• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Roughly 3 weeks into Trump as PEOTUS...

What part of the United States being a federal republic does the birdman not get? If you want a unitary system, there are plenty of places in Europe for you. I wouldn't wait too long because if you are a young fellow the Muslims might have it all changed by the time you are ready to retire.

Trump does not have a mandate. He won, so he gets to do his thing, and and rest of us can try to stop him when we disagree.
 
birdman said:
RJ is right and you are wrong. An electoral system based on space and not votes is bizarre. Tell me, why do 77,000 votes in PA, MI, and WI, count for so much more than 2.8 million votes in CA, OR, and WA? How can you be proud of something like that and how can you claim some sort of mandate to govern? Here you are talking shit to liberals about how our message a policies were rejected by America and we'd better learn some lessons, yet more people, and I mean a lot more people, voted for the liberal platform. It's a ridiculously stoopid system that allows the minority to rule over the majority...but then again, it is a by product of slavery so of course it is rediculously stoopid.
Click to expand...

Way too many illegals voting on the west coast, especially in this election. Can't trust the integrity of their elections at present.
 
BobStackFan4Life said:
Way too many illegals voting on the west coast, especially in this election. Can't trust the integrity of their elections at present.
Click to expand...

Ok honest question here, not trying to needle you. Can you provide proof of this?

Or are you trying to be facetious because this is something trump would say?
 
RaleighDevil said:
What part of the United States being a federal republic does the birdman not get? If you want a unitary system, there are plenty of places in Europe for you. I wouldn't wait too long because if you are a young fellow the Muslims might have it all changed by the time you are ready to retire.

Trump does not have a mandate. He won, so he gets to do his thing, and and rest of us can try to stop him when we disagree.
Click to expand...

The part where we're told from birth about the power and value of democracy and a person's right to meaningful participation
 
Last edited:
birdman said:
RJ is right and you are wrong. An electoral system based on space and not votes is bizarre. Tell me, why do 77,000 votes in PA, MI, and WI, count for so much more than 2.8 million votes in CA, OR, and WA? How can you be proud of something like that and how can you claim some sort of mandate to govern? Here you are talking shit to liberals about how our message a policies were rejected by America and we'd better learn some lessons, yet more people, and I mean a lot more people, voted for the liberal platform. It's a ridiculously stoopid system that allows the minority to rule over the majority...but then again, it is a by product of slavery so of course it is rediculously stoopid.
Click to expand...

You do not understand the concept of federalism, upon which our government is based. Also, Democrats pile up popular vote margins in relatively close elections by getting a monolithic 95% of the black vote while the rest of the voter subsets are looking at both sides and splitting their votes in varying degrees. When you obtain a popular vote margin basically by getting 95% of the vote from one roughly 13% subset of the voters it does not indicate that you have a consensus approval for your policies from the nation as a whole.

If you went by a straight popular vote and black voters who compromised about 13% of the total vote continued to cast their votes in a monolithic 95% to 5% manner, the end result would be that 13% of the population could overrule the combined wishes of the other 87% of the population in many of the closer elections.

Also, Hillary carried California by 4.3 million votes, I believe, the last time I checked. That means without California's vote she lost by 1.5 million votes. Just as one 13% subset of voters should not be allowed to elect a president over the wishes of the other 87% of the voters by giving virtually all of its vote to one candidate, neither should one large state be allowed to elect a president over the wishes of the other 49 states by giving one candidate a 2 to 1 margin with a huge number of votes.

This is why we have a federalist system of government. Hence the name: The United States of America.

By the way, I've never said that Trump had a mandate. He may have said that, but I haven't. Obviously, the nation is bitterly divided.....and I'm afraid that the bitterness and the division is only going to get worse. I know that I have voted Democratic for most of my life....and I have never been more pissed off in my life with a political party than I am right now with today's Democratic Party. Some of my friends who have known me for a long time and knew how strong a Democrat I had been (my only son is named after Robert Kennedy, whom I worked for while a senior at WF; I was the local McGovern campaign manager in 1972 after I got out of the army in 1971; I ran for county office as a Democrat in 2006....and you know about the Howard Dean thing) were shocked at my support for Trump and laughingly said that when the Democrats lost me they must be in really bad shape. Somehow, though, the Democrats have managed to do just that.
 
Newenglanddeac said:
What do you mean nuts? As in it's not true?
Click to expand...

Yes, it's ridiculous to include all those third party votes as a vote against Trump. They were votes for someone, not necessarily against Trump. And if that someone they voted for wasn't in the race those people might have voted for Trump.
 
BobStackFan4Life said:
Yes, it's ridiculous to include all those third party votes as a vote against Trump. They were votes for someone, not necessarily against Trump. And if that someone they voted for wasn't in the race those people might have voted for Trump.
Click to expand...

Is this serious?
 
Newenglanddeac said:
Ok honest question here, not trying to needle you. Can you provide proof of this?

Or are you trying to be facetious because this is something trump would say?
Click to expand...

I could make a case for it, but I'm not going to. Let's just hope the situation is fixed in CA so we can start trusting their elections. 800,000 illegals in LA alone.
 
BobStackFan4Life said:
Yes, it's ridiculous to include all those third party votes as a vote against Trump. They were votes for someone, not necessarily against Trump. And if that someone they voted for wasn't in the race those people might have voted for Trump.
Click to expand...

That's a fair argument but we don't have ranked choice voting so we'll never know. What we do know is that voters had a choice of 3+ candidates and 54% chose to vote for someone other than trump. My point of him not having a mandate remains the same.
 
BobStackFan4Life said:
I could make a case for it, but I'm not going to. Let's just hope the situation is fixed in CA so we can start trusting their elections. 800,000 illegals in LA alone.
Click to expand...

Wish we had a way to rank poster credibility. If you're going to throw out a claim like that then back it up.
 
Bob really seems to hate that black folks vote. Sure does harp on it a lot.

This board gets much more enjoyable when you realize all the trumpshills basically post exactly like bandwagon boy used to. Yet people keep trying to reason with the bots.
 
Newenglanddeac said:
Wish we had a way to rank poster credibility. If you're going to throw out a claim like that then back it up.
Click to expand...

What good would it do? I go look up an article by someone who makes the case, post it, it gets ignored, you post an article by a pro-Hillary establishment source who is opposed to voter id saying it's not a problem...If you want to see the case made for the possibility of illegals voting like never before (because there has never been a candidate they hated like Trump) do your own research. But you won't accept even the possibility.
 
Deacfreak07 said:
Bob really seems to hate that black folks vote. Sure does harp on it a lot.
Click to expand...

Not at all. I have a problem, though, when one group with 13% of the total vote, a large percentage of which is concentrated in relatively few areas, blindly gives all of its votes to one candidate and thinks that their votes should override the other 87% of the voters spread across the country who are looking at both sides and splitting their votes accordingly.

That's basically what happened in this election.
 
bobknightfan said:
Not at all. I have a problem, though, when one group with 13% of the total vote, a large percentage of which is concentrated in relatively few areas, blindly gives all of its votes to one candidate and thinks that their votes should override the other 87% of the voters spread across the country who are looking at both sides and splitting their votes accordingly.

That's basically what happened in this election.
Click to expand...

So you are saying black folks aren't looking at both sides?
 
Deacfreak07 said:
So you are saying black folks aren't looking at both sides?
Click to expand...

That's right. All you have to do is look at the numbers. No other voter subset has a long history of voting more than 90% for the same political party. It's automatic....and it's not just about Trump. This was from the 2012 election:

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/p...voting_wards__Mitt_Romney_got_zero_votes.html

In 59 Philadelphia voting divisions, Mitt Romney got zero votes

Originally published on Nov. 12, 2012.


It's one thing for a Democratic presidential candidate to dominate a Democratic city like Philadelphia, but check out this head-spinning figure: In 59 voting divisions in the city, Mitt Romney received not one vote. Zero. Zilch.

These are the kind of numbers that send Republicans into paroxysms of voter-fraud angst, but such results may not be so startling after all.

"We have always had these dense urban corridors that are extremely Democratic," said Jonathan Rodden, a political science professor at Stanford University. "It's kind of an urban fact, and you are looking at the extreme end of it in Philadelphia."

Most big cities are politically homogeneous, with 75 percent to 80 percent of voters identifying as Democrats. Cities are not only bursting with Democrats: They are easier to organize than rural areas where people live far apart from one another, said Sasha Issenberg, author of The Victory Lab: The Secret Science of Winning Campaigns. "One reason Democrats can maximize votes in Philadelphia is that it's very easy to knock on every door," Issenberg said.

Still, was there not one contrarian voter in those 59 divisions, where unofficial vote tallies have President Obama outscoring Romney by a combined 19,605 to 0?
 
BobStackFan4Life said:
What good would it do? I go look up an article by someone who makes the case, post it, it gets ignored, you post an article by a pro-Hillary establishment source who is opposed to voter id saying it's not a problem...If you want to see the case made for the possibility of illegals voting like never before (because there has never been a candidate they hated like Trump) do your own research. But you won't accept even the possibility.
Click to expand...

Bob I asked for the information and said I'm not trying to needle you. Please educate me on this. I want to know where you're coming from.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top