The following quote is from Putin. He basically says the Left/Dems need to learn how to lose with grace, dignity and class. The Left/Dems don't possess any of the three. Witness the board.
The Democratic Party lost not only the presidential election, but also elections in the Congress, where the Republicans now have a majority. Was that my doing too?” the Russian president asked. “Everything points to systematic problems in the current administration.”
0
The following quote is from Putin. He basically says the Left/Dems need to learn how to lose with grace, dignity and class. The Left/Dems don't possess any of the three. Witness the board.
The Democratic Party lost not only the presidential election, but also elections in the Congress, where the Republicans now have a majority. Was that my doing too?” the Russian president asked. “Everything points to systematic problems in the current administration.”
I can't believe you're still crying Wall over the EC.
A grown man doesn't act this way Wall.
The EC needs to be adjusted no question in my mind, and even more so when Gore won the popular and lost the EC.
I was not and am not pro-Clinton, not remotely. But how can either of you support a system that elects someone who lost STRONGLY from the popular vote? I dont think the founding fathers would support a system that throws out the popular vote due to political strategy and in the process promotes vote negating.
Wasnt part of the reason the original settlers came was to gain freedoms of choice and free elections that the popular vote counted and citizens had the final say on who was elected?
If you want to support the EC then it needs to be properly weighted per the population...so I know the hated California would be heavier weighted as it SHOULD, that is where the population exists. The same as Texas and Arizona are weighted towards republican candidates..and so they should have the same EC numbers as their population supports relative to the national total.
So I dont see how the scare tactic of all the things Tilt mentioned are legitimate, I do not agree with the Kennedy-esque tactics nor that they work. I would appreciate some concrete national recent examples to support the extremes you are suggesting.
0
Quote Originally Posted by 165yds:
I can't believe you're still crying Wall over the EC.
A grown man doesn't act this way Wall.
The EC needs to be adjusted no question in my mind, and even more so when Gore won the popular and lost the EC.
I was not and am not pro-Clinton, not remotely. But how can either of you support a system that elects someone who lost STRONGLY from the popular vote? I dont think the founding fathers would support a system that throws out the popular vote due to political strategy and in the process promotes vote negating.
Wasnt part of the reason the original settlers came was to gain freedoms of choice and free elections that the popular vote counted and citizens had the final say on who was elected?
If you want to support the EC then it needs to be properly weighted per the population...so I know the hated California would be heavier weighted as it SHOULD, that is where the population exists. The same as Texas and Arizona are weighted towards republican candidates..and so they should have the same EC numbers as their population supports relative to the national total.
So I dont see how the scare tactic of all the things Tilt mentioned are legitimate, I do not agree with the Kennedy-esque tactics nor that they work. I would appreciate some concrete national recent examples to support the extremes you are suggesting.
I don't expect anyone in this thread to be persuaded by anything anyone else has to say, but I will, nevertheless, offer my view, best expressed by Michael Barone of the (admittedly conservative) Almanac of American Politics:
" Don't get strung out on process arguments--for example, the recent brouhaha about the Electoral College. Everyone knows that if Trump had a plurality in the popular vote and Clinton a majority of electoral votes, Democrats would have argued that Democratic electors should vote for her. It's an illustration of one of my long-standing rules of politics: All process arguments are insincere. "
0
I don't expect anyone in this thread to be persuaded by anything anyone else has to say, but I will, nevertheless, offer my view, best expressed by Michael Barone of the (admittedly conservative) Almanac of American Politics:
" Don't get strung out on process arguments--for example, the recent brouhaha about the Electoral College. Everyone knows that if Trump had a plurality in the popular vote and Clinton a majority of electoral votes, Democrats would have argued that Democratic electors should vote for her. It's an illustration of one of my long-standing rules of politics: All process arguments are insincere. "
I don't expect anyone in this thread to be persuaded by anything anyone else has to say, but I will, nevertheless, offer my view, best expressed by Michael Barone of the (admittedly conservative) Almanac of American Politics:
" Don't get strung out on process arguments--for example, the recent brouhaha about the Electoral College. Everyone knows that if Trump had a plurality in the popular vote and Clinton a majority of electoral votes, Democrats would have argued that Democratic electors should vote for her. It's an illustration of one of my long-standing rules of politics: All process arguments are insincere. "
bigreds daddy
0
Quote Originally Posted by 1129ken:
I don't expect anyone in this thread to be persuaded by anything anyone else has to say, but I will, nevertheless, offer my view, best expressed by Michael Barone of the (admittedly conservative) Almanac of American Politics:
" Don't get strung out on process arguments--for example, the recent brouhaha about the Electoral College. Everyone knows that if Trump had a plurality in the popular vote and Clinton a majority of electoral votes, Democrats would have argued that Democratic electors should vote for her. It's an illustration of one of my long-standing rules of politics: All process arguments are insincere. "
One of the problems with a popular vote is that one side is grossly manipulating it through questionable registrations and widely distributed false information.
No need to include specifics, one side will never agree to what I just wrote, and the other side will buy it whole heartedly.
Such is the state of US politics
bigreds daddy
0
One of the problems with a popular vote is that one side is grossly manipulating it through questionable registrations and widely distributed false information.
No need to include specifics, one side will never agree to what I just wrote, and the other side will buy it whole heartedly.
I don't expect anyone in this thread to be persuaded by anything anyone else has to say, but I will, nevertheless, offer my view, best expressed by Michael Barone of the (admittedly conservative) Almanac of American Politics:
" Don't get strung out on process arguments--for example, the recent brouhaha about the Electoral College. Everyone knows that if Trump had a plurality in the popular vote and Clinton a majority of electoral votes, Democrats would have argued that Democratic electors should vote for her. It's an illustration of one of my long-standing rules of politics: All process arguments are insincere. "
That is wrong and pure speculation but what is a FACT is Trump loaded the EC gun well before the election was even held...he for SURE would have been tweeting even more maniacal than he does now and I am 100% positive the repubs would be b!tching up a storm for 4 years even more than the dems are...no question in my mind.
0
Quote Originally Posted by 1129ken:
I don't expect anyone in this thread to be persuaded by anything anyone else has to say, but I will, nevertheless, offer my view, best expressed by Michael Barone of the (admittedly conservative) Almanac of American Politics:
" Don't get strung out on process arguments--for example, the recent brouhaha about the Electoral College. Everyone knows that if Trump had a plurality in the popular vote and Clinton a majority of electoral votes, Democrats would have argued that Democratic electors should vote for her. It's an illustration of one of my long-standing rules of politics: All process arguments are insincere. "
That is wrong and pure speculation but what is a FACT is Trump loaded the EC gun well before the election was even held...he for SURE would have been tweeting even more maniacal than he does now and I am 100% positive the repubs would be b!tching up a storm for 4 years even more than the dems are...no question in my mind.
That is wrong and pure speculation but what is a FACT is Trump loaded the EC gun well before the election was even held...he for SURE would have been tweeting even more maniacal than he does now and I am 100% positive the repubs would be b!tching up a storm for 4 years even more than the dems are...no question in my mind.
Call it speculation, call it whatever you want. I offered it as my "view" , nothing more. You disagree. I get it.
0
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
That is wrong and pure speculation but what is a FACT is Trump loaded the EC gun well before the election was even held...he for SURE would have been tweeting even more maniacal than he does now and I am 100% positive the repubs would be b!tching up a storm for 4 years even more than the dems are...no question in my mind.
Call it speculation, call it whatever you want. I offered it as my "view" , nothing more. You disagree. I get it.
Call it speculation, call it whatever you want. I offered it as my "view" , nothing more. You disagree. I get it.
Dont throw partisan digs and expect nothing in reply...Trump was whining about this WELL before the election, I dont think your biased message is accurate.
Sure the dems are upset, you are correct about that...but how can you deny the opposite? Repubs and Trump himself were lubing up the machine before the election was held...that is a fact.
0
Quote Originally Posted by 1129ken:
Call it speculation, call it whatever you want. I offered it as my "view" , nothing more. You disagree. I get it.
Dont throw partisan digs and expect nothing in reply...Trump was whining about this WELL before the election, I dont think your biased message is accurate.
Sure the dems are upset, you are correct about that...but how can you deny the opposite? Repubs and Trump himself were lubing up the machine before the election was held...that is a fact.
My examples were not extreme at all. They are right there in front of us to see. I'm sorry, but you are too partisan I believe if you can't see what i'm talking about. Albeit right now its on a smaller scale, the past 8 years were a glimpse in our future. Government control and intervention everywhere, and the populace's acquiescence as long as they aren't starving and got smart phones and big screens.
It's always partisan ship that blinds people to whats really going on.
The Trump era will just be temporary road block on the road to total Plutocrat control. Don't worry, what you think you want, you will get eventually, and I promise you won't like it. Open borders will be the way of the world. And for the first time in human history the community will not have a say on who they let in to it. Think about that for awhile. Since the dawn of man, we've had a choice who to let in to our communities. Thats rapidly going away forever.
I know you dislike Hillary. I fully get that and have never doubted that.
Hasn't society already decided on the big issues Dems love to champion? Racial Equity, Gaay Rights, and others that escape me right now. the big things that matter. These things have been deciced and the right side has won. What matters now is how to give people oppurtunity, which ultimately leads to quality of life.
The current incarnation of the democrat party offers only subsistence, sustained by perpetual grievance. No inspiration, or motivation for people to make better choices, and better there life. Eat, breathe, sleep, procreate, do whatever feels good and we'll take care of you, just well enough to keep you distracted from what's really going on and where it all leads in the end.
Ultimately they offer no hope, which leads to misery. People need a reason to live.
It's pure human nature. The struggle for power is as base an instinct as reproduction is in the mammal world. That's why allowing mob rule would be a disaster in the long run. It wouldn't start out so bad, but it will always lead to that. Know your species. And wisdom will follow.
Trump's win was a fluke in a lot of ways. people should understand that as well
NY and Cali give the dems a mortal lock on 86 votes btw as well
0
My examples were not extreme at all. They are right there in front of us to see. I'm sorry, but you are too partisan I believe if you can't see what i'm talking about. Albeit right now its on a smaller scale, the past 8 years were a glimpse in our future. Government control and intervention everywhere, and the populace's acquiescence as long as they aren't starving and got smart phones and big screens.
It's always partisan ship that blinds people to whats really going on.
The Trump era will just be temporary road block on the road to total Plutocrat control. Don't worry, what you think you want, you will get eventually, and I promise you won't like it. Open borders will be the way of the world. And for the first time in human history the community will not have a say on who they let in to it. Think about that for awhile. Since the dawn of man, we've had a choice who to let in to our communities. Thats rapidly going away forever.
I know you dislike Hillary. I fully get that and have never doubted that.
Hasn't society already decided on the big issues Dems love to champion? Racial Equity, Gaay Rights, and others that escape me right now. the big things that matter. These things have been deciced and the right side has won. What matters now is how to give people oppurtunity, which ultimately leads to quality of life.
The current incarnation of the democrat party offers only subsistence, sustained by perpetual grievance. No inspiration, or motivation for people to make better choices, and better there life. Eat, breathe, sleep, procreate, do whatever feels good and we'll take care of you, just well enough to keep you distracted from what's really going on and where it all leads in the end.
Ultimately they offer no hope, which leads to misery. People need a reason to live.
It's pure human nature. The struggle for power is as base an instinct as reproduction is in the mammal world. That's why allowing mob rule would be a disaster in the long run. It wouldn't start out so bad, but it will always lead to that. Know your species. And wisdom will follow.
Trump's win was a fluke in a lot of ways. people should understand that as well
NY and Cali give the dems a mortal lock on 86 votes btw as well
Dont throw partisan digs and expect nothing in reply...Trump was whining about this WELL before the election, I dont think your biased message is accurate.
Sure the dems are upset, you are correct about that...but how can you deny the opposite? Repubs and Trump himself were lubing up the machine before the election was held...that is a fact.
Noted.
0
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
Dont throw partisan digs and expect nothing in reply...Trump was whining about this WELL before the election, I dont think your biased message is accurate.
Sure the dems are upset, you are correct about that...but how can you deny the opposite? Repubs and Trump himself were lubing up the machine before the election was held...that is a fact.
Dont throw partisan digs and expect nothing in reply...Trump was whining about this WELL before the election, I dont think your biased message is accurate.
Sure the dems are upset, you are correct about that...but how can you deny the opposite? Repubs and Trump himself were lubing up the machine before the election was held...that is a fact.
One HUGE difference though, the media coverage was insanely biased the entire election, they were in the bag the whole game for HRC. a demonstrable fact you can't deny and expect to be taken seriously...Trump's reaction was only as predictable as you calling things you're reluctant to see extreme.
Also, do you remember in the last debate when they asked him if he would concede right away if he lost?
Do you want to try take a shot at the motive behind that question?
Remember, this was in the midst of Trump has no chance, will lose in a landslide days, and alleged 10 pt deficits in polls. And after the disgusting tape was leaked. You were also in that squad saying he had no chance might i remind you...
I'll let you take a shot at that question before I go further
0
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:
Dont throw partisan digs and expect nothing in reply...Trump was whining about this WELL before the election, I dont think your biased message is accurate.
Sure the dems are upset, you are correct about that...but how can you deny the opposite? Repubs and Trump himself were lubing up the machine before the election was held...that is a fact.
One HUGE difference though, the media coverage was insanely biased the entire election, they were in the bag the whole game for HRC. a demonstrable fact you can't deny and expect to be taken seriously...Trump's reaction was only as predictable as you calling things you're reluctant to see extreme.
Also, do you remember in the last debate when they asked him if he would concede right away if he lost?
Do you want to try take a shot at the motive behind that question?
Remember, this was in the midst of Trump has no chance, will lose in a landslide days, and alleged 10 pt deficits in polls. And after the disgusting tape was leaked. You were also in that squad saying he had no chance might i remind you...
I'll let you take a shot at that question before I go further
No question the media was slanted against him...to me that isnt the issue, the issue is WHY were they slanted that way?
The guy makes enemies with so many people, he is an offensive, male chauv jerk and if you dont know that I am not sure if you have been paying attention for 20 yrs. He is on video making a massive fool of himself over and over and over. It is no wonder the media was against him, he is a total jerk. I think the media is used to candidates with experience and a certain level of diplomacy and class..he has none of this.
As a citizen his classlessness makes me completely unable to support him and I wont. How he ridicules people left and right, I dont tolerate that in any aspect of my life, and I wont look the other way for this fraud either.
So yeah we can agree that the media was against him, but my contention is he deserved every bit of this and more. It is quite telling how such a large voting group could ignore the repeated and disgusting way he treats others and still vote for him. As you know I dont care for Clinton in ANY way, going back to Bill in office I know she is very underhanded and devious...I know that and STILL I would rather have her as president than Trump.
0
Tilt,
No question the media was slanted against him...to me that isnt the issue, the issue is WHY were they slanted that way?
The guy makes enemies with so many people, he is an offensive, male chauv jerk and if you dont know that I am not sure if you have been paying attention for 20 yrs. He is on video making a massive fool of himself over and over and over. It is no wonder the media was against him, he is a total jerk. I think the media is used to candidates with experience and a certain level of diplomacy and class..he has none of this.
As a citizen his classlessness makes me completely unable to support him and I wont. How he ridicules people left and right, I dont tolerate that in any aspect of my life, and I wont look the other way for this fraud either.
So yeah we can agree that the media was against him, but my contention is he deserved every bit of this and more. It is quite telling how such a large voting group could ignore the repeated and disgusting way he treats others and still vote for him. As you know I dont care for Clinton in ANY way, going back to Bill in office I know she is very underhanded and devious...I know that and STILL I would rather have her as president than Trump.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Hot Forum Topics
