Strange Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 On 11/27/2016 at 7:58 PM, Opl said: When I read Strange's posts , I can only hope D. Trump turns America into a huge gated community. Good guys in, bad guys out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tropo Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 (edited) 8 hours ago, Tawan Dok Krating Daeng said: Apart from qualifying as Trivial Pursuit questions, there is really no relevance of your 19th Century 'ironies' to anything in the current world. The Electoral College debate is all about the one person one vote issue and how a system designed to protect slave states is no longer appropriate to a modern democracy. It must hurt you that the Democrats got the wrong end of the stick all 5 times then as I added it just for interest. It makes a nice change from all the sour grapes, vile-spewing posts don't you think? Considering what's going on at the moment, this "Trivial Pursuit" history is more relevant than it's ever likely will be. I'm sure a lot of people would find it very interesting that a popular vote vs EC problem back in 1824 was a, or the reason for the formation of the Democratic Party. Edited November 29, 2016 by tropo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaibeachlovers Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 8 hours ago, Tawan Dok Krating Daeng said: Apart from qualifying as Trivial Pursuit questions, there is really no relevance of your 19th Century 'ironies' to anything in the current world. The Electoral College debate is all about the one person one vote issue and how a system designed to protect slave states is no longer appropriate to a modern democracy. All of the noise that Trump boys are making will not distract from legitimate recounts, the reality of Clinton's significant win in the popular vote and its impact on the legitimacy of Trump's soon to be regime and the restarting of Trump's vainglorious lies and paranoid ramblings on twitter about illegal votes. How is this at all connected to Andrew Jackson? Maybe you can provide some context for your interesting little 'fact lets'? Regardless, come December 13, such irrelevancies will be shown to be irrelevant so far as Trump being president is in dispute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tawan Dok Krating Daeng Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 23 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said: Regardless, come December 13, such irrelevancies will be shown to be irrelevant so far as Trump being president is in dispute. Wishful thinking. I do not dispute the actuality of the EC result but neither do I dismiss the relevance of the popular vote as one of what will be many planks building a case for Trump's lack of legitimacy. He has exacerbated and exploited social divisions for his own personal glory. I look forward to the deliciousness of the bonfire of his vanity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tawan Dok Krating Daeng Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 36 minutes ago, tropo said: It must hurt you that the Democrats got the wrong end of the stick all 5 times then as I added it just for interest. It makes a nice change from all the sour grapes, vile-spewing posts don't you think? Considering what's going on at the moment, this "Trivial Pursuit" history is more relevant than it's ever likely will be. I'm sure a lot of people would find it very interesting that a popular vote vs EC problem back in 1824 was a, or the reason for the formation of the Democratic Party. Not at all. You are trying to build a narrative to diminish the impact of Trump's loss of the popular vote and to reinforce one view of the EC system as a wise and beneficial system to protect the poor old rural folk from the tyranny of the cities, which is an historically false narrative. No doubt the protagonists would be arguing the exact opposite if the election result had been reversed. To contribute to your narrative, you are using historic trivialities to justify your position. I think you are being superficial and ask for some relevant connection apart from mere coincidence. I do not think that you can compare the 19th century context to the current context at all. This is the problem with anachronisms like the EC, they get further and further out of date. I am happy to accept some lesson from Andrew Jackson during the period that predates the accession of Victoria to the British throne and a mere decade or so after the end of the Napoleonic Wars to the election of Donald Trump in 2016 if you can provide some relevant connection. Until then, I will treat your attempt as an irrelevant attempt at historical appropriation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tropo Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 3 hours ago, Tawan Dok Krating Daeng said: Wishful thinking. I do not dispute the actuality of the EC result but neither do I dismiss the relevance of the popular vote as one of what will be many planks building a case for Trump's lack of legitimacy. He has exacerbated and exploited social divisions for his own personal glory. I look forward to the deliciousness of the bonfire of his vanity. As I look forward to you eating your words. Really, all this prediction of imminent failure before he's served one day in office is getting old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tropo Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 3 hours ago, Strange said: Yawn ^^ Double yawn!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thaibeachlovers Posted November 29, 2016 Share Posted November 29, 2016 8 hours ago, Tawan Dok Krating Daeng said: Not at all. You are trying to build a narrative to diminish the impact of Trump's loss of the popular vote and to reinforce one view of the EC system as a wise and beneficial system to protect the poor old rural folk from the tyranny of the cities, which is an historically false narrative. No doubt the protagonists would be arguing the exact opposite if the election result had been reversed. To contribute to your narrative, you are using historic trivialities to justify your position. I think you are being superficial and ask for some relevant connection apart from mere coincidence. I do not think that you can compare the 19th century context to the current context at all. This is the problem with anachronisms like the EC, they get further and further out of date. I am happy to accept some lesson from Andrew Jackson during the period that predates the accession of Victoria to the British throne and a mere decade or so after the end of the Napoleonic Wars to the election of Donald Trump in 2016 if you can provide some relevant connection. Until then, I will treat your attempt as an irrelevant attempt at historical appropriation. Trump will treat his minority win with the same concern as G W Bush did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagnabbit Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 There are 3,141 counties in the United States. Trump won 3,084 of them. Clinton won 57. There are 62 counties in New York State. Trump won 46 of them. Clinton won 16. Clinton won the popular vote by approx. 1.5 million votes. In the 5 counties that encompass NYC, (Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Richmond & Queens) Clinton received well over 2 million more votes than Trump. (Clinton only won 4 of these counties; Trump won Richmond) Therefore these 5 counties alone, more than accounted for Clinton winning the popular vote of the entire country. These 5 counties comprise 319 square miles. The United States is comprised of 3, 797,000 square miles. When you have a country that encompasses almost 4 million square miles of territory, it would be ludicrous to even suggest that the vote of those who inhabit a mere 319 square miles should dictate the outcome of a national election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ulysses G. Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 39 minutes ago, Dagnabbit said: When you have a country that encompasses almost 4 million square miles of territory, it would be ludicrous to even suggest that the vote of those who inhabit a mere 319 square miles should dictate the outcome of a national election. Not if they believe in the same things that you do. As far as the left is concerned, they are the only ones who should be allowed to vote at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 58 minutes ago, Dagnabbit said: There are 3,141 counties in the United States. Trump won 3,084 of them. Clinton won 57. There are 62 counties in New York State. Trump won 46 of them. Clinton won 16. Clinton won the popular vote by approx. 1.5 million votes. In the 5 counties that encompass NYC, (Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Richmond & Queens) Clinton received well over 2 million more votes than Trump. (Clinton only won 4 of these counties; Trump won Richmond) Therefore these 5 counties alone, more than accounted for Clinton winning the popular vote of the entire country. These 5 counties comprise 319 square miles. The United States is comprised of 3, 797,000 square miles. When you have a country that encompasses almost 4 million square miles of territory, it would be ludicrous to even suggest that the vote of those who inhabit a mere 319 square miles should dictate the outcome of a national election. This is a good post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgrahmm Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 1 hour ago, Dagnabbit said: There are 3,141 counties in the United States. Trump won 3,084 of them. Clinton won 57. There are 62 counties in New York State. Trump won 46 of them. Clinton won 16. Clinton won the popular vote by approx. 1.5 million votes. In the 5 counties that encompass NYC, (Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Richmond & Queens) Clinton received well over 2 million more votes than Trump. (Clinton only won 4 of these counties; Trump won Richmond) Therefore these 5 counties alone, more than accounted for Clinton winning the popular vote of the entire country. These 5 counties comprise 319 square miles. The United States is comprised of 3, 797,000 square miles. When you have a country that encompasses almost 4 million square miles of territory, it would be ludicrous to even suggest that the vote of those who inhabit a mere 319 square miles should dictate the outcome of a national election. Best post in the entire thread....The latest reported figures of illegal ballots seems to leave HC with about 3,000,000 less votes - and losing by popular vote....But a small percentage of votes are still out standing so it could get marginally better, or worse for her.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostinisaan Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 Hilary is put on suspension as well. But she'll continue to be the Superwoman for many Americans.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lannarebirth Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 2 hours ago, Dagnabbit said: There are 3,141 counties in the United States. Trump won 3,084 of them. Clinton won 57. There are 62 counties in New York State. Trump won 46 of them. Clinton won 16. Clinton won the popular vote by approx. 1.5 million votes. In the 5 counties that encompass NYC, (Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Richmond & Queens) Clinton received well over 2 million more votes than Trump. (Clinton only won 4 of these counties; Trump won Richmond) Therefore these 5 counties alone, more than accounted for Clinton winning the popular vote of the entire country. These 5 counties comprise 319 square miles. The United States is comprised of 3, 797,000 square miles. When you have a country that encompasses almost 4 million square miles of territory, it would be ludicrous to even suggest that the vote of those who inhabit a mere 319 square miles should dictate the outcome of a national election. The World as seen from New York: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puck2 Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 2 hours ago, Strange said: 3 hours ago, Dagnabbit said: <------> In the 5 counties that encompass NYC, (Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Richmond & Queens) Clinton received well over 2 million more votes than Trump. (Clinton only won 4 of these counties; Trump won Richmond) Therefore these 5 counties alone, more than accounted for Clinton winning the popular vote of the entire country. These 5 counties comprise 319 square miles. The United States is comprised of 3, 797,000 square miles. When you have a country that encompasses almost 4 million square miles of territory, it would be ludicrous to even suggest that the vote of those who inhabit a mere 319 square miles should dictate the outcome of a national election. What an abstruse argument. Are these "counties" male or female and at least 18 years old? New rightwing law ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silurian Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 3 hours ago, Dagnabbit said: When you have a country that encompasses almost 4 million square miles of territory, it would be ludicrous to even suggest that the vote of those who inhabit a mere 319 square miles should dictate the outcome of a national election. It is good to know that land mass itself has voting power. Must be all those Rocky and Appalachian Mountains that voted that swung the electoral vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 5 minutes ago, puck2 said: What an abstruse argument. Are these "counties" male or female and at least 18 years old? New rightwing law ??? What? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 Just now, Silurian said: It is good to know that land mass itself has voting power. Must be all those Rocky and Appalachian Mountains that voted that swung the electoral vote. What are you talking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andaman Al Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 (edited) 3 hours ago, Dagnabbit said: There are 3,141 counties in the United States. Trump won 3,084 of them. Clinton won 57. There are 62 counties in New York State. Trump won 46 of them. Clinton won 16. Clinton won the popular vote by approx. 1.5 million votes. In the 5 counties that encompass NYC, (Bronx, Brooklyn, Manhattan, Richmond & Queens) Clinton received well over 2 million more votes than Trump. (Clinton only won 4 of these counties; Trump won Richmond) Therefore these 5 counties alone, more than accounted for Clinton winning the popular vote of the entire country. These 5 counties comprise 319 square miles. The United States is comprised of 3, 797,000 square miles. When you have a country that encompasses almost 4 million square miles of territory, it would be ludicrous to even suggest that the vote of those who inhabit a mere 319 square miles should dictate the outcome of a national election. Hardly a 'good post' as some have said but a disgraceful example of the abuse of statistics and a disgraceful example of plagiarism without giving reference or credit. http://www.allenbwest.com/michele/numbers-shut-liberals-electoral-college Also in the readers comments here http://occupydemocrats.com/2016/11/29/trump-just-laughed-voters-surprise-treasury-secretary-pick/ And here from yesterday http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=622871.0 So it wasn't a great post it was a fraud post by a TV member who is a fraud. As normal you guys are sucked in by the first thing that sounds sweet to your ears. No wonder you make it easy for conman Trump to control you, sheesh! Edited November 30, 2016 by Andaman Al Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgrahmm Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 13 minutes ago, Strange said: What are you talking about? Just another leftie way of deflection & calling names....Serious stuff to them..... Nonsense to just about everyone else...... Groundless assertions....Even using mountains.....The grandeur of it all.... Awakening "hangover" from 8 years of delusional slumber...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puck2 Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 2 minutes ago, Strange said: What are you talking about? Ref. to # 467 I translate it for you: Do square miles decide on US election or the number of people ? It's already a "democrazy" in the US that the majority of the voters doesn't win an election, but the so called electoral votes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andaman Al Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 (edited) 20 minutes ago, Strange said: What are you talking about? What he is talking about is that the member who made such a great post in your opinion - Dagnabbit seems to think it ok that 150 000 square miles of desert should be able to vote and be heard as much as the 1 sq km that is the financial capital of the USA. Cute! (apart from the fact the rubbish post is not Dagnabbits in the first place). Edited November 30, 2016 by Andaman Al Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgrahmm Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 It's as simple as this..... Trump won more states 36? or 38? out of the 50.....Roughly 2/3's to 1/3..... Not to mention the gains the Republican party made in a virtual clean sweep at every level.....More to come in 2 years in all probability.... That's the way it's tabulated....It cannot be discounted because one party clearly & substantially won over the other and the losers "don't like it"......It's just not how it works...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 29 minutes ago, Andaman Al said: As normal you guys are sucked in by the first thing that sounds sweet to your ears. No wonder you make it easy for conman Trump to control you, sheesh! The post, and information are across a lot of boards, and articles, yes, but that does not make it any less true. IS the information a lie? No. Is Trump conning anyone? No. Electoral College for hundreds of years now. Quit yr bitchin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andaman Al Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 6 minutes ago, pgrahmm said: It's as simple as this..... Trump won more states 36? or 38? out of the 50.....Roughly 2/3's to 1/3..... Not to mention the gains the Republican party made in a virtual clean sweep at every level.....More to come in 2 years in all probability.... That's the way it's tabulated....It cannot be discounted because one party clearly & substantially won over the other and the losers "don't like it"......It's just not how it works...... Please read about the very real practice of the Gerrymandering capital of the world, the USA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andaman Al Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 (edited) 1 minute ago, Strange said: The post, and information are across a lot of boards, and articles, yes, but that does not make it any less true. IS the information a lie? No. Is Trump conning anyone? No. Electoral College for hundreds of years now. Quit yr bitchin. What a pity Trump did not advocate the Electoral College when Obama won, instead calling it a disgrace. A little like his supporter base. He seems to like the EC now. STRANGE THAT ISN'T IT? Edited November 30, 2016 by Andaman Al Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgrahmm Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 2 minutes ago, Andaman Al said: Please read about the very real practice of the Gerrymandering capital of the world, the USA. So the state lines were ebbing & flowing on election day? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 7 minutes ago, Andaman Al said: What a pity Trump did not advocate the Electoral College when Obama won, instead calling it a disgrace. A little like his supporter base. He seems to like the EC now. STRANGE THAT ISN'T IT? Yeah Ive been in support of how we do it, for as long as I been alive. Trump, Obama, Hillary, whoever isn't influencing me. Only thing strange is your fascination with trying to poke holes in literally everything to do with the USA, like, somehow, you are the only one that knows any thing and everyone else is stupid. Arrogance dude, nobody likes it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strange Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 26 minutes ago, Andaman Al said: What a pity Trump did not advocate the Electoral College when Obama won, instead calling it a disgrace. A little like his supporter base. He seems to like the EC now. STRANGE THAT ISN'T IT? I support EC, supported it prior to Trump, would have still supported it if Hillary Clinton won, and if somehow by some freak of nature Hillary becomes president due to a recount, I will support that too. I don't care what Trump says on the subject and I didn't vote for him based on what he said about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andaman Al Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 1 hour ago, Strange said: Yeah Ive been in support of how we do it, for as long as I been alive. Trump, Obama, Hillary, whoever isn't influencing me. Only thing strange is your fascination with trying to poke holes in literally everything to do with the USA, like, somehow, you are the only one that knows any thing and everyone else is stupid. Arrogance dude, nobody likes it. So, first I am homeboy then I am dude. I am not a dude or a home boy is that clear. To be honest Strange, the only thing that is fascinating is your continued reference to my fascination about poking holes in America. I do not. Please cut and paste examples. I think Trump and his supporter base are jerks and Trump will have a direct economic effect (for the worse) on a global scale. You are becoming the equivalent of an internet stalker, now go and play with someone else. Either respond to the comments or do not but stop obsessing with your fascination about my fascination. Telling you I believe you are wrong is not arrogant. Get over yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now