Clinton says she hopes Harris gets 'less sexist' treatment on U.S. campaign trail

[Sujo]

2 hours ago, Kelsall said:

If the election had been based on the popular vote, Trump still would have won.  He would have run a different campaign designed to win the popular vote.

 

People want to change the rules after the election.  It's like a football team that loses the Super Bowl saying, "yeah they got more points, but we got more yardage."

And trump wants to get rid of the electoral vote

[Sujo]

5 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Rather than waffle on and enlighten us all to your own personal view on democracy and absolute margins, why don't you invest on reading about the US Electoral College system and why the founding fathers thought this wise. You might also read about The Tyranny of the Majority.

 

Very few countries use a simple majority to elect their President, PM, Chancellor or whatever title. The UK certainly doesn't. 

 

 

Why dont you tell trump then, he doesnt agree with the electoal vote. What has UK got to do with it.

[Sujo]

6 minutes ago, mr mr said:

would you like to make a bet on that ? i'll take those odds. 7 to 10 million more votes for joe *i can't put a coherent sentence together* biden ? 

 

the man needs to have a live in care provider never mind run for president. 

Covfefe, thighland, yo-semite.

[herfiehandbag]

7 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Rather than waffle on and enlighten us all to your own personal view on democracy and absolute margins, why don't you invest on reading about the US Electoral College system and why the founding fathers thought this wise. You might also read about The Tyranny of the Majority.

 

Very few countries use a simple majority to elect their President, PM, Chancellor or whatever title. The UK certainly doesn't. 

 

 

From the (limited) reading which I have done, it is obvious that the "Founding Fathers"  intention was absolutely not to to create a system whereby the popular vote, in a simple binary contest, could be overturned. That is what has happened. Similarly, I don't think that the "the tyranny of the majority" is remotely relevant, unless it is another way of explaining that the winner in such a binary (national) contest should not be acknowledged as such because you don't like her policies. A majority did, that is why they voted for her.

 

I know that we are very much of opposing views when it comes to "qualifying " electoral results. For me it is quite simple, the person who gets the most votes wins. It is not a parliamentary election, it is a simple vote for a President.

 

The rest of my post explains my views on the effects of the electoral college  shenanigans. If you don't like them, feel free to ignore them.

[Cryingdick]

12 hours ago, Sujo said:

Why, does she have less rights than others to speak?

 

The problem is every time she speaks she cause more damage than good. She is toxic to the causes she is supposedly trying to help. If that's what you want as a dem I happily welcome Hillary to take center stage and suck the air out of the room. 

 

You can see from this thread that a good percentage of dems do not like her at all. She has the right to speak but I also have the right to suggest she would do better to simply quietly go away forever. See how that works? I have the right to speak my opinions as well. 

 

Simply because one has the right to do something doesn't necessarily mean that the intelligent thing is to exercise that right.

Edited August 14, 2020 by Cryingdick

[mr mr]

3 hours ago, Sujo said:

Covfefe, thighland, yo-semite.

so those things make biden any more competent ? got it.

[Bluespunk]

Biden/Harris team hitting back. 

 

US 2020: Biden campaign says Trump 'abhorrent' for fuelling Harris conspiracy https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2020-53783177

Edited August 14, 2020 by Bluespunk
Wrong link posted

[candide]

6 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Hilary just can't accept that the American people rejected her for the evil corrupt person she is. She can't play the race card so she plays the feminist card. "It's because I'm a woman" - no sweetie, it's because your evil and got seen through!

 

"Clinton, a Democrat, lost in the electoral college to U.S. President Donald Trump in 2016 despite receiving more votes than him nationwide."

 

Same with Reuters. They always trip this old chestnut out. Somebody should explain the Electoral College system to them and tip them off that the US is a Republic not an absolute democracy. Same old same old tosh.

Whatever the merits of the US electoral system may be, the " American people" did not reject her.

[SiSePuede419]

22 hours ago, Jack Mountain said:

Remember Trump got elected thanks to Clinton.

You misspelled Putin. ????

[Isaan sailor]

We didn’t so much vote for Donald Trump. We did so much vote against Hillary Clinton.  She has the negativity to effect the same result this time.

[stevenl]

1 minute ago, Isaan sailor said:

We didn’t so much vote for Donald Trump. We did so much vote against Hillary Clinton.  She has the negativity to effect the same result this time.

She is not there this time, and will not be involved by the Biden-Harris campaign.

[TopDeadSenter]

6 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

Biden/Harris team hitting back. 

 

US 2020: Biden campaign says Trump 'abhorrent' for fuelling Harris conspiracy https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2020-53783177

Why is Trump abhorrent for wanting the rule of law to prevail? Who are you to decide which laws and rules should be followed, and which ignored? We should let the relevant authorities look into the claims, and either vindicate Harris, or punish her and sack her from the senate if she is found to have bypassed immigration laws.

 Ignoring the ridiculous editted preface, which is an apology to the left for covering this story which they want covered up, it is an interesting read. Should they not have checked her eligibility first? They had 4 years to field sensible candidates and they end up with these 2 !!

https://www.newsweek.com/some-questions-kamala-harris-about-eligibility-opinion-1524483

 

[Bluespunk]

4 minutes ago, TopDeadSenter said:

Why is Trump abhorrent for wanting the rule of law to prevail? Who are you to decide which laws and rules should be followed, and which ignored? We should let the relevant authorities look into the claims, and either vindicate Harris, or punish her and sack her from the senate if she is found to have bypassed immigration laws.

 Ignoring the ridiculous editted preface, which is an apology to the left for covering this story which they want covered up, it is an interesting read. Should they not have checked her eligibility first? They had 4 years to field sensible candidates and they end up with these 2 !!

https://www.newsweek.com/some-questions-kamala-harris-about-eligibility-opinion-1524483

 

Promoting a false and baseless claim is clearly abhorrent and a sign of how desperate the trump campaign is. 
 

maga

Edited August 15, 2020 by Bluespunk

[stevenl]

10 minutes ago, TopDeadSenter said:

Why is Trump abhorrent for wanting the rule of law to prevail? Who are you to decide which laws and rules should be followed, and which ignored?

 

The rules have been followed, so it is clearly a baseless conspiracy theory.

 

This has nothing to do with 'the rule of law'.

[Caldera]

Hillary, dear, the treatment you got had nothing to do with sexism and all to do with your obnoxious personality and unethical conduct.

 

I'm sure a fine and upstanding lady such as Kamala Harris will be treated much differently.

 

[Susco]

31 minutes ago, Caldera said:

I'm sure a fine and upstanding lady such as Kamala Harris will be treated much differently.

 

Treated different by that disgusting creature Trump is?

 

Is that why they started the birther drivel already?

[Caldera]

4 minutes ago, Susco said:

 

Treated different by that disgusting creature Trump is?

 

Is that why they started the birther drivel already?

Well I did say "differently", not "better". ????

 

What do you expect from Trump and his minions? That he's pretty desperate doesn't help things!

 

Edited August 15, 2020 by Caldera

[Morch]

5 hours ago, Isaan sailor said:

We didn’t so much vote for Donald Trump. We did so much vote against Hillary Clinton.  She has the negativity to effect the same result this time.

 

That's believable up to a point. The celebration of pretty much any nonsense, bad behavior, ignorance and irrationality coming from Trump tells a different story.

[Morch]

On 8/14/2020 at 6:16 AM, mr mr said:

quite rich coming from her. the reaction to the dem loss after last election was an eye opener to say the least. 

 

seems she still can't let it go. dems may want to muzzle clinton so that she doesn't ruin what tiny chance they have of winning.

 

keep at it with the racist sexist homophobe xenophobe etc talk and see how the voting public reacts.....again.

 

"...see how thee voting public reacts.....again."

 

The voting public chose HRC.

[Morch]

On 8/14/2020 at 6:28 AM, TopDeadSenter said:

Clinton makes a good point. But the democrats themselves set the standard over the last 4 years in regards to sensationalist and sexist accusations. I regard the (wholly unsupported by factual evidence) smears against the POTUS by the democrat elite that claim he paid to be urinated on by two Russian prostitutes in a bed that Obama had previously slept in as the worst on record. Demeaning, sensationalist, sexist? Got it all in spades. Yet now she wants her candidate to be treated with kid gloves? Er, no. Just no.

 

 

Why "no"? Why can't Republicans (and even Trump supporters) be better than that?

[Morch]

On 8/14/2020 at 6:56 AM, Tippaporn said:

I think that whole Russia thing already fell apart but do keep trying.

 

That gap between what you think and what is.

[Morch]

On 8/14/2020 at 6:55 AM, Tippaporn said:

The Democrats always accuse you of exactly what they're doing.  Fact.

 

Whereas accusation by Republicans/Trump supporters are always genuine. Right...

 

As for "fact" - No, it isn't. That's just your biased, unsupportable opinion.