The Reign of Trump

[Scot Dutchy]

It doesn't but he could not care anyway like Trumpcunt just say anything there are enough morons to believe it.

[pErvinalia]

Does someone actually believe Trump doesn't endorse Neo Nazis, now lovingly repackaged as Alt Right?

He's only gone and put their leader, and guy who publishes their foul news publication (Breitbart) on his advisory council, Steve Bannon.

Lies.

Wtf? Bannon IS on his team, and Bannon's website is the self labelled home of the alt-right.

You really are impervious to facts, aren't you?

[Scot Dutchy]

Facts!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

To a Trumpcunt supporter you are swearing. They dont want facts They want lies by the bucket load.

Like him winning the popular vote because there were 3 million illegal voters.

Donald Trump's false claim about illegal votes 'based on unverified tweet posted on conspiracy website'

No evidence but who needs evidence when The Donald has spoken.

[Forty Two]

Article on the Trump endorsed, Neo Nazi movement. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/alt ... ce7aac26fe?

Which of course is a blatant lie, as Trump has never endorsed Neo-Nazis and in fact has disowned and repudiated them repeatedly.

You can't believe anything Huffpo says about Trump, you see, it's a propaganda tool of leftists and nothing more.

Now now Seth, as next thing you will be telling them that the Guardian, Salon. Buzzfeed and well the whole of the MSM have been feeding them propaganda and wont they feel silly.

...and Trump is no idea who David Duke is, and what he stands for.

He even said so.

LOL, David Duke. David Duke who is a monumental nothing. He lost every election he participated in, except one, for a Louisiana state house of representatives seat, in which he barely squeaked out a victory, winning with 8,459, to his opponent's 8,232 votes, and the issue that put him over the top by almost a whopping 132 votes was the fact that Duke promised to vote no on higher property taxes and his opponent has said he would support higher property taxes. Fucking David Duke ran for the 2016 Senate seat for Louisiana, and he barely got on the ballot and won a whopping 3% of the LOUISIANA vote. 3% of the vote - not nationally - but exclusively from LOUISIANA.

Nobody cares about David Duke. He's just a guy the Democrats are using to sully Trump by calling Trump a racist by association (even though Trump has never associated with David Duke). It's a clear political ploy.

[Tero]

Donald you dumbasss. You ARE the system now, no use telling us the system is rigged,

Several hours later, he added more specifics, but again without any evidence: "Serious voter fraud in Virginia, New Hampshire and California - so why isn't the media reporting on this? Serious bias - big problem!"

Election law experts quickly rejected Trump's claims as farfetched.

“There’s no reason to believe this is true,” said Rick Hasen, a professor specializing in election law at the University of California, Irvine. “The level of fraud in US elections is quite low.”

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/t ... ton-231860

[Svartalf]

But the system IS rigged, how else could the loser of the popular vote still be elected?

[pErvinalia]

The system isn't rigged. It's just not election via popular vote.

[Forty Two]

But the system IS rigged, how else could the loser of the popular vote still be elected?

Roughly the same way a team might win the Stanley Cup hockey finals by winning 4 games by a score of 1-0, and losing 3 games by a score of 7-1, 4-1 and 3-1, respectively. The losing team scored more goals, but since it's a best of 7 series, the winner of 4 games wins the contest, not the one who got the most goals.

By analogy, the US is 50 separate elections, not one big election. Nothing in our Constitutional system requires the President to be elected by popular vote at all. The States pick their choice for the President, and that's governed by State law and could even be done by vote of the State legislature or some other method. The states pick who they would support for President and that's what decides the Presidency.

And, before one harps about how undemocratic it is, in the common Parliamentary systems, the Prime Minister (head of state) is generally chosen by the other members of parliament, and not popular vote. So anyone in Parliamentary systems can fuck off. So, quite often, a parliamentary system will have it's head of government or head of state (depending on terminology) chosen who (a) has never been put to a vote at all, and/or (b) is chosen by coalition of minority parties, such that someone who belongs to a party who didn't even win the majority of seats in the Parliament gets picked as Prime Minister by compromise.

Everyone knows damn well "how this can happen," in an electoral system. It can happen because it's not set up as a pure democracy, and every western industrial country has non-democratic aspects to their systems, so all the moralizing and bloviating about how undemocratic the US system is just reveals how little various douchebags around the world know about their own systems. Before one deigns to comment on the American system, of which folks generally know very little, they may want to give some thought to their own systems.

Svartalf, as I recall you are French, and France abolished its electoral college in the early 60s, and France does have a popularly elected President. That's fine, and I'm not criticizing it. And, it gives you, at least, standing to harp on the US system while not harping on your own. But, the rest of the folks, like the Brits and the Germans, can keep their comments to themeselves. In Germany, for example, Chancellor Merkel wasn't popularly elected. She was elected by the Reichstag, err... I mean, the Bundestag. In the UK, the Queen holds head of State office because the right father didn't pull out of the right mother, and she appointed the PM based, by convention or custom, on the majority of the members of Parliament (not popular vote). I don't hear anyone carping about those systems, though....

[Forty Two]

The system isn't rigged. It's just not election via popular vote.

The Democratic Primaries were clearly rigged, in the sense of improperly handled with a view toward freezing out Bernie Sanders and making sure the insider, Hillary, won the nomination.

the Republican primaries were clearly not rigged, because the candidate most hated by the Republican establishment and insiders won because the people said "go fuck yourself" to the Republican party.

That's the beauty of this election.

[Svartalf]

The system isn't rigged. It's just not election via popular vote.

When one man's vote is not worth the same as another's depending on whether one lives in the large population centers of the coasts, or in the rural states, I say the system is rigged.

[pErvinalia]

Rigging implies it's directed. It's not, as far as I can tell.

[Svartalf]

it's organized inequality between voters, ergo rigged... plus, given it structurally favors the Red states, you could say it's directed too.

[Scot Dutchy]

All those voting machines not rigged?

We tried them once and never again. It is just so easy to rig. People would not believe it.

[pErvinalia]

How does it favour the red states?

[Forty Two]

The system isn't rigged. It's just not election via popular vote.

When one man's vote is not worth the same as another's depending on whether one lives in the large population centers of the coasts, or in the rural states, I say the system is rigged.

Well, that's pretty much true of most parliamentary systems. People vote for their member of parliament, and the party which wins the majority seats in parliament picks the prime minister, regardless of who is supported most by the populace. There can even be, in many parliamentary systems, a coalition where the prime minister belongs to a party who did not even win a majority of seats in the parliament.

So, you know, systems differ.