Remember when Obama...

[Quetzal]

Neither did the majority vote for Hillary.
The primary process notwithstanding, I say
the majority would've preferred better choices.

FINALLY! BINGO!!!

 

[Grumpuss]

When you post a link from any serious news source, then I'll respond to the above beyond this.

So you'll deny reality? What's next for you- you'll only believe articles from properly vetted sources like Salon and MotherJones.

Seems like what they said about you was true...

 

[Grumpuss]

I can't remember a single president in all my years of following politics that didn't complain about leaks and say they were going after the leakers.

And yet- Obama didn't go after the leakers. He went after the reporters who the leakers had talked to.

A "mysterious death", and that you supposed link to the Obamas? Here in the good old U.S., according to the Constitution, we operate out of "innocent until proven guilty". Where do you live?

You're probably right. No president has ever done anything wrong, until he's been proven guilty. I'm sure you never criticized anyone other than Richard Nixon, yeah?

 

[Wirey]

FINALLY! BINGO!!!

Where the heck did you get that?

 

[tytlyf]

You're probably right. No president has ever done anything wrong, until he's been proven guilty.

Correct, our judicial system states that Trump is 'innocent until proven guilty.' There's evidence of russian intervention (wikileaks, trolls, assange).

America's problem was that too many people actually fell for the fake news and changed their vote.

Heck, RW media still tells their audience that Clinton's email server was illegal. They lie all day long.

 

[Revoltingest]

The irony of a Trump supporter saying this is overwhelming.
Trump started lying on the first day of his candidacy.
Tom

Not a "Trump supporter", but rather a Trump voter.
Hillary had her problems with being factual too....& with being ethical...& with being peaceful.
But those things didn't matter to her supporters, eh.

 

[Revoltingest]

Lord knows I couldn't put it anywhere else! You would whine about it.

Meta-whining?
Mein Gott, du must getten over die Hildenschwein gelossen haben!

 

[Revoltingest]

FINALLY! BINGO!!!

I don't see how my post earned you a bingo?
Are you agreeing with Tytlyf that she did earn a majority?

 

[tytlyf]

Are you agreeing with Tytlyf that she did earn a majority?

She did win a majority of the votes compared to Trump. Trump had the minority vote count.

 

[Revoltingest]

She did win a majority of the votes compared to Trump. Trump had the minority vote count.

A "majority" is not defined relative to another share..
For your edification....
Definition of MAJORITY

 

[tytlyf]

A "majority" is not defined relative to another share..
For your edification....
Definition of MAJORITY

Yes, and that proves my point. It's clearly written. Majority can mean different things. In your case, there were more than 2 candidates on the ballot. If there were only 2 candidates, it would be a majority.

 

[Wirey]

Yes, and that proves my point. It's clearly written. Majority can mean different things. In your case, there were more than 2 candidates on the ballot. If there were only 2 candidates, it would be a majority.

Hillary failed to win a majority or she'd be President. Saying she won the popular vote is meaningless in the electoral college system. Trump won the majority that counts. That kind of "but, but, but...." apologist rhetoric makes her look worse, not better. A pitcher who only gives up 5 hits against 15 for the other team and loses 2-1 is still the losing pitcher. Running around claiming you actually won because of a stat that doesn't count doesn't put you in the win column, it makes you a whiny loser. You might have pitched a little better, but not more effectively.

 

[Falvlun]

Hillary failed to win a majority or she'd be President. Saying she won the popular vote is meaningless in the electoral college system. Trump won the majority that counts. That kind of "but, but, but...." apologist rhetoric makes her look worse, not better. A pitcher who only gives up 5 hits against 15 for the other team and loses 2-1 is still the losing pitcher. Running around claiming you actually won because of a stat that doesn't count doesn't put you in the win column, it makes you a whiny loser. You might have pitched a little better, but not more effectively.

That Hilary won the popular vote is not meaningless. It demonstrates that more people preferred her to Trump. It fuels the conversation as to to whether the electoral college is an appropriate method for a democracy. It lessens any "mandate" Trump might feel he has. Winning the presidency is probably the most important aspect of the election, but that doesn't mean that no other component can have meaning.

This conversation didn't stem from an argument that "Hilary should have won the presidency". It stemmed from the idea that "the people" found Trump's behavior acceptable. Based on how people voted, no, I don't think that any blanket statement regarding "the people" can be made.

 

[Wirey]

That Hilary won the popular vote is not meaningless. It demonstrates that more people preferred her to Trump. It fuels the conversation as to to whether the electoral college is an appropriate method for a democracy. It lessens any "mandate" Trump might feel he has. Winning the presidency is probably the most important aspect of the election, but that doesn't mean that no other component can have meaning.

This conversation didn't stem from an argument that "Hilary should have won the presidency". It stemmed from the idea that "the people" found Trump's behavior acceptable. Based on how people voted, no, I don't think that any blanket statement regarding "the people" can be made.

I see. But if the vote in California and New York were changed and split to a 50-50 vote, Trump would have a majority of the popular vote. So, by that logic, only those two states need vote. Don't get me wrong, I think Trump is a train wreck, but the electoral college system is what you guys use and it picked him. The meaning inherent in the popular vote merely seems to be that he is extremely unpopular in two states (I exaggerate to clarify a little there) out of fifty. That isn't exactly a ringing endorsement for Hillary.

 

[Falvlun]

I see. But if the vote in California and New York were changed and split to a 50-50 vote, Trump would have a majority of the popular vote. So, by that logic, only those two states need vote. Don't get me wrong, I think Trump is a train wreck, but the electoral college system is what you guys use and it picked him. The meaning inherent in the popular vote merely seems to be that he is extremely unpopular in two states (I exaggerate to clarify a little there) out of fifty.

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by splitting New York and California.

I understand that the electoral college is the method by which we pick a president. That doesn't mean we can't discuss whether it is a good method or not.

That isn't exactly a ringing endorsement for Hillary.

My original point had nothing to do with Hilary. The point was that Trump had no ringing endorsement.

 

[Revoltingest]

So Hilda had more popular votes.
And Trump won the election.
Is this actionable?
Whaddaya gonna do other than complain?

 

[Wirey]

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by splitting New York and California.

I understand that the electoral college is the method by which we pick a president. That doesn't mean we can't discuss whether it is a good method or not.



My original point had nothing to do with Hilary. The point was that Trump had no ringing endorsement.

I merely meant that if the popular vote in those two states ha not been so lopsided this wouldn't come up. And no, the popular vote wasn't a ringing endorsement of Trump. But since the election there has been a steady stream of people saying "She won the popular vote," like it has meaning. It doesn't. Giving up fewer hits but having a couple of them be two run bombs still means you're the losing pitcher.

 

[columbus]

My original point had nothing to do with Hilary. The point was that Trump had no ringing endorsement.

Quite the contrary.
Anything Trump does, from nominate Gorsuch to accuse Obama of a felony, can be interpreted as the sort of thing the USA people voted against.
Which we did. That it doesn't matter is a problem. Trump is what we voted against. I don't really care what 18th century slavers thought they were doing. I am talking about now.
Tom

 

[Falvlun]

I merely meant that if the popular vote in those two states ha not been so lopsided this wouldn't come up. And no, the popular vote wasn't a ringing endorsement of Trump. But since the election there has been a steady stream of people saying "She won the popular vote," like it has meaning. It doesn't. Giving up fewer hits but having a couple of them be two run bombs still means you're the losing pitcher.

That's like saying "if Southern States weren't so lopsided in voting Republican, then Trump wouldn't have won the electoral college." Of course if less people voted for Hilary, then she wouldn't have won the popular vote, just like if less states went Trump, then he wouldn't have won the electoral college. I'm not really sure how that's a point. (Or why the votes of people in New York or California ought to be devalued simply because they are geographically close.)

I already gave a couple examples of why the popular vote has meaning. It doesn't change the outcome of the election, but that doesn't make it meaningless.

 

[tytlyf]

Hillary failed to win a majority or she'd be President. Saying she won the popular vote is meaningless in the electoral college system. Trump won the majority that counts. That kind of "but, but, but...." apologist rhetoric makes her look worse, not better. A pitcher who only gives up 5 hits against 15 for the other team and loses 2-1 is still the losing pitcher. Running around claiming you actually won because of a stat that doesn't count doesn't put you in the win column, it makes you a whiny loser. You might have pitched a little better, but not more effectively.

I'm not claiming she won and I'm not talking about the electoral college. Just saying she won the majority of votes.

The EC is irrelevant and needs to change. We would have avoided this disaster