Electors vote today....will Trump be "unpresidented"?

[BubberMiley]

Apparently he is adding his own private security detail because his advisor Alex Jones told him the CIA is planning to assassinate him and he doesn't trust the Secret Service. So I guess he may be unpresidented yet.

But I doubt it, because the conspiracy theorists don't usually base their theories on reality. But if it happens, I guess it would ultimately be Hillary's fault.

[Omni]

26 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

Perhaps he read a history book about Communist China.

Trump doesn't have time for "intelligence" briefings, (and we all know he could use some of that_ so I doubt he reads much beyond comic strips.

[Argus]

1 hour ago, sharkman said:

Everybody except the Dems.

The Democrats have always been a lot less willing to march in tune than Republicans. It's always been their weakness in congress. Even when they're in the majority they get many defectors every vote. Of course, the advent of the Tea Party has made getting them to vote together almost as difficult.

[cybercoma]

18 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

More EC electors defected from Hillary Clinton than they did for Donald Trump.

How does the DNC feel about rigging the primaries in WA now?

[cybercoma]

14 hours ago, August1991 said:

Once again, Leftists in the US believe that they are correct; but everyone else iswrong.

Righties in the US believe that they are correct; but everyone else iswrong.

[bush_cheney2004]

The EC did the right thing by making sure that an unfit candidate did not become president.   Sorry Hillary.....

[sharkman]

Yeah, did you see her Nov 7?  She was definitely hopped up on some meds to power her through the last day.  Hopefully now she's resting comfortably.

[BubberMiley]

7 minutes ago, sharkman said:

Yeah, did you see her Nov 7?  She was definitely hopped up on some meds to power her through the last day.  Hopefully now she's resting comfortably.

"No puppet! No puppet! (sniff) You're the puppet!"

[sharkman]

On 20 December, 2016 at 9:34 AM, Omni said:

Trump doesn't have time for "intelligence" briefings, (and we all know he could use some of that_ so I doubt he reads much beyond comic strips.

That's funny, when Obama wanted to skip the briefings, the left all nodded sagely.

Personally, I think that the president should be briefed every day, but I'd trust that Trump would respond militarily to a situation that calls for it more than I'd trust Obama would do anything besides go to bed for the night.  Then the next morning, blame a youtube video, as he tried to shape opinion WRT Benghazi rather than shape the actual event.  

[Omni]

26 minutes ago, sharkman said:

That's funny, when Obama wanted to skip the briefings, the left all nodded sagely.

Personally, I think that the president should be briefed every day, but I'd trust that Trump would respond militarily to a situation that calls for it more than I'd trust Obama would do anything besides go to bed for the night.  Then the next morning, blame a youtube video, as he tried to shape opinion WRT Benghazi rather than shape the actual event.  

You're still not up to date re: Benghazi?

[?Impact]

28 minutes ago, sharkman said:

I'd trust that Trump would respond militarily to a situation that calls for it

Yes,  that is the fear that the ignorant uninformed buffoon with the ill temper and itchy trigger finger would respond military to any situation, damn the consequences. 

[bush_cheney2004]

2 hours ago, ?Impact said:

Yes,  that is the fear that the ignorant uninformed buffoon with the ill temper and itchy trigger finger would respond military to any situation, damn the consequences. 

 

There is also fear that a president will not respond with military power when necessary.  American taxpayers do not provide him the finest military in the world just to bluff with false "lines in the sand".

[-TSS-]

If I were asked, which I never am and maybe for a good reason, as to how to reform the American Presidential-election system I would keep it as it is except if a candidate wins more than 50% of the popular vote. In that case you just can't lose under any logic of democracy, can you?

If none of the candidates more than 50% of the popular cvotes then the electoral college decides. In other words, I think Trump is the winner truly and deservedly.

 

[Omni]

1 hour ago, -TSS- said:

If I were asked, which I never am and maybe for a good reason, as to how to reform the American Presidential-election system I would keep it as it is except if a candidate wins more than 50% of the popular vote. In that case you just can't lose under any logic of democracy, can you?

If none of the candidates more than 50% of the popular cvotes then the electoral college decides. In other words, I think Trump is the winner truly and deservedly.

 

Why do you need over 50%, why not just an overwhelming majority of the popular vote, such as Hillary got this time around?

[-TSS-]

10 minutes ago, Omni said:

Why do you need over 50%, why not just an overwhelming majority of the popular vote, such as Hillary got this time around?

Well, with anything under 50% you can be told the majority didn't vote for you. No matter if even a larger majority didn't vote for anyone else.

[Omni]

3 minutes ago, -TSS- said:

Well, with anything under 50% you can be told the majority didn't vote for you. No matter if even a larger majority didn't vote for anyone else.

I just think this EC thing is way out of date, although having said that, ironically this time around the concept of protecting the country from a whack job leader may have failed. I prefer the Canadian system where you don't need 50+1 to win, but then we have much stronger representation from more than 2 parties unlike the US. 

[Hal 9000]

51 minutes ago, Omni said:

I just think this EC thing is way out of date, although having said that, ironically this time around the concept of protecting the country from a whack job leader may have failed. I prefer the Canadian system where you don't need 50+1 to win, but then we have much stronger representation from more than 2 parties unlike the US. 

The EC is not about protecting from a whack job - despite what Martin Sheen says, it's to give representation to areas that otherwise would be forgotten.  Without the EC, California, New York and a handful of large cities would dictate the election.  

As for Canada, Trudeau got 55% of the seats with only about 40% of the popular vote (more voters voted against Trudeau than voted for him).  Fact is, Trump did better all around than Trudeau did in his election.

[Omni]

4 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

The EC is not about protecting from a whack job - despite what Martin Sheen says, it's to give representation to areas that otherwise would be forgotten.  Without the EC, California, New York and a handful of large cities would dictate the election.  

As for Canada, Trudeau got 55% of the seats with only about 40% of the popular vote (more voters voted against Trudeau than voted for him).  Fact is, Trump did better all around than Trudeau did in his election.

All you have to do is have a simple grasp of math to understand those percentages here in Canada. Here is what the EC is about.

http://www.factcheck.org/2008/02/the-reason-for-the-electoral-college/

[Omni]

Or the short story:

Alexander Hamilton was explicit: this mechanism was designed to ensure that “the office of president will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.” In short, it was designed to prevent just this situation: the rise of an unqualified demagogue like Donald Trump.

[Hal 9000]

2 minutes ago, Omni said:

Or the short story:

Alexander Hamilton was explicit: this mechanism was designed to ensure that “the office of president will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.” In short, it was designed to prevent just this situation: the rise of an unqualified demagogue like Donald Trump.

James Madison worried about what he called “factions,” which he defined as groups of citizens who have a common interest in some proposal that would either violate the rights of other citizens or would harm the nation as a whole. Madison’s fear – which Alexis de Tocqueville later dubbed “the tyranny of the majority” – was that a faction could grow to encompass more than 50 percent of the population, at which point it could“sacrifice to its ruling passion or interest both the public good and the rights of other citizens.” Madison has a solution for tyranny of the majority: “A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect, and promises the cure for which we are seeking.”

As Alexander Hamilton writes in “The Federalist Papers,” the Constitution is designed to ensure “that the office of President will never fall to the lot of any man who is not in an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.” The point of the Electoral College is to preserve “the sense of the people,” while at the same time ensuring that a president is chosen “by men most capable of analyzing the qualities adapted to the station, and acting under circumstances favorable to deliberation, and to a judicious combination of all the reasons and inducements which were proper to govern their choice.”

 

This is not about "we just don't trust this guy and don't feel he is qualified".  This is about protecting the smaller, less populated areas or the country.  It's about making sure that the newer "colonies had some say.  The "tyranny of the majority" is about making sure that some overpopulated areas such as New York, Pennsylvania or California didn't have complete say in elections.  The "rights of other citizens" is not in reference to gays or any minority, it's a reference to protecting people in less developed or rural areas of the country.  The "scheme of representation" also refers to the people of rural areas.  The "sense of the people" is a clear shout out to a more even distribution of policies - regardless of popular vote.  "Eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications" is not about demagogues or experienced politicians, it's about having a leader that equally represents people of all areas of the country.

Forgetting the EC will lead to politicians cow towing to the likes of California, Pennsylvania, New York and a handful of major cities and the rest will be left out in the cold.  This will certainly fall into the  "tyranny of the majority" category that Madison was speaking against.

Here in Canada, politicians couldn't give a shit about anything except winning Ontario and Quebec.  The rest ion Canada can pound sand as far as our federal leaders are concerned-and it shows.

 

[Omni]

I guess we'll see if the EC did the right thing putting Trump in office starting in late January when we see if he follows through on his wacky policies. The wall, kicking out Muslims and Mexicans, etc., etc.

[-TSS-]

Whether someone is qualified or is not should be accurately measurable. If you utterly dislike someone it still does not amount to being unqualified.

As I said earlier, the primaries sort out the wheat from the chaff. Those who dont have what it taken to be President drop out of the race,

Edited December 25, 2016 by -TSS-

[?Impact]

On 12/24/2016 at 9:45 PM, Hal 9000 said:

Fact is, Trump did better all around than Trudeau did in his election.

Trump lost by 2.9 million votes, Trudeau won by 1.3 million votes

Trump lost by 2% of popular vote, Trudeau won by 8% of popular vote

 

Trump is a loser, plain and simple. Trudeau is a winner, pain and simple.

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

Trump lost by 2.9 million votes, Trudeau won by 1.3 million votes

Trump lost by 2% of popular vote, Trudeau won by 8% of popular vote

 

Trump is a loser, plain and simple. Trudeau is a winner, pain and simple.

I think that would only be true if Trump's goal was to win the popular vote. His goal was to be President. He achieved that goal. 

[sharkman]

Trudeau hasn't accomplished anything of note in his young life.  Now he's the PM of Canada.  Trump has accomplished more in his little finger than JT the kid.