Donald Trump & 2016 Election

[pilferk]

As long as no one is hurt or any property is damaged they have a right to protest under the constitution. But when they cross that line is where the problem lies and that has happened in a few places such as Portland.

The number of peaceful participants FAR outweigh those causing trouble, around the country.

Again: VERY specifically, those causing trouble, and inciting riots, should be condemned and they should be told they will be held accountable, legally.  And, in the next breath, those assembling peacefully should be assured that nothing will get in the way of them assembling peacefully and protesting. From everyone involved.

And that includes from our President-elect.  I don't care how "unfair" he finds them. I don't care if he thinks they're "paid".  They are doing nothing wrong.  And how he handles those protests goes a long way toward quelling, or fanning, the fears about his administration.

KellyAnne's comments to (and about) Harry Reid has already set a tone that's making people nervous.

[chineseblues]

I love all the people that have said if trump won they will be coming moving to Canada.  We do not want them here trust me.
Lao isn't that a case of just taking your ball home

My guy didn't win in their fair race so I am leaving.  Meh. 

The mayoralty of people cane be right because that not how i feel! 

People must of voted for him because of this.  It's the only way I can explain it.

Your guy lost. Get over it     

Just to be clear...HRC lost...yes.  But the majority of the people (by about 2 million votes) actually voted for her.

It's a minor point, but one worth considering.

Well yeah there are lots of people in New York and California......   I actually like this way of voting.

Where two big one sided hugely populated states cant dictate an election.  

It seemed looking at a voting map of America that the majority of the country was red.

Here in Canada, Ontario can still dictate a federal electrical, just because the majority of people live there......  Sometimes elections are called before votes in the west are even counted.

Again, define "majority".

Not the majority of people/voters.

But the majority of land mass, I guess.

That's right.  The majority of states.  The majority of land

Should it not be the will of the majority of the people who gets elected?

[tim_m]

On 60 minutes last night, Trump told his supporters who have been accused of harassing minorities to stop.

I'd say that Obama and Hillary should extend the same request to the anti-Trump rioters.

I dont know how effective a request like that would be though since it has been reported that at least some of rioters are  professional protestors.

Blocks Of Anti-Trump Protest Buses Caught On Tape


 http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-11-13/blocks-anti-trump-protest-buses-caught-tape

They should condemn the riots.

Peaceful protests? Nope.

That's what the constitution is all about, and precisely why it's worded and set up the way it is.

You may disagree with them.  And even if you think they're "not legit" and paid or inorganic or whatever......

The right to do so is granted them, whatever the motivation, by the constitution.

They will either be effective, or they won't.  But they shouldn't stop just because some people don't like them, or they make them uncomfortable, or whatever.

precisely, the first amendment is there for a reason. We either have it or we don't. We can't only apply it to things we agree with. You have the right to disagree with the protesters but you still have to respect their right to do so. Just as your right to disagree with them is respected. Free speech works both ways.

[Dr. Blutarsky]

I love all the people that have said if trump won they will be coming moving to Canada.  We do not want them here trust me.
Lao isn't that a case of just taking your ball home

My guy didn't win in their fair race so I am leaving.  Meh. 

The mayoralty of people cane be right because that not how i feel! 

People must of voted for him because of this.  It's the only way I can explain it.

Your guy lost. Get over it     

Just to be clear...HRC lost...yes.  But the majority of the people (by about 2 million votes) actually voted for her.

It's a minor point, but one worth considering.

Well yeah there are lots of people in New York and California......   I actually like this way of voting.

Where two big one sided hugely populated states cant dictate an election.  

It seemed looking at a voting map of America that the majority of the country was red.

Here in Canada, Ontario can still dictate a federal electrical, just because the majority of people live there......  Sometimes elections are called before votes in the west are even counted.

Again, define "majority".

Not the majority of people/voters.

But the majority of land mass, I guess.

That's right.  The majority of states.  The majority of land

Should it not be the will of the majority of the people who gets elected?

Ive done a little digging on this since Ive never understood why we elect POTUS based on the EC and not the straight popular vote.

 My understanding is that If we just based it on the popular vote, only a handful of densely populated areas would always decide and the lower populated areas would never have a say in deciding the outcome. A candidate could go to NY. LA and a few other major cities and campaign and be concerned with the issues they face and rural America gets ignored.

[Dr. Blutarsky]

On 60 minutes last night, Trump told his supporters who have been accused of harassing minorities to stop.

I'd say that Obama and Hillary should extend the same request to the anti-Trump rioters.

I dont know how effective a request like that would be though since it has been reported that at least some of rioters are  professional protestors.

Blocks Of Anti-Trump Protest Buses Caught On Tape


 http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-11-13/blocks-anti-trump-protest-buses-caught-tape

They should condemn the riots.

Peaceful protests? Nope.

That's what the constitution is all about, and precisely why it's worded and set up the way it is.

You may disagree with them.  And even if you think they're "not legit" and paid or inorganic or whatever......

The right to do so is granted them, whatever the motivation, by the constitution.

They will either be effective, or they won't.  But they shouldn't stop just because some people don't like them, or they make them uncomfortable, or whatever.

precisely, the first amendment is there for a reason. We either have it or we don't. We can't only apply it to things we agree with. You have the right to disagree with the protesters but you still have to respect their right to do so. Just as your right to disagree with them is respected. Free speech works both ways.

Let me explain perhaps better than I had in my previous posts, sorry if this will seem redundant.....

I agree 100% with you on that. But when it turns from a peaceful protest to a riot, that is when law enforcement needs to step in.  The protestors are a mix of people with different reasons for being there. Some are there out of fear and concern. Others are there just to start shit and damage property. Others are being paid and are there for a check.

 I totally respect their right to protest peacefully and also respect their concerns, my opinion on Trump is obviously different than theirs but that doesn't matter, they have a right to make their voices heard.

But the fact some are being paid takes away from the ones who are there on their own time and want their voices heard.

 

[TheBaconman]

I love all the people that have said if trump won they will be coming moving to Canada.  We do not want them here trust me.
Lao isn't that a case of just taking your ball home

My guy didn't win in their fair race so I am leaving.  Meh. 

The mayoralty of people cane be right because that not how i feel! 

People must of voted for him because of this.  It's the only way I can explain it.

Your guy lost. Get over it     

Just to be clear...HRC lost...yes.  But the majority of the people (by about 2 million votes) actually voted for her.

It's a minor point, but one worth considering.

Well yeah there are lots of people in New York and California......   I actually like this way of voting.

Where two big one sided hugely populated states cant dictate an election.  

It seemed looking at a voting map of America that the majority of the country was red.

Here in Canada, Ontario can still dictate a federal electrical, just because the majority of people live there......  Sometimes elections are called before votes in the west are even counted.

Again, define "majority".

Not the majority of people/voters.

But the majority of land mass, I guess.

That's right.  The majority of states.  The majority of land

Should it not be the will of the majority of the people who gets elected?

Not the minor majority.

I really like this way of representing the whole of a country and not just a couple of states.

Here in Canada many elections are called before even half the country has had a chance to vote.

And who knows, perhaps if the minor majority could win elections the campaigns would of been different.....

[pilferk]

Ive done a little digging on this since Ive never understood why we elect POTUS based on the EC and not the straight popular vote.

 My understanding is that If we just based it on the popular vote, only a handful of densely populated areas would always decide and the lower populated areas would never have a say in deciding the outcome. A candidate could go to NY. LA and a few other major cities and campaign and be concerned with the issues they face and rural America gets ignored.

That was PART of it. For sure.

The other (obsolete) part was simply this: They had no way to realistically and fairly count an entire countries votes in a month.  It was far easier, and logistically tenable, for each state to count their own and then send their electors to DC to be counted that way.

[ice cream sand pig]

Ive done a little digging on this since Ive never understood why we elect POTUS based on the EC and not the straight popular vote.

 My understanding is that If we just based it on the popular vote, only a handful of densely populated areas would always decide and the lower populated areas would never have a say in deciding the outcome. A candidate could go to NY. LA and a few other major cities and campaign and be concerned with the issues they face and rural America gets ignored.

That was PART of it. For sure.

The other (obsolete) part was simply this: They had no way to realistically and fairly count an entire countries votes in a month.  It was far easier, and logistically tenable, for each state to count their own and then send their electors to DC to be counted that way.

I lost complete faith in voting when i realized that someone could win the popular vote and still lose the election. It seemed to defeat the purpose.

[tim_m]

Ive done a little digging on this since Ive never understood why we elect POTUS based on the EC and not the straight popular vote.

 My understanding is that If we just based it on the popular vote, only a handful of densely populated areas would always decide and the lower populated areas would never have a say in deciding the outcome. A candidate could go to NY. LA and a few other major cities and campaign and be concerned with the issues they face and rural America gets ignored.

That was PART of it. For sure.

The other (obsolete) part was simply this: They had no way to realistically and fairly count an entire countries votes in a month.  It was far easier, and logistically tenable, for each state to count their own and then send their electors to DC to be counted that way.

Yep when the EC was created in part for that reason it made sense. Back then counting and reporting the results obviously took much longer. Now it still takes time to count EVERY vote but more often then not enough can be counted election night to know the winner.

[tim_m]

I love all the people that have said if trump won they will be coming moving to Canada.  We do not want them here trust me.
Lao isn't that a case of just taking your ball home

My guy didn't win in their fair race so I am leaving.  Meh. 

The mayoralty of people cane be right because that not how i feel! 

People must of voted for him because of this.  It's the only way I can explain it.

Your guy lost. Get over it     

Just to be clear...HRC lost...yes.  But the majority of the people (by about 2 million votes) actually voted for her.

It's a minor point, but one worth considering.

Well yeah there are lots of people in New York and California......   I actually like this way of voting.

Where two big one sided hugely populated states cant dictate an election.  

It seemed looking at a voting map of America that the majority of the country was red.

Here in Canada, Ontario can still dictate a federal electrical, just because the majority of people live there......  Sometimes elections are called before votes in the west are even counted.

Again, define "majority".

Not the majority of people/voters.

But the majority of land mass, I guess.

That's right.  The majority of states.  The majority of land

Should it not be the will of the majority of the people who gets elected?

Ive done a little digging on this since Ive never understood why we elect POTUS based on the EC and not the straight popular vote.

 My understanding is that If we just based it on the popular vote, only a handful of densely populated areas would always decide and the lower populated areas would never have a say in deciding the outcome. A candidate could go to NY. LA and a few other major cities and campaign and be concerned with the issues they face and rural America gets ignored.

I see what you are saying but even now you have states candidates ignore because they know they have it in the bag or thought they did. Did Hillary go to CA? NY? When did she ever step foot in WI? Did she go to most of the southern states that she knew Trump had in the bag? I can understand why people want the winner of the popular vote to be the deciding factor. It makes people feel like in situations like this their vote doesn't count or matter.

[Dr. Blutarsky]

One change that could be made is award the electoral votes by state proportionally instead of winner take all. All states could be counted with the same system that Maine and Nebraska uses. This would be a better representation of the vote.

But changing they way a POTUS  is elected isn't an easy task.

On a side note, dont expect to hear about election fraud for the next 3 1/2 years. Now would be the time to work on that to ensure we dont have the same kinds of issues we have every election such as bad voting machines, dead people on the rolls, non citizens falling thru the cracks and voting, etc. No one seems to care in between elections only when we get closer and it is too late to do anything about it.

[tim_m]

One change that could be made is award the electoral votes by state proportionally instead of winner take all. All states could be counted with the same system that Maine and Nebraska uses. This would be a better representation of the vote.

But changing they way a POTUS  is elected isn't an easy task.

On a side note, dont expect to hear about election fraud for the next 3 1/2 years. Now would be the time to work on that to ensure we dont have the same kinds of issues we have every election such as bad voting machines, dead people on the rolls, non citizens falling thru the cracks and voting, etc. No one seems to care in between elections only when we get closer and it is too late to do anything about it.

That's not a bad idea. That's how many of the primaries and caucuses are done. I'd be ok with that.

[westcoast_junkie]

Twitter:

Axl Rose ‏@axlrose
Good people don't listen to, acknowledge, nominate or elect people like Senator Jeff Sessions.

[DeN]

Twitter:

Axl Rose ‏@axlrose
Good people don't listen to, acknowledge, nominate or elect people like Senator Jeff Sessions.

  thx for that

[Bridge]

Sheesh, Axl's getting political.   

http://radio.com/2016/11/18/axl-rose-slams-jeff-sessions/

[damnthehaters]

Sheesh, Axl's getting political.   

http://radio.com/2016/11/18/axl-rose-slams-jeff-sessions/

Funny considering Sessions helped desegregate schools in Alabama and also fought for death penalty for a KKK member.  But yet, there's an alleged report of him coming across as racist back in 1986 that some people want to run with.  I would think Axl of all people would know better than to take something in the media as fact....especially when it comes from a liberal calling a conservative racist.  That's a new one

[Johnnyblood]

Sheesh, Axl's getting political.   

http://radio.com/2016/11/18/axl-rose-slams-jeff-sessions/

Funny considering Sessions helped desegregate schools in Alabama and also fought for death penalty for a KKK member.  But yet, there's an alleged report of him coming across as racist back in 1986 that some people want to run with.  I would think Axl of all people would know better than to take something in the media as fact....especially when it comes from a liberal calling a conservative racist.  That's a new one

Probably more about Sessions' anti-immigration crusading.

[AtariLegend]

Sheesh, Axl's getting political.   

http://radio.com/2016/11/18/axl-rose-slams-jeff-sessions/

Axl's right.

[ITARocker]

Twitter:

Axl Rose ‏@axlrose
Good people don't listen to, acknowledge, nominate or elect people like Senator Jeff Sessions.

Well, i know for sure "One in a milion" is his favourite song 

[westcoast_junkie]

Twitter:

Axl Rose ‏@axlrose
"Hamilton Cast harassed Pence." Do u ever stop whining?An apology?Seriously?!U won,this is the job,get on with it or get out of the kitchen.