Clinton will win the popular vote

[TexasTiger 12,897]

1 minute ago, homersapien said:

I missed the part where the founders stressed geologic space as being important.

Maybe we should give Alaskans even more influence than they already have?   

They're yuuuuge!

[TexasTiger 12,897]

6 hours ago, Mikey said:

Not just now. Ever since the Founding Fathers selected this wise method. Apparently even in those days a largely ignorant mass of urban voters were subject to undue influence by a few unscrupulous "leaders". Thus is the superiority of the EC over a simple vote count demonstrated.

Now a large mass of voters are subject to undue influence by dishonest propaganda machine in cahoots with the Russians-- modern day useful idiots rule!

[homersapien 11,379]

10 hours ago, Mikey said:

They obviously didn't. The stats and the above map indicate how well the EC worked. The vast majority of the nation did not want Clinton to be president. Thanks to the EC, a handful of high population areas whose voters are heavily influenced by preachers and ward clerks were not allowed to dictate to the rest of us.

Thanks to the Columbus, Ohio Dispatch here are updated numbers: Clinton carried 487 counties, 15.5% of the total 3,143.

Excuse me, but Clinton got way more votes than Trump.

Ya'll are a hoot!

[homersapien 11,379]

23 hours ago, AURaptor said:

To say anything contrarian to the Leftists is to be branded a liar. And a racist. Misogynist, Bigot... there is no allowable dissent. You will be shamed into agreeing 

Quit whining and brush up on the rules of logic.  You're pitiful.

[TexasTiger 12,897]

23 hours ago, AURaptor said:

To say anything contrarian to the Leftists is to be branded a liar. And a racist. Misogynist, Bigot... there is no allowable dissent. You will be shamed into agreeing 

You've earned the right to be called all those things on your own, so don't you let anyone else take credit you richly deserve.

[homersapien 11,379]

22 hours ago, SaltyTiger said:

You forgot stupid and ignorant. We are all ignorant because we do not subscribe to the Huffington Post

Stupid and ignorant is as stupid and ignorant does.

Defend your posts or attack mine.  Just stop with the whining.

[homersapien 11,379]

7 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Now a large mass of voters are subject to undue influence by dishonest propaganda machine in cahoots with the Russians-- modern day useful idiots rule!

Mmmmm, the exact sort of thing the EC was designed to prevent.

I would love for them to vote their own conscience, just like the constitution proscribed.  After all, if the purpose was to protect us from "mob rule", shouldn't they have a completely free hand to do that?

[TexasTiger 12,897]

Just now, homersapien said:

Mmmmm, the exact sort of thing the EC was designed to prevent.

I would love for them to vote their own conscience, just like the constitution proscribed.  After all, if the purpose was to protect us from "mob rule", shouldn't they have a completely free hand to do that?

That was the original plan-- heads would explode from all the folks loving them some EC if it functioned as the founders in their wisdom intended. Sad!

[SaltyTiger 7,812]

49 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Stupid and ignorant is as stupid and ignorant does.

Defend your posts or attack mine.  Just stop with the whining.

Boo Hoo Hoo - Go help with recount Homie... or was it stopped? been busy today - thought I saw something

[AURaptor 1,125]

2 hours ago, homersapien said:

Quit whining and brush up on the rules of logic.  You're pitiful.

Quit falsely accusing those with whom you disagree. 

[homersapien 11,379]

16 hours ago, AURaptor said:

Quit falsely accusing those with whom you disagree. 

You mean accusing you of being whiney and illogical?    

Then stop whining and start studying.

[Mikey 16,605]

On 12/8/2016 at 2:39 PM, homersapien said:

Excuse me, but Clinton got way more votes than Trump.

Ya'll are a hoot!

Please try to keep up. That fact was known and accepted from the get-go in this thread. There are a number of posts upthread as to why we should all be glad that the EC foiled the ward clerks, preachers and other urban gangsters that force their followers to vote for the Democrat every time. What the EC did was keep such "leaders" from having a couple thousand votes each. America won!

[icanthearyou 4,463]

36 minutes ago, Mikey said:

Please try to keep up. That fact was known and accepted from the get-go in this thread. There are a number of posts upthread as to why we should all be glad that the EC foiled the ward clerks, preachers and other urban gangsters that force their followers to vote for the Democrat every time. What the EC did was keep such "leaders" from having a couple thousand votes each. America won!

Force?  How do they do that?  

Funny, my preacher stands up on Sunday before the election and says, "Christians have to vote Republican".  Odd isn't it?

[AURaptor 1,125]

22 hours ago, homersapien said:

You mean accusing you of being whiney and illogical?    

Then stop whining and start studying.

If you were accused of being ...oh, kicking dogs and kittens, and then objected to such a charge, would you be 'whining' ? 

And what do you think I need to study up on ? Truly ironic for you to say. 

[quietfan 233]

Can't believe this thread is still going on.   Can't believe the same points are being rehashed over and over with very little new ideas since the first 4-5 pages.  But I guess I'll continue playing by repeating myself as well:

Trump won by the current rules of the game and therefore should and will be sworn in in January as the legitimately elected President.  But we may certainly change the rules of the game for the future if we (or 3/4ths of the states) want to.  

Trump was not the choice of the majority of voters.  (Neither was Hillary, but she got more votes than Donald.)  While legally a candidate need only win a majority of the Electoral Vote, I believe morally/ethically a President should be guided by the will of the People, specifically the will of the greater portion of the People, while accepting that the Constitution guarantees protection of fundamental rights and liberties to all, including minorities.  The greater portion of the voters preferred Clinton to Trump.

The Founding Fathers never claimed to be infallible, but rather included the amendment process in the Constitution because they knew: 1. They could be wrong or mistaken, and 2. They knew the needs and best interests of the nation could change in ways they could not foresee. Ergo, I don't really care about arguments based on perceptions of Founding Father intent almost 250 years after the fact. We should judge our Constitution and any need for amendment based on how it's working for us today, not what the writers may or may not have thought in the 1780's.

Counties are irrelevant to the process and never mentioned in the Constitution.  Land area is irrelevant to the process and never mentioned in the Constitution.  So any arguments based on land area or counties are red herrings irrelevant to the discussion.  Besides, I have no idea what a plot of dirt in Alaska, Alabama, or California thinks about the candidates although I'm pretty sure that land does not think or have an opinion, period!  And if counties matter, let's just amend the Constitution to let the chief executive or probate judge of each county choose our President and save most of us the cost and agony of a national election.  (Of course, such an amendment would need to prevent states from simply subdividing themselves into a myriad tiny counties for greater political influence.)

 

Finally, accusations of voter fraud are meaningless without cold hard evidence.  An ability to commit fraud, or a personal bias/belief that "libs" or minorities must have committed fraud, is insufficient evidence to make such an argument.

 

[AURaptor 1,125]

10 minutes ago, quietfan said:

Finally, accusations of voter fraud are meaningless without cold hard evidence.  

" Do you actually think I made a mistake, or do you just wish I did ? " - Dr.  Bob, Scrubs 

Per the recount, this action is entirely politically driven.  Offering no evidence, what so ever, just the hypothetical possibility, in some specific instances, should have never been enough to warrant the recount, no matter how much $ is raised, or how much noise is generated by the likes of Stein and Co. 

 

[TheBlueVue 177]

On 12/8/2016 at 2:38 PM, TexasTiger said:

Now a large mass of voters are subject to undue influence by dishonest propaganda machine in cahoots with the Russians-- modern day useful idiots rule!

Actually, I'd say the REAL useful idiots are the ones buying the story that the Russians influenced the election.You people fielded the worst nominee EVER and she lost. Get over it.

[homersapien 11,379]

5 hours ago, Mikey said:

Please try to keep up. That fact was known and accepted from the get-go in this thread. There are a number of posts upthread as to why we should all be glad that the EC foiled the ward clerks, preachers and other urban gangsters that force their followers to vote for the Democrat every time. What the EC did was keep such "leaders" from having a couple thousand votes each. America won!

"The EC foiled the ward clerks, preachers and other urban gangsters that force their followers to vote for the Democrat every time."

That's too demented to even merit ridicule.  It speaks for itself.

Such insane comments don't reflect very well on what passes for conservative voices on this forum.

Between you, Raptor, Blue and a few others, this place is starting to sound like an insane asylum.

[homersapien 11,379]

3 hours ago, TheBlueVue said:

Actually, I'd say the REAL useful idiots are the ones buying the story that the Russians influenced the election.You people fielded the worst nominee EVER and she lost. Get over it.

Do you think Hillary invented this story?

If you don't like something, just disbelieve it, even if it true.

We have truly entered a "fact-free" era of public thinking. I fear for our country.

[homersapien 11,379]

3 hours ago, AURaptor said:

" Do you actually think I made a mistake, or do you just wish I did ? " - Dr.  Bob, Scrubs 

Per the recount, this action is entirely politically driven.  Offering no evidence, what so ever, just the hypothetical possibility, in some specific instances, should have never been enough to warrant the recount, no matter how much $ is raised, or how much noise is generated by the likes of Stein and Co. 

 

Just because you haven't seen the evidence doesn't mean the CIA doesn't have evidence.  

(Hint: it's unlikely the CIA are going to share detailed evidence on this with you or anyone else.)

And this is not politically driven.  In case you didn't know, it's the CIA's job to uncover such activities committed by foreign companies.

[TexasTiger 12,897]

5 hours ago, Mikey said:

Please try to keep up. That fact was known and accepted from the get-go in this thread. There are a number of posts upthread as to why we should all be glad that the EC foiled the ward clerks, preachers and other urban gangsters that force their followers to vote for the Democrat every time. What the EC did was keep such "leaders" from having a couple thousand votes each. America won!

You have an extremely warped view. Your extreme prejudice is showing.

[homersapien 11,379]

4 hours ago, quietfan said:

Can't believe this thread is still going on.   Can't believe the same points are being rehashed over and over with very little new ideas since the first 4-5 pages.  But I guess I'll continue playing by repeating myself as well:

Trump won by the current rules of the game and therefore should and will be sworn in in January as the legitimately elected President.  But we may certainly change the rules of the game for the future if we (or 3/4ths of the states) want to.  

Trump was not the choice of the majority of voters.  (Neither was Hillary, but she got more votes than Donald.)  While legally a candidate need only win a majority of the Electoral Vote, I believe morally/ethically a President should be guided by the will of the People, specifically the will of the greater portion of the People, while accepting that the Constitution guarantees protection of fundamental rights and liberties to all, including minorities.  The greater portion of the voters preferred Clinton to Trump.

The Founding Fathers never claimed to be infallible, but rather included the amendment process in the Constitution because they knew: 1. They could be wrong or mistaken, and 2. They knew the needs and best interests of the nation could change in ways they could not foresee. Ergo, I don't really care about arguments based on perceptions of Founding Father intent almost 250 years after the fact. We should judge our Constitution and any need for amendment based on how it's working for us today, not what the writers may or may not have thought in the 1780's.

Counties are irrelevant to the process and never mentioned in the Constitution.  Land area is irrelevant to the process and never mentioned in the Constitution.  So any arguments based on land area or counties are red herrings irrelevant to the discussion.  Besides, I have no idea what a plot of dirt in Alaska, Alabama, or California thinks about the candidates although I'm pretty sure that land does not think or have an opinion, period!  And if counties matter, let's just amend the Constitution to let the chief executive or probate judge of each county choose our President and save most of us the cost and agony of a national election.  (Of course, such an amendment would need to prevent states from simply subdividing themselves into a myriad tiny counties for greater political influence.)

 

Finally, accusations of voter fraud are meaningless without cold hard evidence.  An ability to commit fraud, or a personal bias/belief that "libs" or minorities must have committed fraud, is insufficient evidence to make such an argument.

 

Excellent post.  Too measured and reasoned to impact the folks you addressed it to though.

Mikey's rebuttal would be:  

"The EC foiled the ward clerks, preachers and other urban gangsters that force their followers to vote for the Democrat every time."

And you have to admit, you can't argue with that.

[quietfan 233]

2 hours ago, homersapien said:

And you have to admit, you can't argue with that.

Whether or not I can argue with any given thought in these forums, I certainly realize that it's a largely a waste of time to do so.  

 Yet foolishly I keep coming back.  I must be more of a masochist that I previously believed.  

[homersapien 11,379]

10 minutes ago, quietfan said:

Whether or not I can argue with any given thought in these forums, I certainly realize that it's a largely a waste of time to do so.  

 Yet foolishly I keep coming back.  I must be more of a masochist that I previously believed.  

To participate on this forum means you are foolish, by definition.  But at least you are self-aware of it which is more than a lot of the participates can say.

So don't get down on yourself. Like me, you just need a real life I suppose.  

[TheBlueVue 177]

8 hours ago, icanthearyou said:

Force?  How do they do that?  

Funny, my preacher stands up on Sunday before the election and says, "Christians have to vote Republican".  Odd isn't it?

Did he drive a bus to pick up every person in the congregation and take them to vote republican? A lot do just that but Im sure you';ll argue that's not true.