Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ACG official US election thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
    Clinton won more voters.

    Trump won the right voters.

    If anything, his victory in the Electoral College is a check for him by demonstrating he (or more likely his people) were more than capable of understanding political reality and knew where to focus their efforts.
    The number of Clinton votes not cast by felons, illegals, dead people, and general ballot-box-stuffing is unclear.

    Therefore Trump won both the right-thinking, and greater number of voters.
    Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
      The number of Clinton votes not cast by felons, illegals, dead people, and general ballot-box-stuffing is unclear.

      Therefore Trump won both the right-thinking, and greater number of voters.
      Hillary won Virginia with the felon vote, 60,000.

      Popular vote don't mean squat, that is why with have the EC system, so that any one certain region cannot dominate an election.

      She won the popular vote by 200,000. Most of her votes came from states that were not in play. She won California by 2.5 million and New York by 1.5 million.
      Last edited by Salinator; 10 Nov 16, 22:27.
      Flag: USA / Location: West Coast

      Prayers.

      BoRG

      http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/8757/snap1ws8.jpg

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PtsX_Z3CMU

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Salinator View Post
        Hillary won Virginia with the felon vote, 60,000.

        Well, what would you expect? They have a lot in common with her.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Salinator View Post
          She won the popular vote by 200,000. Most of her votes came from states that were not in play. She won California by 2.5 million and New York by 1.5 million.
          Not so fast Sal, they won't be finished counting for a couple of weeks yet.
          Here is a Map of votes in the US by County.
          Trying hard to be the Man, that my Dog believes I am!

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Trung Si View Post
            Not so fast Sal, they won't be finished counting for a couple of weeks yet.
            Here is a Map of votes in the US by County.
            The point is that popular vote don't mean squat because we are a constitutional republic and not a direct democracy. Democracy is nothing more than mob rule.

            The Electoral College was designed to prevent powerful states or regions from dominating national elections. If we go with popular vote, California and New York will decide every national election.

            Besides for the 4 million dead but registered Democrat voters.
            Not to mention the illegals.
            Flag: USA / Location: West Coast

            Prayers.

            BoRG

            http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/8757/snap1ws8.jpg

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PtsX_Z3CMU

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Salinator View Post
              The point is that popular vote don't mean squat because we are a constitutional republic and not a direct democracy. Democracy is nothing more than mob rule.
              No single poster her has ever actually explained that line of reasoning to me. It's repeated like a religious mantra, but nobody ever seems willing to explain how having the mob choose representatives to do their bidding is any different than the mob just choosing for themselves, when the outcome (the mob getting their way) is still the same.

              The Electoral College was designed to prevent powerful states or regions from dominating national elections. If we go with popular vote, California and New York will decide every national election.
              Indeed. It is electoral socialism: taking political power away from the haves to endowed those states too lazy or incompetent to increase their own populations enough to compete legitimately. That is why a Texan's vote is worth less than an Alaskan's vote: it's a redistribution of political power in the name of "fairness" for a minority.
              Last edited by Daemon of Decay; 10 Nov 16, 22:57.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
                Indeed. It is electoral socialism: taking political power away from the haves to endowed those states too lazy or incompetent to increase their own populations enough to compete legitimately.

                That is why a Texan's vote is worth less than an Alaskan's vote: it's a redistribution of political power in the name of fairness.
                It is a balance of power. No different than Rhode Island having the same amount of senators as California.
                Flag: USA / Location: West Coast

                Prayers.

                BoRG

                http://img204.imageshack.us/img204/8757/snap1ws8.jpg

                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PtsX_Z3CMU

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Salinator View Post
                  It is a balance of power. No different than Rhode Island having the same amount of senators as California.
                  Socialism is about a balance of power through wealth redistribution. Same basic principles: taking from the powerful, the haves, the successful, and giving to the weak, the feeble, and the have nots, to ensure the balance of favor more fairly tilts toward the have nots.

                  Comment


                  • Well, congratulations for a mostly peaceful election, and to Trump, the incoming president.

                    Too bad about the protests. I wonder what the protests hope to accomplish? It's not like there was any cheating.
                    "We have no white flag."

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
                      Clinton won more voters.

                      Trump won the right voters.

                      If anything, his victory in the Electoral College is a check for him by demonstrating he (or more likely his people) were more than capable of understanding political reality and knew where to focus their efforts.
                      It was practically a dead heat on overall numbers. The closing RCP poll average was for Clinton to win by 3.2 points!

                      If the system was changed to total vote, people in turn would turn out to vote in different patterns. It can give the loser something to cling to for their own purposes but it is meaningless in any practical sense.
                      Ne Obliviscaris, Sans Peur

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Trung Si View Post
                        Not so fast Sal, they won't be finished counting for a couple of weeks yet.
                        Here is a Map of votes in the US by County.
                        Where did you find that map? It shows my county blue even though it went for Trump 62-38. N.B. It went for Obama both times.

                        Tuebor

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Escape2Victory View Post
                          It was practically a dead heat on overall numbers. The closing RCP poll average was for Clinton to win by 3.2 points!

                          If the system was changed to total vote, people in turn would turn out to vote in different patterns. It can give the loser something to cling to for their own purposes but it is meaningless in any practical sense.
                          What the opinion polls do not know is who it is that actually turns out. A lot of Dems stayed home, because they did not like her or because she was not black, but the GOP was very motivated. Also a lot of normal Blue Collar Democrats (aka Reagan Democrats) turned and voted GOP this go around.

                          Tuebor

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Tuebor View Post
                            What the opinion polls do not know is who it is that actually turns out. A lot of Dems stayed home, because they did not like her or because she was not black, but the GOP was very motivated. Also a lot of normal Blue Collar Democrats (aka Reagan Democrats) turned and voted GOP this go around.

                            Tuebor
                            That's not good enough given the time and money invested. It is a binary choice that a coin toss will get right half the time. The pollsters needs to up their game. In what other industry would the consumer accept such poor product? Tell us who will win or be clear that it is too complicated to say and you don't know the answer. The latter is unthinkable so of course the pollster must make a choice of winner they themselves are dubious about.
                            Ne Obliviscaris, Sans Peur

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Daemon of Decay View Post
                              No single poster her has ever actually explained that line of reasoning to me. It's repeated like a religious mantra, but nobody ever seems willing to explain how having the mob choose representatives to do their bidding is any different than the mob just choosing for themselves, when the outcome (the mob getting their way) is still the same.

                              Basically it's an electoral reading of the Connecticut Compromise. IOW, a Virginia Plan approach would be popular vote only. A Delaware plan approach would be each state getting equal representation. The Compromise position is that each state gets a limited amount of equal representation, IOW 3 votes,.....and then it gets additional representation based on population. This is to prevent the states with large populations from 'ruling' their smaller neighbors by the fiat of huge population.


                              Indeed. It is electoral socialism: taking political power away from the haves to endowed those states too lazy or incompetent to increase their own populations enough to compete legitimately. That is why a Texan's vote is worth less than an Alaskan's vote: it's a redistribution of political power in the name of "fairness" for a minority.
                              In some ways you're correct. But you're incorrect as to your reasoning. Wyoming or Alaska is never going to have the population of New York or California, no matter how much they incentivize or encourage people to move there. Originally the plan was set up to prevent New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia from 'ruling' the United States by virtue of a large population. Without some way of ensuring that each state has at least some vote, you turn into mob rule of the cities, and that only mattering. IOW, if we didn't have the electoral vote (AND the Senate), New York would literally rule New England.....the little New England states would be beholden to New York to get anything beneficial to themselves and would create a bloc out of proportion to the actual size of New York, because New York had enough population to nullify anything but a massive coalition of states against her desires.

                              Socialism is a push for equality of economic outcome regardless of effort. Republican government and the Electoral College is more of a push for equality of 'voice' regardless of size. You don't presume that I should have more of a voice than someone else because I'm physically more imposing and I have more money. Equally, you don't have the ability to overrule a plurality of states just because your state has a large population and some rich people.
                              Tacitos, Satrap of Kyrene

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Escape2Victory View Post
                                That's not good enough given the time and money invested. It is a binary choice that a coin toss will get right half the time. The pollsters needs to up their game. In what other industry would the consumer accept such poor product? Tell us who will win or be clear that it is too complicated to say and you don't know the answer. The latter is unthinkable so of course the pollster must make a choice of winner they themselves are dubious about.
                                Which is why a reputable poll will get elections right far more often than 50% of the time. Otherwise you're just standing around playing with yourself, wasting everyone's time. Being as accurate as a coin toss isn't good enough.

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X