Hillary Clinton leads Donald Trump by 2m votes

[JetsetBkk]

 

[Strange]

6 minutes ago, sjaak327 said:

Hmm, I have been 'harping on it' since 2000. I understand, you think throwing away votes is ok, because it suits your agenda, I happen to believe that every vote should count equally, as in most proper democracies ...

 

We are not a 'proper' democracy. We are a Democratic Republic & you should watch the video. 

 

I am a Trump supporter, but I had completely expected a Hillary win until I woke up Nov 9 AM Thai Time to watch it unfold. 

Never crossed my mind to go all snowflake or riot or campaign against EC or anything because this is how we do it, and the ideas for it I support, win or lose. 

[sjaak327]

1 minute ago, Strange said:

 

We are not a 'proper' democracy. We are a Democratic Republic & you should watch the video. 

 

I am a Trump supporter, but I had completely expected a Hillary win until I woke up Nov 9 AM Thai Time to watch it unfold. 

Never crossed my mind to go all snowflake or riot or campaign against EC or anything because this is how we do it, and the ideas for it I support, win or lose. 

Well maybe it's about time to become one is all I can say. I don't need to watch the video, I have taken all the arguments for the EC into account, and I find none of them compelling.

[Andaman Al]

1 hour ago, Strange said:

We are pretty much tied as far as % of the population with university degrees. Yours is no better or worse than mine. 

That's like comparing the quality of a Thai degree with a Brit degree ! Similar to comparing a Malus Pumila and Citrus Sinensis.

[Strange]

1 minute ago, Andaman Al said:

That's like comparing the quality of a Thai degree with a Brit degree ! Similar to comparing a Malus Pumila and Citrus Sinensis.

 

Just goes to show everyone your heartfelt prejudice against Americans. An American Degree is just as good as a Brit Degree and AU Degree or any combination of the 3.

[F4UCorsair]

57 minutes ago, sjaak327 said:

Sure, and they don't even need to be, they have specific positions in the cabinet to deal with those aspects. The point was being a good leader of a society. By definition, someone who disqualifies a large number of the members of society based upon what religion they practice, or where they come from, cannot be a good leader.

 

Such a person devides he doesn't bond.

 

57 minutes ago, sjaak327 said:

Sure, and they don't even need to be, they have specific positions in the cabinet to deal with those aspects. The point was being a good leader of a society. By definition, someone who disqualifies a large number of the members of society based upon what religion they practice, or where they come from, cannot be a good leader.

 

Such a person devides he doesn't bond.

 

What religion they practise?  Or what side of the railway tracks they live?

 

That's what Clinton did by calling a large number of the population "The Deplorables".

 

The rest Is history!!!

[Andaman Al]

40 minutes ago, Strange said:

 

Just goes to show everyone your heartfelt prejudice against Americans. An American Degree is just as good as a Brit Degree and AU Degree or any combination of the 3.

 It is nothing to do with prejudice, you seem to be an advocate of facts, well i am just quoting facts. Get over it.

[sgtsabai]

Let the recount begin. No, I never supported the Clintons but I damn sure don't accept the fascist as my president, nor his right wingnut religious wacko VP. http://www.truthdig.com/report/print/im_done_trying_to_empathize_with_poor_white_trump_voters_20161124

[Strange]

8 minutes ago, Andaman Al said:

 It is nothing to do with prejudice, you seem to be an advocate of facts, well i am just quoting facts. Get over it.

 

Naw ur trolling and clearly think you are better than americans. I don't know if anyone has ever told you but its pretty tiring. Nobody likes that noise and ill bet you can't take it in person just the same. 

 

We can continue this via PM if you like. 

 

[Andaman Al]

1 minute ago, Strange said:

 

Naw ur trolling and clearly think you are better than americans. I don't know if anyone has ever told you but its pretty tiring. Nobody likes that noise and ill bet you can't take it in person just the same. 

 

We can continue this via PM if you like. 

 

I am not trolling if its in world ranking tables.

 

No i would not like to continue via pm. I communicate with friends via pm ( most of whom are American ?) and we engage in intellectual debate and banter,  you just wouldnt fit in.

[acid thunder]

1 hour ago, Strange said:

I am a Trump supporter, but I had completely expected a Hillary win until I woke up Nov 9 AM Thai Time to watch it unfold. 

 

Almost word for word of the email I received from my English friend who resides in Seattle who emphatically stated he never expected the outcome.  Never. 

[Strange]

1 minute ago, Andaman Al said:

I am not trolling if its in world ranking tables.

 

No i would not like to continue via pm. I communicate with friends via pm ( most of whom are American ?) and we engage in intellectual debate and banter,  you just wouldnt fit in.

 

TROLL

 

Inbox is open

[CMNightRider]

2 hours ago, JetsetBkk said:

 

 

All of the liberal left-wing wackos on this site still sobbing and whining over Hillary receiving more votes than Trump, should be required to view this video before posting anymore hysterical comments about the Electoral College.  

 

As for their friends protesting in the streets, destroying public property, assaulting people, blocking traffic, along with their American flag burning, and assaulting police officers, should be introduced to the criminal justice system.  

 

Maybe after being a recipient of correctional services and spending a few months if a jail cell with bubba, will help them think a little clearer.   :-)

Edited November 26, 2016 by CMNightRider

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, sgtsabai said:

Let the recount begin. No, I never supported the Clintons but I damn sure don't accept the fascist as my president, nor his right wingnut religious wacko VP. http://www.truthdig.com/report/print/im_done_trying_to_empathize_with_poor_white_trump_voters_20161124

I take it you are renouncing US citizenship then! If you don't he is, and nothing you can do about it.

[PattayaBoy]

[tropo]

5 hours ago, Morch said:

 

For many people Trump's supposed "efforts" are anathema to much the believe in. Why would they be expected to support such "efforts"? It is not as if there's a consensus that these "efforts" serve the greater good.

 

How are protests (again, not condoning violence) or passing criticism on Trump constitute not "letting him get on with business"? It does not even amount to not accepting results. It's simply not embracing the president-elect's views.

 

True that elections often see a large part of the electorate unsatisfied, and true they do not always result in such a reaction. Then again, Trump wasn't a usual candidate and he did not run a usual campaign. He's at least partially responsible for the outrage expressed. I don't usually go for blanket generalizations with regard to voters, so not going to comment on yours.

 

Notice though, that it is not only the protests which are rejected, but even criticism passed on these topics.

 

These people are not protesting efforts, outcomes or results. He has not yet spent one day in office. They are protesting anticipated, negative outcomes, which is just plain stupid.

 

Your country desperately needs a shakeup. Nothing's going to change or improve if you continue to elect lame duck Presidents who continue to dish out more of the same.

 

 

[Xircal]

21 hours ago, Strange said:

 

It literally matters not. The red counties are Trump and 1 vote over Hillary is enough to paint it red. It does not matter as the popular vote in the state is the one that gets the EC votes but the point is to illustrate that there is a lot more Trump support than meets the eye. 

 

In illinois, yeah I'm sure there are hundreds in some counties and thousands in some counties and that IS the case 100%. 

 

Hillary got the Popular Vote but drive across america and you'll find a lot more Trump support.

 

People think Trump won by some freak of nature and that is just not the case. EC did its job.  

 

Your rural photo is likely a vehemently red state. The ones I showed are vehemently blue states but are almost completely red. 

 

Well, it'll be interesting to see what the results of the recount in Wisconsin reveal together with those of the other two contested states of Michigan and Pennsylvania. http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-usa-election-recount-wisconsin-idUKKBN13K2DA

 

Wisconsin alone won't be enough to topple Trump, but all three combined would mean Trump will be out and Clinton in.

[Strange]

5 minutes ago, Xircal said:

Well, it'll be interesting to see what the results of the recount in Wisconsin reveal together with those of the other two contested states of Michigan and Pennsylvania. http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-usa-election-recount-wisconsin-idUKKBN13K2DA

 

Wisconsin alone won't be enough to topple Trump, but all three combined would mean Trump will be out and Clinton in.

 

If a legitimate recount proves that Hillary won then so be it. Il be disappointed but not going to go full snowflake. 

 

As it sits right now the possibility of a losing recount in not one, but three states is so unlikely its almost a non issue. 

[acid thunder]

9 minutes ago, Xircal said:

Wisconsin alone won't be enough to topple Trump, but all three combined would mean Trump will be out and Clinton in.

 

What do you think the result would be if all three states were recounted?  I'll give you a clue, Trump is still president-elect.

[Xircal]

2 minutes ago, acid thunder said:

 

What do you think the result would be if all three states were recounted?  I'll give you a clue, Trump is still president-elect.

 

Nope: http://www.ibtimes.com/can-clinton-win-michigan-wisconsin-pennsylvania-recounts-sought-republican-electors-2450693

 

[acid thunder]

1 minute ago, Xircal said:

Nope: http://www.ibtimes.com/can-clinton-win-michigan-wisconsin-pennsylvania-recounts-sought-republican-electors-2450693

 

Get a grip, Xircal.  You've been defeated and no point crying.  Jill Stein is thrashing about with nowhere to go and trying to make a name for herself but will be for all the wrong reasons. 

[Xircal]

Just now, acid thunder said:

 

Get a grip, Xircal.  You've been defeated and no point crying.  Jill Stein is thrashing about with nowhere to go and trying to make a name for herself but will be for all the wrong reasons. 

 

Now you're being childish.

 

It stands to reason that there wouldn't be any point in contesting all three states if there was no chance that Clinton could gain from it. The fact that there is is something you need to accept like an adult; not like a spoilt little child who has just had his favorite teddy-bear taken away from him.

[acid thunder]

Just now, Xircal said:

 

Now you're being childish.

 

It stands to reason that there wouldn't be any point in contesting all three states if there was no chance that Clinton could gain from it. The fact that there is is something you need to accept like an adult; not like a spoilt little child who has just had his favorite teddy-bear taken away from him.

 

If you say so.  Not a word from HRC either way. 

 

Come back when the recounts complete then we can compare notes.  Next.

[Strange]

17 minutes ago, Xircal said:

Now you're being childish.

 

It stands to reason that there wouldn't be any point in contesting all three states if there was no chance that Clinton could gain from it. The fact that there is is something you need to accept like an adult; not like a spoilt little child who has just had his favorite teddy-bear taken away from him.

 

Jill Stein is saying that the reason she wants a recount is not because she does not Trump as president, but because she is concerned about voter fraud/hacking. The "evidence" is something like "Pre-election polling vs Voter Turnout" or some such. 

 

So basically Stein is doing this as an integrity check. Nothing to do with Trump or Clinton and neither have made a comment yet. 

 

Of course thats what she is "saying" anyway. Reading between the lines she is just playing the long game. 

 

Majority of MSM agrees the chance is virtually non-existent.

 

So again, its not about Clinton but you think it is. 

[Xircal]

51 minutes ago, Strange said:

 

Jill Stein is saying that the reason she wants a recount is not because she does not Trump as president, but because she is concerned about voter fraud/hacking. The "evidence" is something like "Pre-election polling vs Voter Turnout" or some such. 

 

So basically Stein is doing this as an integrity check. Nothing to do with Trump or Clinton and neither have made a comment yet. 

 

Of course thats what she is "saying" anyway. Reading between the lines she is just playing the long game. 

 

Majority of MSM agrees the chance is virtually non-existent.

 

So again, its not about Clinton but you think it is. 

 

That's not was I was thinking at all actually. But Clinton would be the one to benefit if a discrepancy did arise and that's what I was trying to point out.

 

The problem with the three swing states is that they all relied on electronic voting systems. Given the controversy surrounding Clinton's private email server and substantial evidence that Russian hackers infiltrated the system dumping large amounts of email copied from it, it's only fair to make the case that the three states in question could have been hacked in a similar way to manipulate the final result.

 

There's a blog written by Alex Halderman who is a Professor of Computer Science at the University of Michigan which deals with that same scenario: https://medium.com/@jhalderm/want-to-know-if-the-election-was-hacked-look-at-the-ballots-c61a6113b0ba#.tlescl1gq

 

[Strange]

28 minutes ago, Xircal said:

That's not was I was thinking at all actually. But Clinton would be the one to benefit if a discrepancy did arise and that's what I was trying to point out.

 

The problem with the three swing states is that they all relied on electronic voting systems. Given the controversy surrounding Clinton's private email server and substantial evidence that Russian hackers infiltrated the system dumping large amounts of email copied from it, it's only fair to make the case that the three states in question could have been hacked in a similar way to manipulate the final result.

 

There's a blog written by Alex Halderman who is a Professor of Computer Science at the University of Michigan which deals with that same scenario: https://medium.com/@jhalderm/want-to-know-if-the-election-was-hacked-look-at-the-ballots-c61a6113b0ba#.tlescl1gq

 

I mean its always a possibility, but in reality I think its extremely unlikely that Russia (or whoever) hacked/manipulated our voting machines. Anythings possible though and if thats the case then hell ill be pretty shocked.

 

We are getting all conspiracy theory here so I don't want to comment much on that. 

 

Anyway whatever I want Hill to be out on her ass but I want the president that got the most electoral votes to be president. Right now I don't see anything and neither does Jill Stein & Crew. 

[Anthony5]

17 minutes ago, Strange said:

 

I mean its always a possibility, but in reality I think its extremely unlikely that Russia (or whoever) hacked/manipulated our voting machines. Anythings possible though and if thats the case then hell ill be pretty shocked.

 

We are getting all conspiracy theory here so I don't want to comment much on that. 

 

Anyway whatever I want Hill to be out on her ass but I want the president that got the most electoral votes to be president. Right now I don't see anything and neither does Jill Stein & Crew. 

 

 

The reason for the recount has nothing to do with hacking, it's just a desperate grasp at straw helms, as they choose the states where Trump's majority was the smallest.

[Strange]

1 minute ago, Anthony5 said:

The reason for the recount has nothing to do with hacking, it's just a desperate grasp at straw helms, as they choose the states where Trump's majority was the smallest.

 

Exactly + Jill Stein & Crew playing the long game pandering to Clinton's snowflakes. 

[sgtsabai]

Please define "snowflake". I can certainly come up with a definition of racist, misogynist, sociopath, bigot, homophobic, fascist,  but those certainly aren't "snowflakes". We do seem to have our share of them on TV and I don't mean snowflakes.

 

I can't stand the Clintons, on the other hand the fascist will never in 1,000,000,000 years be my president. I swore an oath to the Constitution, not a fascist or anybody else. Jill Stein is certainly no Clinton supporter nor as far as I can determine are the election experts that are calling for a vote recount. Computerized voting machines need to be done away with, they are too easy to tamper and there is too much evidence it has happened in the past. Unfortunately the main witness for the 2004 election fiasco died in an unexplained plane crash. I really like those, like the one where my long time friend Mickey Leland's plane ran into the side of a mountain, yea "pilot error" my ass.

[Xircal]

7 minutes ago, Strange said:

 

I mean its always a possibility, but in reality I think its extremely unlikely that Russia (or whoever) hacked/manipulated our voting machines. Anythings possible though and if thats the case then hell ill be pretty shocked.

 

We are getting all conspiracy theory here so I don't want to comment much on that. 

 

Anyway whatever I want Hill to be out on her ass but I want the president that got the most electoral votes to be president. Right now I don't see anything and neither does Jill Stein & Crew. 

 

That sounds reasonable and I respect your opinion.

 

Just going back briefly to your map of Illinois with its red predominance with just a few blue coded counties to represent votes for Clinton, I was looking at the makeup of the actual systems in place there. There appears to be a mix of electronic voting systems with verifieable paper results together with the option for purely paper votes.

 

To save us both jumping backwards and forwards between posts, I've created an image to compare them both side-by-side. The two counties in red on the right hand side of the image both voted for Clinton using a purely electronic means. The others either used a mixture of electronic and paper voting, or just paper ballots.

 

I wanted to do the same thing with Wisconsin, but can't figure out how to get the map view from your link ?