SURVEY: Did the US elect the right person as President?

[roo860]

 
By that I meant. He's 3d generation American. His grandparents came with nothing and some of them I believe settled in Brooklyn and then worked their ass for their way up. His family history is typical American success story when hard work earns you the rewards. Hundred million dollars is hardly a tycoon, that just a poor turned wealthy American family. Any upper middle class family in NY could probably afford that school. That's pretty humble compared to something like a 5th generation Rockefeller - the mega billionaires and monopolists who are known to have earned their wealth in a not exactly so honest ways. That's totally different actually. So he comes from a family who succeeded in building successful construction business - so what's the problem, basically the guy is a builder and not a talker :) Like he has to be from a beat down unsuccessful poor family just to qualify to be the president - that's a little silly.

So why not say that in the first place?

Sent from my SM-G920F using Thaivisa Connect mobile app

[Shawn0000]

2 minutes ago, Jblood said:

 

By that I meant. He's 3d generation American. His grandparents came with nothing and some of them I believe settled in Brooklyn and then worked their ass for their way up. His family history is typical American success story when hard work earns you the rewards. Hundred million dollars is hardly a tycoon, that just a poor turned wealthy American family. Any upper middle class family in NY could probably afford that school. That's pretty humble compared to something like a 5th generation Rockefeller - the mega billionaires and monopolists who are known to have earned their wealth in a not exactly so honest ways. That's totally different actually. So he comes from a family who succeeded in building successful construction business - so what's the problem, basically the guy is a builder and not a talker :) Like he has to be from a beat down unsuccessful poor family just to qualify to be the president - that's a little silly.

 

Frederic provided bunk houses for miners during the gold rush and flipped properties, sometimes the very next day for huge profits, he was described as "mining the miners", nothing that anyone would describe as "working his ass off".

 

His son, Fred, Donalds father, was a property tycoon, you dispute this because he only amassed about 300 hundred million in today's money, which is a tycoon by most peoples reckoning, particularly so when you consider that at one point he had 27,000 apartments, the truth being he was one of America's biggest ever property tycoons.

 

What "any upper-middle class person can afford" is not what anyone normal calls humble, and comparing this to a family that is estimated to be worth 340 billion dollars is just plain ridiculous.  How about comparing it to the average American family income, where we will see that Donalds school is far from a humble beginning as it cost 60% of that, and as he had three siblings, they would have needed 2.4 times the national average family income just for their schooling.  Get in touch with reality.

 

And the success was not exactly from building, the family fortune really came from profiteering off the Federal Housing Administration, buying cheap land, renting it to themselves for far more than they paid so that if their project failed and they had to default on the loan, the FHA would owe millions thus preventing their risky and at times unprofitable projects from being bankrupted.  They also loaned far more than projects cost to build and put the cost of repayments onto their tenants, something that thousands of these tenants sued them for.   Considering the amount of times they have been prosecuted, sued and bankrupted I find it incredible that anyone could admire this crooked family.

 

As for Donald, he would be worth more if he had of just held on to the properties his dad handed over to him, but of course he wanted to do all his vanity projects and he managed to lose half the money, he is still worth 3.4 billion but the 27,000 apartments would be worth over 5 billion by now.  Donald is less of a builder and more of a vain fool.

 

As for your closing statement, I did not claim that a president must have a humble beginning, it was just that you claimed he did, and you did also use Rockefeller's to demonstrate what is not humble, which is more than a little silly.

 

[Jblood]

28 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

Frederic provided bunk houses for miners during the gold rush and flipped properties, sometimes the very next day for huge profits, he was described as "mining the miners", nothing that anyone would describe as "working his ass off".

 

His son, Fred, Donalds father, was a property tycoon, you dispute this because he only amassed about 300 hundred million in today's money, which is a tycoon by most peoples reckoning, particularly so when you consider that at one point he had 27,000 apartments, the truth being he was one of America's biggest ever property tycoons.

 

What "any upper-middle class person can afford" is not what anyone normal calls humble, and comparing this to a family that is estimated to be worth 340 billion dollars is just plain ridiculous.  How about comparing it to the average American family income, where we will see that Donalds school is far from a humble beginning as it cost 60% of that, and as he had three siblings, they would have needed 2.4 times the national average family income just for their schooling.  Get in touch with reality.

 

And the success was not exactly from building, the family fortune really came from profiteering off the Federal Housing Administration, buying cheap land, renting it to themselves for far more than they paid so that if their project failed and they had to default on the loan, the FHA would owe millions thus preventing their risky and at times unprofitable projects from being bankrupted.  They also loaned far more than projects cost to build and put the cost of repayments onto their tenants, something that thousands of these tenants sued them for.   Considering the amount of times they have been prosecuted, sued and bankrupted I find it incredible that anyone could admire this crooked family.

 

As for Donald, he would be worth more if he had of just held on to the properties his dad handed over to him, but of course he wanted to do all his vanity projects and he managed to lose half the money, he is still worth 3.4 billion but the 27,000 apartments would be worth over 5 billion by now.  Donald is less of a builder and more of a vain fool.

 

As for your closing statement, I did not claim that a president must have a humble beginning, it was just that you claimed he did, and you did also use Rockefeller's to demonstrate what is not humble, which is more than a little silly.

 

 

I don't even know how much your argument is worth, probably not a lot, I don't have time to examine it in detail. Just over some word I used - "humble". I'm not the one who needs a reality check. The reality was announced a few days ago, I don't know if you missed it :) You see that's the *reality*, so welcome to reality :)

 

I get some sense that a lot of "liberals" are living in some kind of a utopian cocoon and don't understand the country they are living in.

 

2 points: Trump isn't a fascist, and he's not as incompetent as a lot of "experts" claimed, the same "experts" who said he would never win the election. While I know that Trump IS the president that kind of brings into question the quality of expertise of "experts" on your side of the argument :) While losing 100% of all your predictions, and still calling the guy who won the campaign against all odds - a vain fool, sounds like some of you guys might  be just a bit bitter and disappointed, it's totally understood that nobody feels good about being 100% wrong.

 

[NovaBlue05]

Sometimes....Less is more! 

[Shawn0000]

8 minutes ago, Jblood said:

 

I don't even know how much your argument is worth, probably not a lot, I don't have time to examine it in detail. Just over some word I used - "humble". I'm not the one who needs a reality check. The reality was announced a few days ago, I don't know if you missed it :) You see that's the *reality*, so welcome to reality :)

 

I get some sense that a lot of "liberals" are living in some kind of a utopian cocoon and don't understand the country they are living in.

 

2 points: Trump isn't a fascist, and he's not as incompetent as a lot of "experts" claimed, the same "experts" who said he would never win the election. While I know that Trump IS the president that kind of brings into question the quality of expertise of "experts" on your side of the argument :) While losing 100% of all your predictions, and still calling the guy who won the campaign against all odds - a vain fool, sounds like some of you guys might  be just a bit bitter and disappointed, it's totally understood that nobody feels good about being 100% wrong.

 

 

Well that was the word you used to describe someone who came from an extremely privileged background, what do you expect?

 

I fully understand the way some people in America operate, amorally, but to hero worship them is strange, these people who profiteer by holding the country to ransom like Trumps father did are truly traitors not heroes.

 

2 points?  Did I call Trump a fascist?  Is he as competent as a lot of people assume due to his wealth or as I pointed out is he just a loser who has managed to hold on to about half of his fathers wealth while bragging about "making" money?

 

You "know" that Trump is the president?  Really, I thought that was Obama?  Sorry, and what experts are you talking about, I never mentioned any.  And what predictions?  Are you confusing me with someone else?  Anyway, all I was saying is he could have held onto his fathers investments, lived off the rent of 27,000 apartments which would have also grown in value to far more than he has accumulated by making his hotel, tower, golf courses and becoming a TV star, all of which have only cost him money but served his ego well, which would make them, by definition, vanity projects and the maker of them a fool.

 

You talk of nobody feeling good being 100% wrong, I guess you're feeling bad then?

[Publicus]

On 11/17/2016 at 5:48 AM, NovaBlue05 said:

 

On Capitol Hill, that's the big trifecta. 

 

No Constitutional or useful political definition of "mandate" anyway. Just a term the media came up with long ago to make it sound like their candidate of choice has overwhelming support when in fact they actually got  about half the voters to vote for them.

 

Only Michigan yet to post that will give Trump 306 EV.

http://www.nytimes.com/elections/results/president

 

122.6M votes cast for the two with Clinton holding a razor thin 948K vote difference. A statistical tie.

 

A statistical tie.

 

One million vote difference at this point and still counting. The more they count the wider the significant difference becomes in the Popular Vote of the voting public. The only nominee to get more votes for Potus in U.S. history is Barack Obama. Trump is a laggard.

 

 

Trump has a mandate and Trump's mandate from the people is to knock it off, and to knock it off forthwith to instead get real....

 

Less Than A Third Of Americans Want Trump To Follow Through On Campaign Proposals

 Wed, Nov 16th, 2016

 

The honeymoon phase that most incoming presidents enjoy at the beginning of their tenures appears to be nonexistent for Donald Trump.

 

According to a new Washington Post/Schar School poll, just 29 percent of Americans think the results of the Nov. 8 presidential election give Trump a mandate to follow through on his plans, which would include proposals like the Muslim registry/ban, a deportation force, and building a border wall – all agenda items the Trump team is moving forward with as we speak.

 

In all, about 60 percent of Americans think Trump should compromise with Democrats if they strongly oppose something he is proposing – which is (rightfully so) nearly everything on his agenda.

 

One particular promise Trump made during the campaign was to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the email server Hillary Clinton used during her time as Secretary of State. According to the poll, though, a sizable majority of Americans – 57 percent – don’t want Trump to do that, compared to just 36 percent who do

 

http://www.politicususa.com/2016/11/16/29-percent-americans-election-mandate-donald-trump.html

 

 

 

 

Poll finds tempered optimism after Trump victory, but doubts about mandate

By Scott Clement and Dan Balz November 16 at 7:00 AM

 

Americans emerged from President-elect Donald Trump’s surprise victory in last week’s election with passionate and polarized reactions, overall expressing tempered optimism about his presidency but unconvinced that he has a mandate to enact a sweeping new policy agenda, according to a Washington Post-Schar School national poll.

 

Nationally, just 3 in 10 Americans — 29 percent — say he has a mandate to carry out the agenda he presented during the campaign, while 59 percent say he should compromise with Democrats when they strongly disagree with the specifics of his policy proposals.

 

That 29 percent figure is sharply lower than the 50 percent who said the same for President Obama after his first election in 2008 and the 41 percent for former president George W. Bush after the 2000 election and the contentious recount that followed. 

 

Americans are more worried. Slender majorities say they are not confident he will show respect for people with whom he disagrees or make wise decisions about war and peace.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/poll-finds-tempered-optimism-after-trump-victory-but-doubts-about-mandate/2016/11/15/da362ca4-ab71-11e6-a31b-4b6397e625d0_story.html?wpisrc=al_alert-national

 

 

So 29% say a mandate for Trump to implement his wild ideas, yet 59% say Trump must compromise with Democrats in Washington on issues of overriding importance to the Democratic Party. That is +30% to compromise on vital issues.

 

Given Trump lost the popular vote and now 30% more Americans want Trump to compromise than do not want Trump to compromise, there is a mandate. The mandate is on Trump and for Trump to compromise. And to respect people he disagrees with. And to not proliferate nuclear weapons to other countries.

 

Tell us you got it. Once and for all, tell us you got it.

[Opl]

3 hours ago, Si Thea01 said:

 

Wasn't the last Presidency referred to as the Obama presidency? It was also unclear as who was behind him but then with HRC, we all know who was behind her.

 

The Trump vote combines an anti-system component, and a traditional component ( registered GOP voters, who voted for him out of fidelity to their party) .

One of the issues of the composition of the Trump administration, will be to know how much  these two components respectively  weight  

[lannarebirth]

4 hours ago, Opl said:

 

With HRC you know.

But with D. Trump today, In fact, it gives the Strange feeling of a man who played poker with the presidential élections. D. Trump made his show. He played and bluffed. he sowed the trouble, and on this blow he succeeded beyond his own hopes.

Like a Nero he will be manipulated by those who flatter him and those who manipulate his ego.  

 

You may be right and I think you probably are. If so, don't you think the opposition ought to strike a more conciliatory tone?

[Si Thea01]

6 hours ago, Opl said:

 

The Trump vote combines an anti-system component, and a traditional component ( registered GOP voters, who voted for him out of fidelity to their party) .

One of the issues of the composition of the Trump administration, will be to know how much  these two components respectively  weight  

 

He is President,  so anti-system component and traditional component is just as irrelevant as the popular vote. They voted and he won, that's all that matters in the end. 

[Si Thea01]

6 hours ago, Publicus said:

 

A statistical tie.

 

One million vote difference at this point and still counting. The more they count the wider the significant difference becomes in the Popular Vote of the voting public. The only nominee to get more votes for Potus in U.S. history is Barack Obama. Trump is a laggard.

 

 

Trump has a mandate and Trump's mandate from the people is to knock it off, and to knock it off forthwith to instead get real....

 

Less Than A Third Of Americans Want Trump To Follow Through On Campaign Proposals

 Wed, Nov 16th, 2016

 

The honeymoon phase that most incoming presidents enjoy at the beginning of their tenures appears to be nonexistent for Donald Trump.

 

According to a new Washington Post/Schar School poll, just 29 percent of Americans think the results of the Nov. 8 presidential election give Trump a mandate to follow through on his plans, which would include proposals like the Muslim registry/ban, a deportation force, and building a border wall – all agenda items the Trump team is moving forward with as we speak.

 

In all, about 60 percent of Americans think Trump should compromise with Democrats if they strongly oppose something he is proposing – which is (rightfully so) nearly everything on his agenda.

 

One particular promise Trump made during the campaign was to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the email server Hillary Clinton used during her time as Secretary of State. According to the poll, though, a sizable majority of Americans – 57 percent – don’t want Trump to do that, compared to just 36 percent who do

 

http://www.politicususa.com/2016/11/16/29-percent-americans-election-mandate-donald-trump.html

 

 

 

 

Poll finds tempered optimism after Trump victory, but doubts about mandate

By Scott Clement and Dan Balz November 16 at 7:00 AM

 

Americans emerged from President-elect Donald Trump’s surprise victory in last week’s election with passionate and polarized reactions, overall expressing tempered optimism about his presidency but unconvinced that he has a mandate to enact a sweeping new policy agenda, according to a Washington Post-Schar School national poll.

 

Nationally, just 3 in 10 Americans — 29 percent — say he has a mandate to carry out the agenda he presented during the campaign, while 59 percent say he should compromise with Democrats when they strongly disagree with the specifics of his policy proposals.

 

That 29 percent figure is sharply lower than the 50 percent who said the same for President Obama after his first election in 2008 and the 41 percent for former president George W. Bush after the 2000 election and the contentious recount that followed. 

 

Americans are more worried. Slender majorities say they are not confident he will show respect for people with whom he disagrees or make wise decisions about war and peace.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/poll-finds-tempered-optimism-after-trump-victory-but-doubts-about-mandate/2016/11/15/da362ca4-ab71-11e6-a31b-4b6397e625d0_story.html?wpisrc=al_alert-national

 

 

So 29% say a mandate for Trump to implement his wild ideas, yet 59% say Trump must compromise with Democrats in Washington on issues of overriding importance to the Democratic Party. That is +30% to compromise on vital issues.

 

Given Trump lost the popular vote and now 30% more Americans want Trump to compromise than do not want Trump to compromise, there is a mandate. The mandate is on Trump and for Trump to compromise. And to respect people he disagrees with. And to not proliferate nuclear weapons to other countries.

 

Tell us you got it. Once and for all, tell us you got it.

 

 

Quoting more of those famous polls, they got it wrong before the election, what makes you thing they've got it right now. The popular vote is still irrelevant so why bang on about it.  Means nothing and will not change a thing. 

Edited November 17, 2016 by Si Thea01

[Jingthing]

Just now, Si Thea01 said:

 

He is President,  so anti-system component and traditional component is just as irrelevant as the popular vote. They voted and he won, that's all that matters in the end. 

The abominable Mr. trump is still just Mr. trump. 

[NovaBlue05]

1 minute ago, Si Thea01 said:

 

 

Quoting more of those famous polls, they got it wrong before the election, what makes you thing they've got it right now. 

 

 

He's not much but, like JT....he's at least predictable and consistent

[Si Thea01]

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

The abominable Mr. trump is still just Mr. trump. 

 

Ah, good morning.  No, he is the President-Elect, so accept it.  All the name calling and cry baby whining is only showing a lack of immaturity by the losing side.

 

[Scott]

A troll post has been removed.   Accusing candidates of buying votes is not going to be tolerated unless it is backed up by a credible source.   Spending money on a campaign and buying votes is not the same thing.  

 

You have been warned.  

[Publicus]

 

11 hours ago, Si Thea01 said:

 

May I ask why you're still on about the popular vote.? Totally irrelevant and makes absolutely no difference.  I suppose if you keep on about it you get a does of happiness, even though it will be short lived, Mr. Trump will be the President  whether you like it or not.

 

As of today you are removed from my Ignore Hall of Shame so let's see if you and I can discuss the issues and the principal public figures without your trying pathetically to bait or troll as you'd attempted with the devious "Mr. P" posts.

 

Which makes today a new day concerning your posts to me -- hopefully and ideally.

 

 

So you need to know the question in the post is absurd. Same for the vacuous claim we on this side do not accept the election that makes Donald Trump Potus-Elect The right has no argument in this -- it has only political nonsense.

 

A return visit to middle school 7th grade civics class shows unmistakably why the question is absurd. The question is moreover self-embarrassing.  The question is both absurd and self-embarrassing to the right who in 2016 deny and try to dismiss the significance and the Constitutional proscriptions of the Popular Vote in respect of the Electoral College.

 

Here is why and it is the direct answer to the question.

 

The Popular Vote of a state -- each of the 50 states -- determines which candidate wins the Electoral College Electors of the state. (As even you do know, the candidate who totals 270 ECVotes wins election as Potus.)

 

For example, take Pennsylvania. Trump very narrowly won the Popular Vote in PA. (PA had not voted Red for Potus since 1988.)

 

Pennsylvania Popular Vote, Potus, 2016

Trump:   2,900,785  (48.9%)

Clinton:  2,825,767  (47.6%)

Winning Popular Vote Margin for Trump: 75,018  (1.3%)

Total Popular Vote: 5,726,552

(See link below.)

 

Because Donald Trump won the Popular Vote of the voters of Pennsylvania, Donald Trump won the state's Electoral College Votes/Electors (20). Donald Trump did in fact win the Electoral College Electors of each state in which Trump won the Popular Vote.

 

Same same in respect of each state where Hillary Clinton won the Popular Vote, i.e., Clinton won the Electors in the state of the Electoral College. In other words, without the Popular Vote of each state, the election means nothing.

 

(PA is one of 20 states that does not have a state law that binds each person who is an Electoral College Elector to the winner of the Popular Vote of the state.)

 

Further....

 

The U.S. Constitution does not dictate how presidential electors are to cast their votes, but, in general, electors are expected to vote for the winner of the popular vote in their state.

 

https://ballotpedia.org/Presidential_election_in_Pennsylvania,_2016

 

 

In the fortunately few instances in which a Potus won the Electoral College Electors but lost the Popular Vote nationally, it is considered an anomaly, something of an odd contradiction of democracy and democratic principles and precepts. The bizarre event not only makes news, it makes history -- in unfavorable and negative ways. 

 

Disparaging or dismissing the Popular Vote is in any respect a dangerous notion and purpose. If one is to dismiss the Popular Vote in any sense or aspect, then he dismisses not only the Electoral College, he dismisses the Popular Vote per se. This includes in each state and nationally.

 

The Popular Vote matters in each state, and the Popular Vote matters nationally because it is the Popular Vote. So either the Popular Vote is significant in technical and moral terms, or it is unimportant and matters not at all anywhere or in any context. Dismissing the Popular Vote in any context or in any respect is a dangerous notion that is exclusive to the Trump Fanboyz in this election.

 

If one is to respect the Popular Vote in each state, then one must recognise and respect the Popular Vote of the nation as a whole. Each has an assigned value that requires respect because in each instance it is the Popular Vote. Any denial of the Popular Vote is the denial of democracy itself.

[Ulysses G.]

No one is denying the popular vote. They are simply pointing out that it does not win the election. Trump won the vote that counts by a landslide.

[Publicus]

5 minutes ago, Ulysses G. said:

No one is denying the popular vote. They are simply pointing out that it does not win the election. Trump won the vote that counts by a landslide.

 

Dismissing or disparaging the direct Popular Vote in any way is undemocratic.

 

It may lead to becoming antidemocratic. (It may in fact be bringing antidemocratic thinking out of the closet.)

 

Either the Popular Vote in every instance, every time, is respected or it is disrespected. The latter suggests certain antidemocratic tendencies. There's a name for antidemocratic tendencies or beliefs -- or purposes.

[kevkev1888]

9 minutes ago, Publicus said:

 

Dismissing or disparaging the direct Popular Vote in any way is undemocratic.

 

It may lead to becoming antidemocratic. (It may in fact be bringing antidemocratic thinking out of the closet.)

 

Either the Popular Vote in every instance, every time, is respected or it is disrespected. The latter suggests certain antidemocratic tendencies. There's a name for antidemocratic tendencies or beliefs -- or purposes.

 

The nationwide popular vote is not part of the current democratic process. Therefore, it is entirely irrelevant.

 

Luckily, as can you imagine the farce, over a week since election day and still counting. less than 1% between 120 million plus votes. They would be recounting it for 4 years!!!

 

Also as is obvious, the campaigns, both sides were for the electoral votes, had the rules been different then the campaigns would have been different . 

 

No doubt Trump would have won that game too! 

[Publicus]

2 minutes ago, kevkev1888 said:

 

The nationwide popular vote is not part of the current democratic process. Therefore, it is entirely irrelevant.

 

Luckily, as can you imagine the farce, over a week since election day and still counting. less than 1% between 120 million plus votes. They would be recounting it for 4 years!!!

 

Also as is obvious, the campaigns, both sides were for the electoral votes, had the rules been different then the campaigns would have been different . 

 

No doubt Trump would have won that game too! 

 

Middle school grade 7 civics again, which I am please to point out...

 

Win the Electoral College Electors and Vote by winning the Popular Vote. Then there separately is the Popular Vote. The EC is the technical vote. The PV is the direct vote of the people as the electorate.

 

Dismissing the direct Popular Vote in a state, all 50 states or nationally, is antidemocratic.

[ivan96822]

Trump won. Period.

 

Adios, Clintons! See you never ever again in politics :)

[thaibeachlovers]

4 minutes ago, Publicus said:

 

Middle school grade 7 civics again, which I am please to point out...

 

Win the Electoral College Electors and Vote by winning the Popular Vote. Then there separately is the Popular Vote. The EC is the technical vote. The PV is the direct vote of the people as the electorate.

 

Dismissing the direct Popular Vote in a state, all 50 states or nationally, is antidemocratic.

[Opl]

"While the wave of real stories surrounding the role of hoax news stories on social media in the recent presidential election have included stunning revelations, none are as insane as the claims one of the most prolific hoaxers made in a chat with the Washington Post."

 

http://mashable.com/2016/11/17/four-crazy-quotes-from-a-fake-news-writer/#RID1davCHEqL

 

" I fooled America with fake news stories and got Trump elected" (Paul Horner)

 

"Trump fans "do not check anything and believe in anything"  

http://nypost.com/2016/11/17/i-fooled-america-with-fake-news-stories-and-got-trump-elected/

Conservatives (38%) share more fake items than Liberals (19%), revealed a study by Buzzfeed in October.
For the creator of fake sites, Paul Horner,  the Conservatives are therefore a target of choice. since each click on one of his articles brings him money, he has logically set himself to write content aimed specifically at this electorate, inventing in particular numerous anti-Muslim hoaxes

 

Edited November 18, 2016 by Opl

[Publicus]

 

The national Popular Vote is the direct vote of the people who voted, i.e., the American electorate.

 

Respect it.

 

To deny or dismiss it is flat out antidemocratic.

[Publicus]

12 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

 

Antidemocratic.

[kevkev1888]

19 minutes ago, Publicus said:

 

Middle school grade 7 civics again, which I am please to point out...

 

Win the Electoral College Electors and Vote by winning the Popular Vote. Then there separately is the Popular Vote. The EC is the technical vote. The PV is the direct vote of the people as the electorate.

 

Dismissing the direct Popular Vote in a state, all 50 states or nationally, is antidemocratic.

 

Sorry, I really don't know what you are talking about????????

 

But that is fine please do not try to explain any further. 

[Ulysses G.]

16 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Where is that beating a dead horse emoticon gone? I would like to use it but it doesn't appear to be available anymore.

 

Too bad. It certainly applies here.

[Publicus]

22 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Where is that beating a dead horse emoticon gone? I would like to use it but it doesn't appear to be available anymore.

 

The radical right has been denying the national Popular Vote since the counting of it went and has remained favorable to former SecState Hillary Clinton.

 

The national Popular Vote is integral to every election every where at all times because it is the direct vote of the people who constitute the electorate.

 

The radical right have been denying the national popular vote daily, numerous times daily since the votes began to be counted November 8th.

[Opl]

Viral Fake Election News Outperformed Real News On Facebook In Final Months Of The US Election

A BuzzFeed News analysis found that top fake election news stories generated more total engagement on Facebook than top election stories from 19 major news outlets combined.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/craigsilverman/viral-fake-election-news-outperformed-real-news-on-facebook?utm_term=.hfJLNa5zl#.lrZvoKwjA

 

 

[Scott]

Off-topic, troll posts removed.  

[Publicus]

44 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Where is that beating a dead horse emoticon gone? I would like to use it but it doesn't appear to be available anymore.

 

Denying the Popular Vote consistently and persistently daily since November 8th...