I know it's been 5 years and 7 months ago but I still am not over it. Voter fraud and criminality? Here it is Trump won over Hilary by 10,704 criminal votes Johnson, Stein, Castle, McMullin, and Soltysik got over a quarter of a million fraudulent votes. That's exactly the way I see it and I don't know if I will ever get over it.
2016 United States presidential election in Michigan
Good piece. Not surprising. Every potential threat to US security seems to go through the hype/spin-wash cycle to the point of being utterly blown out of proportion.
More pressing, more concerning, is the degree of condescending paternalism that American elites exhibit towards their flocks of fellow innocent, dumb citizens. It is official: the average American voter cannot be trusted to reason without some kind of firm, paternal guidance.
No wonder the USA democratic system is still essentially unchanged over the last 2 1/2 centuries.
This is incredibly condescending when it comes from the outside, but of course it is also true .
Whenever we engage un "We ought to do...." or "They ought to do....", there is always a risk of being condescending. Always.
Here in Canuck land, we ought to get rid of of our unelected Senate. We ought to adopt proportional representation so nobody can finger-point us and exclaim that Canadians are just as 'exceptional' as their American counterparts. "American exceptionalism" stinks of arrogance but then it is also a wake-up call for those caring to pay attention. Why do folks living in other rich, western countries appear to pay more attention to American academics, American scientists and other American experts than ordinary voting Americans?
Good piece. Not surprising. Every potential threat to US security seems to go through the hype/spin-wash cycle to the point of being utterly blown out of proportion.
More pressing, more concerning, is the degree of condescending paternalism that American elites exhibit towards their flocks of fellow innocent, dumb citizens. It is official: the average American voter cannot be trusted to reason without some kind of firm, paternal guidance.
No wonder the USA democratic system is still essentially unchanged over the last 2 1/2 centuries.
This is incredibly condescending when it comes from the outside, but of course it is also true .
Good piece. Not surprising. Every potential threat to US security seems to go through the hype/spin-wash cycle to the point of being utterly blown out of proportion.
More pressing, more concerning, is the degree of condescending paternalism that American elites exhibit towards their flocks of fellow innocent, dumb citizens. It is official: the average American voter cannot be trusted to reason without some kind of firm, paternal guidance.
No wonder the USA democratic system is still essentially unchanged over the last 2 1/2 centuries.
This is fascinating. The female Trump seems smart and genuine, the male Clinton seems like a fool in over his head. I didn't realize before seeing this reenactment that Trump actually forced her into a real debate, not just a sequence of questions followed by BS responses.
This is fascinating. The female Trump seems smart and genuine, the male Clinton seems like a fool in over his head. I didn't realize before seeing this reenactment that Trump actually forced her into a real debate, not just a sequence of questions followed by BS responses.
As a percentage of eligible voters, Clinton received 28.43% (65,845,063) of all votes compared to Trump’s 27.20% (62,980,160) and Did Not Vote’s 44.37% (102,731,399).
something something sanctions, something something proportional and appropriate, blah blah blah. If only it were so easy to have something so fitting, convenient and deserved for the russians.
something something sanctions, something something proportional and appropriate, blah blah blah. If only it were so easy to have something so fitting, convenient and deserved for the russians.
We, ( Canadians) find the way of electing a president in your country totally absurd. What is this silly thing : "There are 538 electors and to win a majority and become president either candidate needs to accumulate 270 electors – half the total plus one. Americans technically vote for electors, not the candidates themselves. The electors are state officials or senior party figures, but they are not usually named on the ballot. ." .........What is this ? too much of a complex process which can lead to a lot of fraud and bad results. I think it's time to change the way it's done and just use the total votes to elect 1 candidate to be president. The people should elect the president, not some obscure electors who can be bought and forced to changed their mind.
The prime minister, along with the other ministers in cabinet, is appointed by the governor general on behalf of the monarch.<6> However, by the conventions of responsible government, designed to maintain administrative stability, the viceroy will call to form a government the individual most likely to receive the support, or confidence, of a majority of the directly-elected members of the House of Commons;<7> as a practical matter, this is often the leader of a party whose members form a majority, or a very large plurality, of Members of Parliament (MPs).<8> There are no age or citizenship restrictions on the position of prime minister itself.
We, ( Canadians) find the way of electing a president in your country totally absurd. What is this silly thing : "There are 538 electors and to win a majority and become president either candidate needs to accumulate 270 electors – half the total plus one. Americans technically vote for electors, not the candidates themselves. The electors are state officials or senior party figures, but they are not usually named on the ballot. ." .........What is this ? too much of a complex process which can lead to a lot of fraud and bad results. I think it's time to change the way it's done and just use the total votes to elect 1 candidate to be president. The people should elect the president, not some obscure electors who can be bought and forced to changed their mind.
Yep. There may have been a point for the Electoral College in the past, but those days are gone.
We are consistent: anybody is welcome to add more information to our electorate. Anybody.
We would be repulsed by a foreign power intervening in our elections...had that happened. It didn't. No one's votes were changed for them, no one was kept from the polls, no candidates were removed from the ballot. To the extent that happened it was done by Americans, for the usual crass political reasons.
You seem to think that by chanting "But the Russians told us!" over and over that we should stop knowing what was revealed: that the DNC was coordinating with journalists to get their message out; that the DNC tilted the field in favor of it's preferred candidate in the primaries; that the DNC is utterly incompetent at IT security. If we did the election over should we all have our memories wiped so that inconvenient facts disappear?
The electorate is not a jury, and it isn't bound by any rules of evidence. Anyone is free to tell it anything, for any reason. Anyone is free even to lie to it—as you and kcar are doing—by building the mythology that the election was stolen.
And I get to respond.
We, ( Canadians) find the way of electing a president in your country totally absurd. What is this silly thing : "There are 538 electors and to win a majority and become president either candidate needs to accumulate 270 electors – half the total plus one. Americans technically vote for electors, not the candidates themselves. The electors are state officials or senior party figures, but they are not usually named on the ballot. ." .........What is this ? too much of a complex process which can lead to a lot of fraud and bad results. I think it's time to change the way it's done and just use the total votes to elect 1 candidate to be president. The people should elect the president, not some obscure electors who can be bought and forced to changed their mind.
