Clinton got more votes than Trump. People are pissed because of that.
Get it? Got it? Good.
So what? That isn't what the rules were, they would have run the campaigns very differently if they had been.
How many times did Clinton or Trump go to CA? If it was popular vote, then they both would have and the results may have been different, or not, we'll never know.
You can't (or shouldn't, if you're being honest) project the existing popular vote to mean much. Lots of people in Texas, New York, and California didn't bother to vote because of the EC and their vote not counting.
No, but who suffers will be psuedorandom and chaotic.
Not really, I'm rich, or at least "rich enough", that it won't hurt me.
I'm not quite to "fuck you money", but I'm getting there...
You'll probably think that is bad or something, but we each do what is in our own best interest...
What's missing is apparently the will to utilize it.
You are correct... it is human nature, you want a lot of people to pay a lot of money to help a lot of other people to harm themselves, that just isn't how humans generally work...
I don't have solar panels on my roof because they cost too much. I can afford them, but it isn't in my own interest to put them up. It might be in "everyone's interest", but I'm human
A real racist doesn't "turn it on and off", it is part of who they are...
Complaining about someone of color does not make you a racist. For example, Al Sharpton is a pile of dog shit. Saying that doesn't make me a racist, because the color of his skin is not the problem, it is his behavior that is the problem.
Nomani, a former Wall Street Journal reporter and co-founder of the Muslim Reform Movement, first made her self-described "confession" in a Washington Post column on Thursday. Since it published, she told Costello, she has received a torrent of abuse on social media. It's a symptom, Nomani insisted, of an increasingly hostile "liberal honor brigade."
And that is what the left doesn't understand... and it is one of the reasons Clinton lost...
Liberals, self-proclaimed "tolerant" people, attack anyone who doesn't hold their values.
Frankly, the real solution is population control, much of the problem is really too many people.
Our rate of pollution per person wouldn't be an issue if we had 500 million total people on Earth. Cutting pollution by 50% per person, then doubling the number of people, doesn't actually solve anything.
You can't get elected otherwise, most people are idiots and have no idea of the issues...
Hoping for it to be otherwise is to live in delusion.
Smart people read between the lines and figure out what they are really saying, then pick the person who covers the important issues in a broad and general sense.
If you want some measure of detail beyond that, donate a million dollars and you'll get it. Otherwise, you pick the one who paints a general picture and hope for the best.
The debate on abortion in the US is legally messy.
That is one of the problems of having "laws" written by courts...
As messy as Congress can be, the courts can be "too simple" in this regard.
Side note: My personal belief is that you do not have an abortion, even to save the life of the mother. You do not kill children for any reason whatsoever. I will not stand before God and tell him "I wanted my wife to live, so I killed my child to save her".
That being said... I'm not so fixed on this to be unable to see that not everyone agrees with me. Abortions being illegal (murder) except in the case of rape, incest, or the life of the mother, I could compromise on. I could also understand if the child is damaged in some way, brain dead or otherwise never going to live anyway. If a doctor certifies that this is the case, then fair enough, I can compromise there.
I personally wouldn't do it, but I also understand we live in an imperfect world and other people have points of view.
The problem with the whole "A woman's right to choose" is that the choice is the death of a child. How about my "right to punch you in the nose because you're an idiot"? Do I get the "man's right to choose to punch idiots"? To me, that is equally stupid as the "woman's right to choose nonsense". Murder is illegal for a reason, after all. You can't just do ANYTHING that you want in this world, we have rules...
u wot? He got sued successfully for not letting black people rent his properties.
In the 1970s, and it wasn't "successfully", he never went to trial, never admitted any guilt.
In any case, it was the 1970s, that was another time (quite common back then, he wasn't unique there), or would YOU like to be judged on what you did 40 years ago?
That said, he's pretty quick to blame the whole group for over-representation or problems with small segments within that group. Islamic terrorism is a problem with Muslims, illegal immigration is a problem with Mexicans, it's easy to feel harassed and discriminated when you're a non-terrorist Muslim or of Mexican descent and not an illegal immigrant.
1/3 of Mexicans voted for him, the smart ones understand he wasn't talking about LEGAL Mexicans, just ILLEGAL ones...
And they ALSO understood that when he first said "DEPORT THEM ALL", he didn't REALLY mean that, it was just his starting position, he has already moved off from that and now just "DEPORT THE ILLEGAL MEXICANS WITH A CRIMINAL RECORD".
You have to start at the extreme position and work towards the middle.
"Ban all Muslims" has turned into "Extreme vetting from countries that sponsor or harbor terrorists" for example.
I never for one second thought he meant "ALL" in either case, I have a brain and use it.:)
He's not much of a homophobe, but he is certainly racist and bigoted, that's well-documented and indisputable at this point.
Indisputable? Really?
Ok, then explain his campaign spokesperson, who is black...
I'd dispute it completely, if you think he is racist, that is because you want to think it, you've been convinced by MSM and Clinton's campaign of it, not because of any evidence.
And what happened in the 1970s stays there, that was another time, he isn't racist today, even if maybe he was in the 1970s.
There's nothing wrong with your sister or you holding those beliefs. There would be something wrong if she tried to pass legislation requiring everyone else to hold those same beliefs. Do you understand the difference?
I totally do... which is why I think it is horrible that we have such laws on the books... Such as the one that says I can't bar black people from renting my apartments...
After all, legislation requiring me to hold someone else's beliefs is wrong, right?
See the problem with your position? It works fine when it is something you support, but do you really support it both ways? I 100% agree the GOVERNMENT should not discriminate, which is why I SUPPORT gay marriage, because the GOVERNMENT issues the licence.
However, I as a PRIVATE citizen don't have to support it, and the laws should not try and require that I do, such as baking them a wedding cake.
So it's worse to generalize that a group of people are "deplorable"
You still haven't learned...
Being called names finally grew to be too much... so we voted Trump in to send you a message that perhaps you'd hear.
Seems like it didn't work, you're not listening... neither is a lot of the media, who STILL can't figure it out... For "college educated" people, liberals can be really stupid.
So Trump's cozying up to Evangelicals, conservative Catholics and other social conservatives with pretty strong guarantees of a Supreme Court willing to rip up abortion and gay rights didn't happen?
He was running for office and letting them know it would be ok...
There is zero chance that abortion rights and gay rights are going away...
Side note: abortion rights should go away, but gay rights should stay, for whatever that is worth. I still can't understand how anyone is for child murder, but there are funny people in this world.
Over the past year, many people have underestimated Donald Trump... "he will flame out before the Iowa Caucus", "he can't survive Super Tuesday", "he can't win over moderate Republicans in the upper midwest", "he is leading the Republican Party into the wilderness", "he doesn't stand a chance against Hillary". So far, they have all been wrong.
We have the truth, right there...
Lots of Democrats love to parrot that Donald Trump never really was successful or knew anything, that it was all Daddy's money and Donald knew nothing.
if Peter lands a spot in Trump's administration, it certainly won't be business as usual.
When is the last time a Republican Administration had an openly gay man in a senior role?
Peter would make a decent tech adviser to Trump. For all the people bitching that Trump is a raciest, homophobic, bigot... well, you're not paying attention...
Let me put it this way... George Bush didn't run the country, Dick Cheney did, along with a few others in the background (Karl Rove, etc.)
Donald Trump really only trusts 3 people in the world... Donald Jr., Eric, and Ivanka, with her husband Jared Kushner a really, really close 4th...
Notice how fast Chris Christie was out? That took 3 whole days... Ivanka was the one who got Daddy to fire Corey Lewandowski and Paul Manafort and to hire Kellyanne Conway who knew what she was doing. Jared was the one who kept Donald from putting Chris Christie on the ticket as VP (which is what he wanted to do).
VP Mike Pence is current the "top man" for the transition team, for appearances and political reasons, but Donald has largely reached the point where he just like giving speeches and feeling important. He lets the kids run the company and soon, the country. Jared will join them and he is no fool, he'll be fine. Mike Pence will also get more of a role than most VPs do, and that's not a bad thing.
Donald recently told his advisers that he wants to keep having big rallies and crowds, he loves hearing himself talk, he can do that for 8 years and feel important.
I very much hope that Ivanka runs for President in 2024, she would make a wonderful first female President who understands the balance between capitalism and human beings. Who understands the importance of woman's issues and should be acceptable across a wide path of Americans, she should win it in a landslide.
What mistake? I think Trump getting elected has some pretty nice benefits actually, not the least of which being that maybe we're reminded why it's best to stick someone with brains in charge.
Like who, Hillary? Please don't make me laugh, she is as stupid as Trump is...
You still don't get it, you have no idea who was actually running for the key job of "person in charge", and it wasn't either of them...
The 350.org people are not living in reality, if they are your source of info, then you're just living in fantasy land.
Quote from your link:
âoeIf humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on Earth is adapted, paleoclimate evidence and ongoing climate change suggest that CO2 will need to be reduced from [current levels] to at most 350 ppm.â
There is zero chance of that happening in the next 100 years, none, ziltch... It will hit 500 ppm long before it has a chance to stop climbing... it probably will hit 600 ppm before the end of this century...
Those people are insane. Notice they don't actually state what will be required to do that, they just say "conserve and stop burning stuff", but they never say HOW MUCH.
Do you know why? Because they know the truth, they know that if they actually publish the number, they'll get ignored.
The number HAS been published... the Western world has to cut 80% of its power consumption and the developing world 60% of its power consumption, and the whole planet has just 32 years to do it.
Now before you scream solar and wind, read the above sentence, then read it again, because I'm 99% sure you won't read it correctly the first few times.
In other words, Trump supporters are racists, they're bigots, they're stupid and gullible, and some of them, I assume, are good people. Or is that just not PC to say things like that unless you're Trump?
The percentage of Trump supporters who are really racist is probably similar to the number of Mexicans who are rapists, which is to say, a very small number.
Side note, being a rapist is a crime, being a racist is not, yet you wish to equate the two...
Another fault of the left and another reason Trump won, we're tired of being called near-criminals for daring to think different...
That's not fair. Germany was, until not so long ago, not even *allowed* to defend itself.
It has been decades, they have had long enough...
Keep in mind that the main gun on the American M1 Abrams main battle tank is a German-designed gun.:)
Germany can take care of itself. If they like, I'd even sell them nuclear weapons from the American stockpile at this point if they'd rather avoid developing their own. A few hundred would be plenty...
If some people want to protest gay marriage, I might disagree with what they have to say, but I VERY MUCH insist on their right to say it. And that's accepting that some people are intolerant assholes.
But if they physically harm anyone due to their intolerance? Well I just won't tolerate that. Send the cops, lock them up. That shit's illegal. And if they're facing a jury that let's them off scott-free? That's what federal hate-crimes are for. (But oh man have they been dragged into some stupid fights).
^ I agree with you... people should have the right to not like people, to disagree with something like gay marriage... but should not have the right to harm them.
Do I support gay marriage rights? Yes Do I endorse or like gay marriage? No
Slashdot Mirror
I live in Texas, my vote doesn't count either.
I'm 100% for getting rid of the EC.
Let me explain it to you simply.
Clinton got more votes than Trump. People are pissed because of that.
Get it? Got it? Good.
So what? That isn't what the rules were, they would have run the campaigns very differently if they had been.
How many times did Clinton or Trump go to CA? If it was popular vote, then they both would have and the results may have been different, or not, we'll never know.
You can't (or shouldn't, if you're being honest) project the existing popular vote to mean much. Lots of people in Texas, New York, and California didn't bother to vote because of the EC and their vote not counting.
No, but who suffers will be psuedorandom and chaotic.
Not really, I'm rich, or at least "rich enough", that it won't hurt me.
I'm not quite to "fuck you money", but I'm getting there...
You'll probably think that is bad or something, but we each do what is in our own best interest...
What's missing is apparently the will to utilize it.
You are correct... it is human nature, you want a lot of people to pay a lot of money to help a lot of other people to harm themselves, that just isn't how humans generally work...
I don't have solar panels on my roof because they cost too much. I can afford them, but it isn't in my own interest to put them up. It might be in "everyone's interest", but I'm human
I don't think you know what a racist is...
A real racist doesn't "turn it on and off", it is part of who they are...
Complaining about someone of color does not make you a racist. For example, Al Sharpton is a pile of dog shit. Saying that doesn't make me a racist, because the color of his skin is not the problem, it is his behavior that is the problem.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/11/...
Nomani, a former Wall Street Journal reporter and co-founder of the Muslim Reform Movement, first made her self-described "confession" in a Washington Post column on Thursday. Since it published, she told Costello, she has received a torrent of abuse on social media. It's a symptom, Nomani insisted, of an increasingly hostile "liberal honor brigade."
And that is what the left doesn't understand... and it is one of the reasons Clinton lost...
Liberals, self-proclaimed "tolerant" people, attack anyone who doesn't hold their values.
If we don't do those things, we will die.
Not all of us...
Frankly, the real solution is population control, much of the problem is really too many people.
Our rate of pollution per person wouldn't be an issue if we had 500 million total people on Earth. Cutting pollution by 50% per person, then doubling the number of people, doesn't actually solve anything.
You can't get elected otherwise, most people are idiots and have no idea of the issues...
Hoping for it to be otherwise is to live in delusion.
Smart people read between the lines and figure out what they are really saying, then pick the person who covers the important issues in a broad and general sense.
If you want some measure of detail beyond that, donate a million dollars and you'll get it. Otherwise, you pick the one who paints a general picture and hope for the best.
The debate on abortion in the US is legally messy.
That is one of the problems of having "laws" written by courts...
As messy as Congress can be, the courts can be "too simple" in this regard.
Side note: My personal belief is that you do not have an abortion, even to save the life of the mother. You do not kill children for any reason whatsoever. I will not stand before God and tell him "I wanted my wife to live, so I killed my child to save her".
That being said... I'm not so fixed on this to be unable to see that not everyone agrees with me. Abortions being illegal (murder) except in the case of rape, incest, or the life of the mother, I could compromise on. I could also understand if the child is damaged in some way, brain dead or otherwise never going to live anyway. If a doctor certifies that this is the case, then fair enough, I can compromise there.
I personally wouldn't do it, but I also understand we live in an imperfect world and other people have points of view.
The problem with the whole "A woman's right to choose" is that the choice is the death of a child. How about my "right to punch you in the nose because you're an idiot"? Do I get the "man's right to choose to punch idiots"? To me, that is equally stupid as the "woman's right to choose nonsense". Murder is illegal for a reason, after all. You can't just do ANYTHING that you want in this world, we have rules...
u wot? He got sued successfully for not letting black people rent his properties.
In the 1970s, and it wasn't "successfully", he never went to trial, never admitted any guilt.
In any case, it was the 1970s, that was another time (quite common back then, he wasn't unique there), or would YOU like to be judged on what you did 40 years ago?
That said, he's pretty quick to blame the whole group for over-representation or problems with small segments within that group. Islamic terrorism is a problem with Muslims, illegal immigration is a problem with Mexicans, it's easy to feel harassed and discriminated when you're a non-terrorist Muslim or of Mexican descent and not an illegal immigrant.
1/3 of Mexicans voted for him, the smart ones understand he wasn't talking about LEGAL Mexicans, just ILLEGAL ones...
And they ALSO understood that when he first said "DEPORT THEM ALL", he didn't REALLY mean that, it was just his starting position, he has already moved off from that and now just "DEPORT THE ILLEGAL MEXICANS WITH A CRIMINAL RECORD".
You have to start at the extreme position and work towards the middle.
"Ban all Muslims" has turned into "Extreme vetting from countries that sponsor or harbor terrorists" for example.
I never for one second thought he meant "ALL" in either case, I have a brain and use it. :)
He's not much of a homophobe, but he is certainly racist and bigoted, that's well-documented and indisputable at this point.
Indisputable? Really?
Ok, then explain his campaign spokesperson, who is black...
I'd dispute it completely, if you think he is racist, that is because you want to think it, you've been convinced by MSM and Clinton's campaign of it, not because of any evidence.
And what happened in the 1970s stays there, that was another time, he isn't racist today, even if maybe he was in the 1970s.
If you pull the tiger's tail, don't be shocked when it turns around and has you for lunch...
There's nothing wrong with your sister or you holding those beliefs. There would be something wrong if she tried to pass legislation requiring everyone else to hold those same beliefs. Do you understand the difference?
I totally do... which is why I think it is horrible that we have such laws on the books... Such as the one that says I can't bar black people from renting my apartments...
After all, legislation requiring me to hold someone else's beliefs is wrong, right?
See the problem with your position? It works fine when it is something you support, but do you really support it both ways? I 100% agree the GOVERNMENT should not discriminate, which is why I SUPPORT gay marriage, because the GOVERNMENT issues the licence.
However, I as a PRIVATE citizen don't have to support it, and the laws should not try and require that I do, such as baking them a wedding cake.
So it's worse to generalize that a group of people are "deplorable"
You still haven't learned...
Being called names finally grew to be too much... so we voted Trump in to send you a message that perhaps you'd hear.
Seems like it didn't work, you're not listening... neither is a lot of the media, who STILL can't figure it out... For "college educated" people, liberals can be really stupid.
So Trump's cozying up to Evangelicals, conservative Catholics and other social conservatives with pretty strong guarantees of a Supreme Court willing to rip up abortion and gay rights didn't happen?
He was running for office and letting them know it would be ok...
There is zero chance that abortion rights and gay rights are going away...
Side note: abortion rights should go away, but gay rights should stay, for whatever that is worth. I still can't understand how anyone is for child murder, but there are funny people in this world.
Over the past year, many people have underestimated Donald Trump ... "he will flame out before the Iowa Caucus", "he can't survive Super Tuesday", "he can't win over moderate Republicans in the upper midwest", "he is leading the Republican Party into the wilderness", "he doesn't stand a chance against Hillary". So far, they have all been wrong.
We have the truth, right there...
Lots of Democrats love to parrot that Donald Trump never really was successful or knew anything, that it was all Daddy's money and Donald knew nothing.
I notice the Dems aren't laughing anymore...
And that was the point of the law wasn't it? Why make any changes at all if not otherwise to solemnize the process in the mind of the mother?
I have a sister-in-law who has had three miscarriages, she held a funeral for every one of them, a real funeral.
Life begins at conception, anything else is just absurd...
if Peter lands a spot in Trump's administration, it certainly won't be business as usual.
When is the last time a Republican Administration had an openly gay man in a senior role?
Peter would make a decent tech adviser to Trump. For all the people bitching that Trump is a raciest, homophobic, bigot... well, you're not paying attention...
Let me put it this way... George Bush didn't run the country, Dick Cheney did, along with a few others in the background (Karl Rove, etc.)
Donald Trump really only trusts 3 people in the world... Donald Jr., Eric, and Ivanka, with her husband Jared Kushner a really, really close 4th...
Notice how fast Chris Christie was out? That took 3 whole days... Ivanka was the one who got Daddy to fire Corey Lewandowski and Paul Manafort and to hire Kellyanne Conway who knew what she was doing. Jared was the one who kept Donald from putting Chris Christie on the ticket as VP (which is what he wanted to do).
VP Mike Pence is current the "top man" for the transition team, for appearances and political reasons, but Donald has largely reached the point where he just like giving speeches and feeling important. He lets the kids run the company and soon, the country. Jared will join them and he is no fool, he'll be fine. Mike Pence will also get more of a role than most VPs do, and that's not a bad thing.
Donald recently told his advisers that he wants to keep having big rallies and crowds, he loves hearing himself talk, he can do that for 8 years and feel important.
I very much hope that Ivanka runs for President in 2024, she would make a wonderful first female President who understands the balance between capitalism and human beings. Who understands the importance of woman's issues and should be acceptable across a wide path of Americans, she should win it in a landslide.
What mistake? I think Trump getting elected has some pretty nice benefits actually, not the least of which being that maybe we're reminded why it's best to stick someone with brains in charge.
Like who, Hillary? Please don't make me laugh, she is as stupid as Trump is...
You still don't get it, you have no idea who was actually running for the key job of "person in charge", and it wasn't either of them...
That's nice. That's not sustainable, though.
The 350.org people are not living in reality, if they are your source of info, then you're just living in fantasy land.
Quote from your link:
âoeIf humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on Earth is adapted, paleoclimate evidence and ongoing climate change suggest that CO2 will need to be reduced from [current levels] to at most 350 ppm.â
There is zero chance of that happening in the next 100 years, none, ziltch... It will hit 500 ppm long before it has a chance to stop climbing... it probably will hit 600 ppm before the end of this century...
Those people are insane. Notice they don't actually state what will be required to do that, they just say "conserve and stop burning stuff", but they never say HOW MUCH.
Do you know why? Because they know the truth, they know that if they actually publish the number, they'll get ignored.
The number HAS been published... the Western world has to cut 80% of its power consumption and the developing world 60% of its power consumption, and the whole planet has just 32 years to do it.
Now before you scream solar and wind, read the above sentence, then read it again, because I'm 99% sure you won't read it correctly the first few times.
There is zero chance of that happening.
In other words, Trump supporters are racists, they're bigots, they're stupid and gullible, and some of them, I assume, are good people. Or is that just not PC to say things like that unless you're Trump?
The percentage of Trump supporters who are really racist is probably similar to the number of Mexicans who are rapists, which is to say, a very small number.
Side note, being a rapist is a crime, being a racist is not, yet you wish to equate the two...
Another fault of the left and another reason Trump won, we're tired of being called near-criminals for daring to think different...
That's not fair. Germany was, until not so long ago, not even *allowed* to defend itself.
It has been decades, they have had long enough...
Keep in mind that the main gun on the American M1 Abrams main battle tank is a German-designed gun. :)
Germany can take care of itself. If they like, I'd even sell them nuclear weapons from the American stockpile at this point if they'd rather avoid developing their own. A few hundred would be plenty...
I can laugh at your stupidity all I want
You can, of course... but you're missing the chance to learn something by doing so...
I said that Trump's win should give you pause, if you throw that away, then you've learned nothing and will repeat the mistakes...
If some people want to protest gay marriage, I might disagree with what they have to say, but I VERY MUCH insist on their right to say it. And that's accepting that some people are intolerant assholes.
But if they physically harm anyone due to their intolerance? Well I just won't tolerate that. Send the cops, lock them up. That shit's illegal. And if they're facing a jury that let's them off scott-free? That's what federal hate-crimes are for. (But oh man have they been dragged into some stupid fights).
^ I agree with you... people should have the right to not like people, to disagree with something like gay marriage... but should not have the right to harm them.
Do I support gay marriage rights? Yes
Do I endorse or like gay marriage? No
Those are not incompatible positions