I'm about tired of Soros dicking around with US politics and protests.
Evidence? You don't need no steenking evidence, right?
Sorry Jhhnn, I'm marginalizing you, enjoy the next 4 maybe 8 years.
Actually, none of the people covering the election did anything correct. Trump assumed he is the elected president. The media as always followed the norm, by assuming. Rodham-Clinton conceded to Trump's victory, by assuming he has won.It would be nice if Obama or Clinton stepped forward and explained to the protestors how elections work. Great opportunity for a Sanders protege to step forward and demonstrate some real leadership in channeling this emotion into something productive for the midterms and beyond.
Can't believe all the people that are suffering from " Trump Acceptance Resistance Disorder"
or TARD
Popular vote is irrelevant. Trump won the electoral college which is how we elect Presidents. Doing an electoral college flanking maneuver would do more to destoy this country than Trump ever could.Actually, none of the people covering the election did anything correct. Trump assumed he is the elected president. The media as always followed the norm, by assuming. Rodham-Clinton conceded to Trump's victory, by assuming he has won.
The people who determine the election is not the people. It is the electors who are free agents by constitutional rights. Yes, they do mostly always vote the line. There duty is however to select the candidate with the most merit. This time however we have two majority candidates, not a single minor candidate won popular vote. One with not a single drop of merit and basically won by testing radical nationalist policies realtime. The other with so much merit that its a joke to even compare.
He hasn't won the electoral college. The college votes by electors in December 19th, and then has the vote counted by the senate in January 7th.Popular vote is irrelevant. Trump won the electoral college which is how we elect Presidents. Doing an electoral college flanking maneuver would do more to destoy this country than Trump ever could.
Can't believe all the people that are suffering from " Trump Acceptance Resistance Disorder"
or TARD
Keep on dreaming, the Electoral College is going to vote per the results and Trump will become PresidentHe hasn't won the electoral college. The college votes by electors in December 19th, and then has the vote counted by the senate in January 7th.
The electors base their decision by a bias created from Hamilton's Fear. That the popular vote is easily susceptible to someone without merit. Thus, America needs a balance and check to who gets elected.
Popular vote is irrelevant. Trump won the electoral college which is how we elect Presidents. Doing an electoral college flanking maneuver would do more to destoy this country than Trump ever could.
This is Trump we're talking about. If Trump was the only person in America who voted for Trump, Trump would still declare a mandate to do whatever he wanted. Four or five months into his presidency it might occur to him that his wife didn't vote for him.It's irrelevant as to who won, no doubt. OTOH, it should be relevant to the winner's attitude about their "mandate" & governance.
Agreed. My expectation is that the Republicans are humble in their approach and don't over reach under a false premise of having a mandate, because they don't have one.It's irrelevant as to who won, no doubt. OTOH, it should be relevant to the winner's attitude about their "mandate" & governance.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absentee_ballot#/media/File:Early_voting_US_states.svgThe numbers that came out on Election Night were enough to secure Trump the presidency, but they weren’t complete. State officials are still counting millions of provisional and absentee ballots, and within two weeks, Clinton will likely have another few million votes in the bank.
Most were cast in the Clinton-leaning states of California, Washington, and New York—not swing states—so they won’t change the Electoral College. But there’s a sufficient amount to put her within striking distance of Obama’s 2012 turnout, and help put an end to the argument that she simply didn’t work hard enough.
“We probably have about 7 million votes left to count,” said David Wasserman, an editor at Cook Political Report who is tracking turnout. “A majority of them are on the coasts, in New York, California, and Washington. She should be able to win those votes, probably 2-1.” By mid-December, when the Electoral College officially casts its ballots, Wasserman estimates that Clinton could be ahead by 2 percentage points in the popular vote.
But there’s a sufficient amount to put her within striking distance of Obama’s 2012 turnout, and help put an end to the argument that she simply didn’t work hard enough.
Agreed. My expectation is that the Republicans are humble in their approach and don't over reach under a false premise of having a mandate, because they don't have one.
Suppression didnt seem to be an issue with Obama, and McCain and Romney were infinitely better candidates than TrumpWhen was the last time that was true?
They don't seem to have problems w/ voter suppression at all, employing means both subtle and obvious. Trump won basically because they managed to suppress turnout with the whole "Can't trust Hillary!" routine, not because anything else really changed.
Hell- this is from 36 years ago-
Paul Weyrich - Goo-Goo Syndrome (proper audio/video synchronization) - YouTube
Doesn't look like anything has changed there, either.
The voter suppression enactment was after both of those elections. Particularly making success in the 2014 season, thus allowing some to rig/sabotage the election of 2016.Suppression didnt seem to be an issue with Obama, and McCain and Romney were infinitely better candidates than Trump
Suppression didnt seem to be an issue with Obama, and McCain and Romney were infinitely better candidates than Trump