DECISION AMERICA 2016: The Election Results Thread

[bsnub]

Personally I wish the country would have remained with the Articles of Confederation.

Yep because times never change. So why is the US constitution the only sacred document? I mean the fucking bible has been revised countless times. Hypocrisy.

[Cujo]

let's all agree that Trump won fair and square, didn't he ?

We won't know until the Dec 19 vote.
At this point it's just assumed.

[koman]

let's all agree that Trump won fair and square, didn't he ?

Absolutely. Fair and square under the rules that have been in place for over two centuries. He did not set the rules; may not even like the rules, but until they are changed that's the way it is, but the whinging and bitching will go on unabated....

Was any of this a burning issue before or during the election?......no...it's only a burning issue now because the sore losers are having tantrums and trashing around like fucking three year olds that have been denied an ice cream cone.

[redhaze]

It was a very big issue in 2000. So big that the supreme court, not the voters, decided who our president would be

[Cujo]

let's all agree that Trump won fair and square, didn't he ?

Absolutely. Fair and square under the rules that have been in place for over two centuries. He did not set the rules; may not even like the rules, but until they are changed that's the way it is, but the whinging and bitching will go on unabated....

Was any of this a burning issue before or during the election?......no...it's only a burning issue now because the sore losers are having tantrums and trashing around like fucking three year olds that have been denied an ice cream cone.

But you're missing the point that the electoral college hasn't actually voted yet.

[bsnub]

Was any of this a burning issue before or during the election?

Yes and this is why you should piss off and not comment on US political threads because you are a clueless fuck and only look ignorant.

California Sen. Barbara Boxer files long shot bill to scrap the Electoral College system - LA Times

This is a long standing issue.

[SKkin]

So why is the US constitution the only sacred document? I mean the fucking bible has been revised countless times. Hypocrisy.

You may not agree with it, but you should check this book out. The author is a Libertarian.

Hologram of Liberty by Kenneth Royce (aka Boston T. Party) at Javelin Press

Hologram of Liberty –The Constitution's Shocking Alliance With Big Government– is a cold splash of water on our civic mythology. Hologram's main contention is that the 1787 Convention, its Constitution and Federal Government was the most brilliant and subtle coup d'etat in political history. While the majority of Americans then were Jeffersonian in nature, a few Hamiltonian Federalists eradicated our Swiss-style Confederation and replaced it with a latent leviathan. The Federal Government was given several escape keys to the putative handcuffing by the Constitution. Using the "necessary and proper" and "general welfare" clauses in conjunction with congressional powers under treaty, interstate commerce, and emergency, the "Founding Lawyers" of 1787 purposely designed a constitutional infrastructure guaranteed to facilitate a future federal colossus. While such a massive government was impossible to erect in the freedom-conscious 1780's, the "virus" of tyranny was cunningly hidden within the Constitution to foment the eventual federal behemoth we are burdened with today. The feds take in a third of economic activity and regulate everything from the price of corn to the size of chimneys and it's all constitutional!" Oh, it's only 'constitutional' because autocratic Supreme Court Justices say it is!," some would reply.

re: "sacred document" That author calls it "parchment worship"

[Storekeeper]

It was a very big issue in 2000. So big that the supreme court, not the voters, decided who our president would be

You don't think comparing 2000 to 2016 is apples and oranges?

IMHO the Florida debacle was just simply outright theft.

[bsnub]

^ Oh course it was and so was this election.

[koman]

Was any of this a burning issue before or during the election?

Yes and this is why you should piss off and not comment on US political threads because you are a clueless fuck and only look ignorant.

California Sen. Barbara Boxer files long shot bill to scrap the Electoral College system - LA Times

This is a long standing issue.

Well. if it's such a hot issue for such a long time, how come nothing has been done to change it? 230 years seems like adequate time to amend a voting process if there is so much discontent with it.

Has there been any comments, or discussion on this in any other currently running thread about the election, about the abolition of the electoral college? I have not seen any until after the election?

I believe "closing the gate after the horse has bolted" has been mentioned however and that seems to cover the situation quite well.

[koman]

let's all agree that Trump won fair and square, didn't he ?

Absolutely. Fair and square under the rules that have been in place for over two centuries. He did not set the rules; may not even like the rules, but until they are changed that's the way it is, but the whinging and bitching will go on unabated....

Was any of this a burning issue before or during the election?......no...it's only a burning issue now because the sore losers are having tantrums and trashing around like fucking three year olds that have been denied an ice cream cone.

But you're missing the point that the electoral college hasn't actually voted yet.

No dog. I have not missed that point at all. The issue here is the validity and/or fairness of this part of the electoral system. Both candidates went to the polls under the same rules. The loser now wishes to change the rules after the game is over.

If it came to pass that the electoral college vote now turned against the winner of the actual election, that. I assume would have to be honored....as that also is part of the system as I understand it.

[buriramboy]

So the libtards want to change the rules as they didn't get the result they wanted. The left really do hate democracy if you don't share their views.

[koman]

It was a very big issue in 2000. So big that the supreme court, not the voters, decided who our president would be

That as I recall, was intervention by the courts in the Florida voting result....and the attending Electoral college vote that would flow from it, so it had nothing to do with changing a whole centuries old voting system. Florida has a big bloc of EC votes and in that case decided the final outcome of the election. Quite different to the current situation.

[Humbert]

The loser now wishes to change the rules after the game is over.

I was not aware that Clinton has asked for the election result to be overturned. Perhaps you could post a link.
What is being proposed is a change for the future not the current election. Misrepresenting the facts as usual koman.

[DrB0b]

Was any of this a burning issue before or during the election?

Yes and this is why you should piss off and not comment on US political threads because you are a clueless fuck and only look ignorant.

California Sen. Barbara Boxer files long shot bill to scrap the Electoral College system - LA Times

This is a long standing issue.

Well. if it's such a hot issue for such a long time, how come nothing has been done to change it? 230 years seems like adequate time to amend a voting process if there is so much discontent with it.

Has there been any comments, or discussion on this in any other currently running thread about the election, about the abolition of the electoral college? I have not seen any until after the election?

I believe "closing the gate after the horse has bolted" has been mentioned however and that seems to cover the situation quite well.

While I agree that it's generally the people who've just lost an election who complain most about the electoral process you're just plain wrong when you say it hasn't changed in 230 years. There have been a number of changes over the years.

While I understand the reasons for the Electoral College system (it's explained in the Federalist Papers) I have to say that they're terrible reasons, the main reason is to ensure that the people don't vote for the wrong man. As James Madison put it, the President should be elected “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” and those men should be members of the Electoral College and not the great unwashed who couldn't be trusted to vote correctly.

It was also designed to prevent something that's endlessly misquoted and misunderstood on TD, the "Tyranny of the Majority".

It's pretty obvious that the Electoral College is not doing very well at either of those functions. I don't think that's really a problem with the EC itself. I think the problem has to do with the way in which Electors/States are apportioned votes. Too much power is given to those states with the greatest number of Congressional representatives, to me that seems a very unbalanced and unfair way of electing one of the few Democratic leaders who still retains almost Monarchical powers.

I see no reason these days why the President can't be directly elected, how that should be done is another issue. To me the EC is an anachronism and serves no positive function any more. In fact, in most recent Elections it's served more to aggravate voters than to ensure the smooth election of a new President.

[SKkin]

I was not aware that Clinton has asked for the election result to be overturned.

The "hail mary" effort to upend the current electoral college vote was proposed by some Republicans is what I got out of it. Somebody posted a link about on one of these threads.

edit: no that's wrong. a democrat is trying to get 37 of his republican colleagues to flip their electoral votes.

It's here:

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/1...p-trump-231350

P. Bret Chiafalo, a Washington State elector who has already declared his opposition to Hillary Clinton, and Micheal Baca of Colorado have launched what they’ve dubbed “Moral Electors,” an attempt to persuade 37 of their Republican colleagues to bail on Trump — just enough to block Trump’s election and leave the final decision to the House of Representatives. They have the support of a third elector, Washington State’s Robert Satiacum.

[RPETER65]

From Donald Trumps own tweets.

Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump The electoral college is a disaster for a democracy.
11:45 AM - 7 Nov 2012


You are one weird fuck Peters you win and keep on bitching....

What exactly have I won, I lost when Rubio went out. No Trump fan here but I do say Trump is the president elect I wish him well and hope he is successful.

[redhaze]

You don't think comparing 2000 to 2016 is apples and oranges?

IMHO the Florida debacle was just simply outright theft.

Its apples to oranges in the sense that Trump won this contest fair and square under the current rules and Bush probably didn't. Oranges to oranges in the sense that the electoral college continues to obstruct democracy and the basic principle of "one man, one vote"

[Cold Pizza]

It would seem to make more sense to me for Electoral votes to be proportional to the actual vote rather than winner takes all.

But that's for the future, the simple fact is that the Trump campaign outsmarted the Clinton one, and that's the end of that.

2 states do this: CO and ME.

I think it's fair if more do it.

[Cold Pizza]

You don't think comparing 2000 to 2016 is apples and oranges?

IMHO the Florida debacle was just simply outright theft.

Its apples to oranges in the sense that Trump won this contest fair and square under the current rules and Bush probably didn't. Oranges to oranges in the sense that the electoral college continues to obstruct democracy and the basic principle of "one man, one vote"

Again, America not designed to be a Pure Democracy like Greece and Rome.

The Founders were influenced by Plato's Republic.

Pure democracy can lead to mob rule.

[redhaze]

I highly doubt the electoral college is preventing mob rule

[Cold Pizza]

It was a very big issue in 2000. So big that the supreme court, not the voters, decided who our president would be

You don't think comparing 2000 to 2016 is apples and oranges?

IMHO the Florida debacle was just simply outright theft.

I'm circumspect about FL in 2000 as well.

Less than 500 votes decided FL.

And the USSC ruling.

There has been and will be corruption, sadly.

I wish Gore would have won. How different history would have been.

We can only speculate.

[Cujo]

let's all agree that Trump won fair and square, didn't he ?

Absolutely. Fair and square under the rules that have been in place for over two centuries. He did not set the rules; may not even like the rules, but until they are changed that's the way it is, but the whinging and bitching will go on unabated....

Was any of this a burning issue before or during the election?......no...it's only a burning issue now because the sore losers are having tantrums and trashing around like fucking three year olds that have been denied an ice cream cone.

But you're missing the point that the electoral college hasn't actually voted yet.

No dog. I have not missed that point at all. The issue here is the validity and/or fairness of this part of the electoral system. Both candidates went to the polls under the same rules. The loser now wishes to change the rules after the game is over.

If it came to pass that the electoral college vote now turned against the winner of the actual election, that. I assume would have to be honored....as that also is part of the system as I understand it.

There isn't a winner of the actual election (except maybe Clinton who got the most votes) untill the electoral college votes. That's my point.

[koman]

The loser now wishes to change the rules after the game is over.

I was not aware that Clinton has asked for the election result to be overturned. Perhaps you could post a link.
What is being proposed is a change for the future not the current election. Misrepresenting the facts as usual koman.

Excuse me, but are you the same Humbert that brought up " Interpretation" a while back? Now you are back at it, showing an almost breathless level of misinterpretation of a simple statement.

Loser....in this case, simply means the losing side, and not the actual candidate although, I suppose it's entirely possible that Clinton herself headed up the tantrum throwing. I did not however suggest anything of the sort in my post, but now that you bring it up......

Any other hairs you wish to split, or straws you wish to clutch? Misrepresenting of facts indeed...

.

[koman]

let's all agree that Trump won fair and square, didn't he ?

Absolutely. Fair and square under the rules that have been in place for over two centuries. He did not set the rules; may not even like the rules, but until they are changed that's the way it is, but the whinging and bitching will go on unabated....

Was any of this a burning issue before or during the election?......no...it's only a burning issue now because the sore losers are having tantrums and trashing around like fucking three year olds that have been denied an ice cream cone.

But you're missing the point that the electoral college hasn't actually voted yet.

No dog. I have not missed that point at all. The issue here is the validity and/or fairness of this part of the electoral system. Both candidates went to the polls under the same rules. The loser now wishes to change the rules after the game is over.

If it came to pass that the electoral college vote now turned against the winner of the actual election, that. I assume would have to be honored....as that also is part of the system as I understand it.

There isn't a winner of the actual election (except maybe Clinton who got the most votes) untill the electoral college votes. That's my point.

Well, OK...I understand your point, but Trump ended up with the most EC votes... and that is how the election is decided; so, unless something quite exceptional happens he will be sworn in as POTUS in January. Once he gets all his opponents rounded up and sent off to the concentration camps, and the wall built, things will settle down....