sense abortion regulations: background checks, waiting periods, lifetime limits, take a class, and a small tax.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #91 posted 06/11/19 11:24am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

jjhunsecker said:
The Electoral College is a zero sum game- when you overvalue some voters, it automatically undervalues other voters
Granted it did serve a purpose at one point time giving under represented states a voice rather than being drowned out by the will of the more populated states. It served its purpose. But today I think it’s the other way around and it gives these states far more sway in the elections. I think a fair compromise can be implemented.

I would say the results of 2016 PROVE it is still necessary as it did exactly what you said it was interned to do and what the founders indented it to do.

No one is coming for your abortion: they just want common-sense abortion regulations: background checks, waiting periods, lifetime limits, take a class, and a small tax.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #92 posted 06/11/19 11:25am

jjhunsecker

avatar

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

jjhunsecker said:



The Electoral College is a zero sum game- when you overvalue some voters, it automatically undervalues other voters


Granted it did serve a purpose at one point time giving under represented states a voice rather than being drowned out by the will of the more populated states. It served its purpose. But today I think it’s the other way around and it gives these states far more sway in the elections. I think a fair compromise can be implemented.


My point exactly. It serves no purpose in modern America. Every vote should count equally, and every candidate should vie for every vote across the entire country
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #93 posted 06/11/19 11:28am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

jjhunsecker said:

Ugot2shakesumthin said:
Granted it did serve a purpose at one point time giving under represented states a voice rather than being drowned out by the will of the more populated states. It served its purpose. But today I think it’s the other way around and it gives these states far more sway in the elections. I think a fair compromise can be implemented.
My point exactly. It serves no purpose in modern America. Every vote should count equally, and every candidate should vie for every vote across the entire country

but that is exactly what they wanted to avoid and it is JUST as much a threat today. You just do not like the results. The fact is MOST (the vast portion of the nation) supported HIM over her. THAT is the POINT of the Elector process.

No one is coming for your abortion: they just want common-sense abortion regulations: background checks, waiting periods, lifetime limits, take a class, and a small tax.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #94 posted 06/11/19 11:47am

Ugot2shakesumt
hin

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:



Ugot2shakesumthin said:


jjhunsecker said:
The Electoral College is a zero sum game- when you overvalue some voters, it automatically undervalues other voters

Granted it did serve a purpose at one point time giving under represented states a voice rather than being drowned out by the will of the more populated states. It served its purpose. But today I think it’s the other way around and it gives these states far more sway in the elections. I think a fair compromise can be implemented.


I would say the results of 2016 PROVE it is still necessary as it did exactly what you said it was interned to do and what the founders indented it to do.



As a self proclaimed partisan I am absolutely sure you and your kind would be up in arms if this worked for Hillary. So your comments are automatically moot.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #95 posted 06/11/19 12:22pm

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

I would say the results of 2016 PROVE it is still necessary as it did exactly what you said it was interned to do and what the founders indented it to do.

As a self proclaimed partisan I am absolutely sure you and your kind would be up in arms if this worked for Hillary. So your comments are automatically moot.

you are wrong. I would be made my person lost but No I would not be mad at the system. And I strive (and I am sure I have) to NOT use this kind of argument as it is a total fallacy.

and want do you mean by "MOOT"?

No one is coming for your abortion: they just want common-sense abortion regulations: background checks, waiting periods, lifetime limits, take a class, and a small tax.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #96 posted 06/11/19 12:28pm

jjhunsecker

avatar

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:



Ugot2shakesumthin said:


jjhunsecker said:
The Electoral College is a zero sum game- when you overvalue some voters, it automatically undervalues other voters

Granted it did serve a purpose at one point time giving under represented states a voice rather than being drowned out by the will of the more populated states. It served its purpose. But today I think it’s the other way around and it gives these states far more sway in the elections. I think a fair compromise can be implemented.


I would say the results of 2016 PROVE it is still necessary as it did exactly what you said it was interned to do and what the founders indented it to do.



As a self proclaimed partisan I am absolutely sure you and your kind would be up in arms if this worked for Hillary. So your comments are automatically moot.


You got that right!
Almost everything he says is purely partisan, and he would turn on a dime if a Liberal or Democrat did or said the same thing
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #97 posted 06/11/19 12:31pm

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

jjhunsecker said:

Ugot2shakesumthin said:
As a self proclaimed partisan I am absolutely sure you and your kind would be up in arms if this worked for Hillary. So your comments are automatically moot.
You got that right! Almost everything he says is purely partisan, and he would turn on a dime if a Liberal or Democrat did or said the same thing

to true... Totally made up...

No one is coming for your abortion: they just want common-sense abortion regulations: background checks, waiting periods, lifetime limits, take a class, and a small tax.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #98 posted 06/11/19 12:44pm

Ugot2shakesumt
hin

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:



Ugot2shakesumthin said:


OnlyNDaUsa said:



I would say the results of 2016 PROVE it is still necessary as it did exactly what you said it was interned to do and what the founders indented it to do.



As a self proclaimed partisan I am absolutely sure you and your kind would be up in arms if this worked for Hillary. So your comments are automatically moot.


you are wrong. I would be made my person lost but No I would not be mad at the system. And I strive (and I am sure I have) to NOT use this kind of argument as it is a total fallacy.

and want do you mean by "MOOT"?



lol
A no one believes that. Not even yourself.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #99 posted 06/11/19 1:00pm

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

you are wrong. I would be made my person lost but No I would not be mad at the system. And I strive (and I am sure I have) to NOT use this kind of argument as it is a total fallacy.

and want do you mean by "MOOT"?

lol A no one believes that. Not even yourself.

you are free to make up things I guess... but you and JJ are wrong. but that is okay I forgive you both... 4 out 5

No one is coming for your abortion: they just want common-sense abortion regulations: background checks, waiting periods, lifetime limits, take a class, and a small tax.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #100 posted 06/11/19 1:27pm

poppys

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

jjhunsecker said:
The Electoral College is a zero sum game- when you overvalue some voters, it automatically undervalues other voters

Granted it did serve a purpose at one point time giving under represented states a voice rather than being drowned out by the will of the more populated states. It served its purpose. But today I think it’s the other way around and it gives these states far more sway in the elections. I think a fair compromise can be implemented.


It really never served a purpose. That was what the elite served up to voters when they put that voting system in place. It was always a snow job on the actual electorate.

[Edited 6/11/19 17:05pm]

politics: the art or science of government.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #101 posted 06/11/19 2:09pm

jjhunsecker

avatar

Ugot2shakesumthin said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:



Ugot2shakesumthin said:


OnlyNDaUsa said:



I would say the results of 2016 PROVE it is still necessary as it did exactly what you said it was interned to do and what the founders indented it to do.



As a self proclaimed partisan I am absolutely sure you and your kind would be up in arms if this worked for Hillary. So your comments are automatically moot.


you are wrong. I would be made my person lost but No I would not be mad at the system. And I strive (and I am sure I have) to NOT use this kind of argument as it is a total fallacy.

and want do you mean by "MOOT"?



lol
A no one believes that. Not even yourself.


A very Trumpian technique- try to Gaslight people so they don't believe what they've actually seen and heard and read
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #102 posted 06/11/19 2:13pm

jjhunsecker

avatar

Here's a test: let's see if he admits that Barack Obama received 65% of the vote in 2008. Because that's the percentage of Electoral votes that he received over McCain... I mean, we're told "That's how the system works "....The VAST majority preferred Obama, am I right?
[Edited 6/11/19 14:14pm]
[Edited 6/11/19 14:16pm]
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #103 posted 06/11/19 2:22pm

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

jjhunsecker said:

Here's a test: let's see if he admits that Barack Obama received 65% of the vote in 2008. Because that's the percentage of Electoral votes that he received over McCain... I mean, we're told "That's how the system works "....The VAST majority preferred Obama, am I right? [Edited 6/11/19 14:14pm] [Edited 6/11/19 14:16pm]

oh no he did not! that is not true! you are WRONG!

[Edited 6/11/19 14:26pm]

No one is coming for your abortion: they just want common-sense abortion regulations: background checks, waiting periods, lifetime limits, take a class, and a small tax.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #104 posted 06/11/19 2:23pm

guitarslinger4
4

avatar

Obama was a candidate people were excited about and excited to vote for. They captured lightning in a bottle eith his candidacy. I don't remember people being that excited about a candidate,like, EVER.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #105 posted 06/11/19 2:35pm

jjhunsecker

avatar

2008 Electoral College Results:

Obama : 365
McCain : 173

Someone with better math skills than me, please confirm what percentage of the vote each candidate received. I calculate Obama with about 65% approximately of the vote
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #106 posted 06/11/19 2:36pm

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

jjhunsecker said:

2008 Electoral College Results: Obama : 365 McCain : 173 Someone with better math skills than me, please confirm what percentage of the vote each candidate received. I calculate Obama with about 65% approximately of the vote

no no no that is not right that is not how it works!

No one is coming for your abortion: they just want common-sense abortion regulations: background checks, waiting periods, lifetime limits, take a class, and a small tax.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #107 posted 06/11/19 3:05pm

jjhunsecker

avatar

Weren't we told earlier in this thread that "the vast majority preferred HIM (Trump) over HER (Clinton)".

Then when I mentioned that by THAT specific metric, the vast majority of the nation preferred Obama over McCain in 2008 (with Obama getting approximately 65% of the Electoral College votes), we're told that's "wrong " and "not how it works "..,,

Well, which is it ? Or are we witnessing someone talking out of both sides of their mouths?
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #108 posted 06/11/19 3:54pm

Ugot2shakesumt
hin

avatar

jjhunsecker said:

Weren't we told earlier in this thread that "the vast majority preferred HIM (Trump) over HER (Clinton)".

Then when I mentioned that by THAT specific metric, the vast majority of the nation preferred Obama over McCain in 2008 (with Obama getting approximately 65% of the Electoral College votes), we're told that's "wrong " and "not how it works "..,,

Well, which is it ? Or are we witnessing someone talking out of both sides of their mouths?



lol
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #109 posted 06/11/19 3:54pm

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

jjhunsecker said:

Weren't we told earlier in this thread that "the vast majority preferred HIM (Trump) over HER (Clinton)". Then when I mentioned that by THAT specific metric, the vast majority of the nation preferred Obama over McCain in 2008 (with Obama getting approximately 65% of the Electoral College votes), we're told that's "wrong " and "not how it works "..,, Well, which is it ? Or are we witnessing someone talking out of both sides of their mouths?

yeah but it is 67.84386617% not 65%

No one is coming for your abortion: they just want common-sense abortion regulations: background checks, waiting periods, lifetime limits, take a class, and a small tax.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #110 posted 06/11/19 4:28pm

jjhunsecker

avatar

Never said I was good at math....

So we all agree that by the metric being pushed here, almost 68% of the nation voted for Barack Obama... correct?
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #111 posted 06/11/19 4:33pm

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

jjhunsecker said:

Never said I was good at math.... So we all agree that by the metric being pushed here, almost 68% of the nation voted for Barack Obama... correct?

he got 68% of the vote...

No one is coming for your abortion: they just want common-sense abortion regulations: background checks, waiting periods, lifetime limits, take a class, and a small tax.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #112 posted 06/11/19 5:27pm

jjhunsecker

avatar

So now it's "right " and "that is how it works "?
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #113 posted 06/11/19 5:35pm

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

jjhunsecker said:

So now it's "right " and "that is how it works "?

yes now that I corrected your maths we agree he got nearly 68% of the votes cast

No one is coming for your abortion: they just want common-sense abortion regulations: background checks, waiting periods, lifetime limits, take a class, and a small tax.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #114 posted 06/11/19 10:20pm

maplenpg

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:



jjhunsecker said:


Weren't we told earlier in this thread that "the vast majority preferred HIM (Trump) over HER (Clinton)". Then when I mentioned that by THAT specific metric, the vast majority of the nation preferred Obama over McCain in 2008 (with Obama getting approximately 65% of the Electoral College votes), we're told that's "wrong " and "not how it works "..,, Well, which is it ? Or are we witnessing someone talking out of both sides of their mouths?



yeah but it is 67.84386617% not 65%


Never in my wildest dreams did I imagine I'd wake up this morning to find Only arguing that Obama got a higher percentage of votes than JJ stated. I really must be dreaming lol
We are all okay, as long as "we" are the ones living on top of the empire of eternal war. - Jaawwnn
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #115 posted 06/11/19 10:45pm

jjhunsecker

avatar

maplenpg said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:



jjhunsecker said:


Weren't we told earlier in this thread that "the vast majority preferred HIM (Trump) over HER (Clinton)". Then when I mentioned that by THAT specific metric, the vast majority of the nation preferred Obama over McCain in 2008 (with Obama getting approximately 65% of the Electoral College votes), we're told that's "wrong " and "not how it works "..,, Well, which is it ? Or are we witnessing someone talking out of both sides of their mouths?



yeah but it is 67.84386617% not 65%


Never in my wildest dreams did I imagine I'd wake up this morning to find Only arguing that Obama got a higher percentage of votes than JJ stated. I really must be dreaming lol


Well, we're just going by his metric of how we're to count the percentage of votes either candidates have received
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #116 posted 06/11/19 11:41pm

benni

avatar

Let's not forget that there were states that did major voter purges in 2016.

In Wisconsin, President-elect Trump beat Secretary Clinton by roughly 27,000 votes, however according to federal court, 300,000 registered voters lacked the proper photo ID.

Chris Carson, president of the League of Women Voters of the United States:

"We are not talking about vigilante voter intimidation,” said Carson. “We are talking about official, legal voter suppression by state legislatures and election officials.”

Carson pointed especially to the work of Kris Kobach (Republican), the Secretary of State of Kansas, who engaged in a multi-year effort to stop eligible Kansans from voting. Laws drafted by Kobach required restrictive documentary proof of citizenship to register by mail and at the DMV.

Despite defeats in federal and state courts, Kobach still pushed to keep eligible citizens from voting.

“Some try to justify voter suppression as just politics as usual – trying to ensure their candidates will win,” Carson said. “There is no excuse for erecting unnecessary barriers to voting. It is not the American way.”


What states rigged their elections? Here’s the list of 13 states with new voting restrictions in effect in the 2016 election:

1. Alabama saw a new restrictive photo ID requirement in 2016. There is ongoing litigation that could require voters to provide more burdensome documentary proof of citizenship when registering to vote. (Went to Trump)


2. Arizona for the first time had limitations on mail-in ballot collection. This law made it a felony to turn in another voter’s completed ballot. This practice is popular for rural and Native American communities that do not have access to reliable transportation or postal offices. (Went to Trump)


3. Indiana now permits election officers to demand voters provide proof of identification. This law subjects voters to an additional and duplicative voter identification requirement that did not exist before the law was enacted. (Went to Trump)


4. Kansas continued attempts to require documentary proof of citizenship in order to register to vote by mail and at the DMV. Courts overturned these requirements but many voters who tried to register were put on a suspense list. (Went to Trump)


5. Mississippi passed a restrictive photo ID requirement that was allowed to go into effect after the U.S Supreme Court gutted Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act in 2013. (Went to Trump)


6. New Hampshire enacted a new photo ID law, requiring voters without acceptable ID to be photographed at the polls, and the photograph to be affixed to an affidavit. (Went to Clinton)



7. Ohio made cuts to early voting and changed absentee and provisional ballot rules. The Buckeye State also eliminated the period known as “Golden Week”, when voters can register and cast a ballot on the same day. The Secretary of State also purged more than 1 million Ohio voters from the registration rolls. (Went to Trump)



8. Rhode Island voters needed to provide a valid photo ID to vote this year. Voters without ID could only cast provisional ballots. (Went to Clinton)



9. South Carolina for the first time required voters who have photo IDs to produce them in order to vote in this presidential election. Voters without ID needed to sign an affidavit at the polls and could only cast a provisional ballot. (Went to Trump)



10. Tennessee lawmakers made the photo ID law already in place more restrictive by limiting acceptable IDs to only those issued by the state or federal government. The state conducted an illegal purge of voters who hadn’t recently voted. (Went to Trump)



11. Texas instituted one of the most restrictive photo ID laws in the nation, but was blocked in the courts. The state then required voters with ID to produce it, and individuals lacking the official ID could vote only after showing a different form of identification and signing a declaration. (Went to Trump)


12. Virginia limited voter registration by civic organizations and required restrictive photo ID for the first time. (Went to Trump)


13. Wisconsin reduced early voting hours on weekdays and eliminated them entirely on weekends. Voters also were required to show photo IDs for the first time. (Went to Trump)


There is no way to know just how much the purged voter rolls helped Trump (in most states that purge voters, the black community is purged at much higher rates than the white community), nor is there anyway of knowing just how the voter ID laws and difficulties with registering helped Trump. I would say that it helped quite a bit, just as the gerrymandered districts helped the GOP win in 2016.




Edited to Add: So while Trump did win the Electoral votes, it was rigged in his favor, add Russia doing their election interference campaign, and there was no way that Trump was going to lose.

[Edited 6/11/19 23:43pm]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #117 posted 06/12/19 5:54am

poppys

https://www.historycentral.com/elections/Electoralcollgewhy.html

The founding fathers were afraid of direct election to the Presidency. They feared a tyrant could manipulate public opinion and come to power. Hamilton wrote in the Federalist Papers:

It was equally desirable, that the immediate election should be made by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice. A small number of persons, selected by their fellow-citizens from the general mass, will be most likely to possess the information and discernment requisite to such complicated investigations.

It was also peculiarly desirable to afford as little opportunity as possible to tumult and disorder. This evil was not least to be dreaded in the election of a magistrate, who was to have so important an agency in the administration of the government as the President of the United States. But the precautions which have been so happily concerted in the system under consideration, promise an effectual security against this mischief.


What they were afraid of has come to pass. A tyrant has come to power. But not because of the electorate. The "magistrates" elected to decide the election have eroded the "precautions" in the system, created the "tumult and disorder" and elected a lunatic. We would have an actual public servant as a President right now with the popular vote.

politics: the art or science of government.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #118 posted 06/12/19 6:35am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

maplenpg said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

yeah but it is 67.84386617% not 65%

Never in my wildest dreams did I imagine I'd wake up this morning to find Only arguing that Obama got a higher percentage of votes than JJ stated. I really must be dreaming lol

haha

No one is coming for your abortion: they just want common-sense abortion regulations: background checks, waiting periods, lifetime limits, take a class, and a small tax.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #119 posted 06/12/19 10:26am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

I doubt Only even knows what Obama did as President.

All you others say Hell Yea!! woot!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 4 of 7 <1234567>
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Politics & Religion > Can Trump become a holy Reagan-esque right wing Messiah?