Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Wed Nov 21 13:48:09 PST 2018

Utopia Talk / Politics / The bitch plots revenge
obaminated
Member
Sun Jul 08 17:17:24
Yes please.

http://www...ck-prepping-Trump-rematch.html
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Sun Jul 08 17:30:55

I heard that too.

Can we be that lucky?


I truly hope so.

Hot Rod
Revved Up
Sun Jul 08 17:32:51

The beautiful part about it is, she would get the nod too.

tumbleweed
the wanderer
Sun Jul 08 17:46:37
no she wouldn't
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Sun Jul 08 18:00:08
...but let's note even with no charisma she beat your liar boy in the popular vote by a substantial margin

Hot Roid
Member
Sun Jul 08 18:43:06
False. Those millions of voters were done by illegals, Trump proved that.
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Sun Jul 08 18:44:11

Yeah, look where that majority vote came from.

I predict he will get the popular vote too next time.

Rugian
Member
Sun Jul 08 18:45:35
tumbleweed
the wanderer Sun Jul 08 17:46:37
no she wouldn't

Does she still substantially control the DNC via her debt holdings? Because unless she's spun those off, I'd say you're wrong on this one.
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Sun Jul 08 18:48:46

Who else can they nominate? There is no one that anyone outside of Washington has ever heard of.

tumbleweed
the wanderer
Sun Jul 08 18:49:38
#LiterallyAnyoneButTrump2020
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Sun Jul 08 19:05:43

Trump will win hands down.

tumbleweed
the wanderer
Sun Jul 08 21:34:52
he'll rule for 1000 yrs if Chuck Norris was right
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Sun Jul 08 22:03:29

No.

Mike Pence two terms.
Don Jr two terms.
Eric two terms.
Ivanka two terms.
Tiffany two terms.
Barron two terms.


See how much fun you are going to have.

Hot Rod
Revved Up
Sun Jul 08 22:04:28

The next in line will serve as VPs.

tumbleweed
the wanderer
Sun Jul 08 22:05:43
Tiffany? you think the Trumps care about Tiffany?
obaminated
Member
Sun Jul 08 22:15:04
She would definitely win. Also, tw, popular vote doesnt count in presidential elections, do you know that?
hood
Member
Sun Jul 08 22:21:34
I can see where Hillary is coming from. The election came down to like 100,000 votes in 3 states. If she hadn't been so over confident and actually put the proper work in, she would have won.

But bitch, don't fucking do it.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Sun Jul 08 22:25:59
popular vote matters in terms of what the people actually wanted

...& it was 70,000 votes across 3 states
kargen
Member
Sun Jul 08 22:51:54
The thing about the popular vote is it doesn't matter in the least bit. If it did matter President Trump would have ran a different campaign.

Thinking the popular vote matters is akin to thinking the Patriots should have won the super bowl because they had more first downs than the Eagles.

Mentioning the popular vote just shows you got nothing so will bring up some unrelated meaningless crap.

Hillary lost because she didn't campaign. She instead assumed she was going to win and went on a victory tour. Late in the election she was still traveling around California doing fund raising when she should have been in almost any other state actually campaigning.
hood
Member
Sun Jul 08 23:38:42
"The thing about the popular vote is it doesn't matter in the least bit."

Certainly it does. Popular vote = what the majority of the country wants. It doesn't == electoral college, but it certainly matters.


"If it did matter President Trump would have ran a different campaign."

No he wouldn't. Trump has only 1 mode: buffoonery. He wouldn't have changed at all.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Mon Jul 09 00:09:02
saying the popular vote is meaningless is retarded

yes, the idiot child won the election as we use the electoral college to decide the winner... that is self-evident

however the actual wishes of the people should also be considered relevant in a democracy... that seems like it should be self-evident but apparently not to all

and no i don't believe Trump could've won the popular vote as he could not possibly have had more exposure
Forwyn
Member
Mon Jul 09 00:23:45
"however the actual wishes of the people should also be considered relevant in a democracy..."

How, exactly? To bitch and moan about it?
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Mon Jul 09 00:30:30
why is this concept so hard to understand?

if someone wins 99:1 vs 51:49 (or in this case loses 62:65) it has meaning

the point of having representatives is to represent the people... we aren't supposed to be electing a dictator (although you did in this case, gullible idiots)
Forwyn
Member
Mon Jul 09 00:36:41
Yes, a 99:1 landslide would represent a symbolic mandate. A 62:65 spread doesn't mean anything, except for #resisters to circlejerk about the "asterisk president".

Not really sure what the process has to do with the executive wielding too much power, or abusing it. Kind of a separate issue.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Mon Jul 09 00:38:04
when Sarah Sanders or others on team Trump claim 'the election shows the American people want the wall' (which they have said) it is False & obnoxiously so
Forwyn
Member
Mon Jul 09 00:43:31
30 states vs. 20 carried, so they'll argue that they represent a more diverse electorate across the US, instead of a few coastal cities.

But sure, politicians exaggerate.

Breaking news
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Mon Jul 09 00:50:11
let's say hypothetically a decent person actually ran for office & made it through the scum to 'win' 62:65... he may feel somewhat obligated to at least consider the wishes of the 65

i can't imagine any president in history has cared less about the people who didn't vote for him than Trump (& none has ever lost as bad as he did)

i mean he has even continued to have campaign rallies... he will never leave campaign mode
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Mon Jul 09 00:52:57
and he has told Mitch to 'go nuclear' on everything that he wants that hasn't gone through... he literally wants the Dems to have no voice at all
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Mon Jul 09 00:59:50
and to the original point

winning 99:1 would make 'the election shows the American people want the wall' a true statement instead of being obnoxiously false in the 62:65 'win'

so YES, the popular vote is not meaningless... in a democracy... duh...
kargen
Member
Mon Jul 09 18:36:43
"No he wouldn't. Trump has only 1 mode: buffoonery. He wouldn't have changed at all."

That may be, but if popular vote mattered he would have taken his buffoonery to California, Texas, Illinois and New York a lot more and probably wouldn't have showed up in Colorado and other similar states at all.

And again pretending the popular vote matters in any way is akin to thinking the Patriots should be super bowl champions because they had more first downs than the Eagles. It is simply a meaningless stat.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Mon Jul 09 18:39:28
here's hoping you are never selected as a representative of any group

also, i'm quite certain New Yorkers were aware of Trump

as was everyone
Rugian
Member
Mon Jul 09 18:54:01
"here's hoping you are never selected as a representative of any group"

The 538 representatives who showed up to the EC vote in 2016 each voted according to their respective group's wishes. Well, except for the faithless electors, but that's a different issue.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Mon Jul 09 19:11:10
I was referring to kargen's insistence that the views of the populace should be completely disregarded by those who are elected once the election ends
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Mon Jul 09 19:33:49

So, are you saying the minority should always be disregarded in favor of the biggest gang with the most votes?

hood
Member
Mon Jul 09 19:41:01
"So, are you saying the minority should always be disregarded in favor of the biggest gang with the most votes?"

That is precisely how democracy is set up to work.
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Mon Jul 09 19:51:27

Democracy is a very bad form of Government, but I ask you to never to forget it, all the others are far worse.

~Slattery's People


Except for a Republic.

We are a representative Republic.

Were it not for The Electoral College New York, California and the State of Washington would have complete and total control of the Country.

Even the seed grain.

kargen
Member
Mon Jul 09 22:58:48
"I was referring to kargen's insistence that the views of the populace should be completely disregarded by those who are elected once the election ends"

I didn't say nor imply that. You see we were talking about something specific. That specific thing was the most recent presidential election held in the United States. In that election (the one for president) the popular vote has no significance at all. Not one bit.

And just in case you are not aware...

Presidents and politicians in general often dedicate a good amount of resources in learning what the general populace thinks on a variety of issues. Polls matter and what the people thinks sometimes matters. Sometimes what big corporations think matters but that is a separate issue.

What doesn't matter is the popular vote. Doesn't matter a bit as far as electing our president is concerned.

Since you mentioned it when running for office as a representative or senator then the popular vote matters. President not so much.
hood
Member
Mon Jul 09 23:18:27
"Polls matter"

Is not the general election one big poll? The most accurate of polls, as it were. All your blubbering about it not mattering, yet it is clearly of importance.
obaminated
Member
Mon Jul 09 23:28:17
Hood, still arguing about the 2016 election results... in 2018.
hood
Member
Tue Jul 10 00:01:53
Nobody is arguing about the results. The argument is about public opinion and the election results are a very good indication of where public opinion falls.
kargen
Member
Tue Jul 10 03:38:32
No it is not one big giant poll. Wanna guess why?

It is because we are a Representative Republic.

Polls matter in deciding what issues to highlight while running for office and what to say/do while in office.

When it comes down to being elected as president what matters is the electoral votes and it is stupid to think the popular vote in any way is relevant to that particular election process.

People that bring up the popular vote are just butt hurt about who won and have nothing substantial to bring to the conversation.
hood
Member
Tue Jul 10 07:25:06
"No it is not one big giant poll. Wanna guess why? It is because we are a Representative Republic."

Taking people's opinions en masse isn't a poll because of our system of government? Really?

That's why we don't call them poll taxes, right?
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poll_tax

Thats why we don't call places to vote polling places, right?
https://www.vote.org/polling-place-locator/

It's because a vote isn't a poll, since we're a republic. Yeah, good fucking logic there.


"it is stupid to think the popular vote in any way is relevant to that particular election process."

Nobody said this. You are inventing that argument and pretending I said it. Sit the fuck down and shut up. You're clearly not intelligent enough for this conversation.
kargen
Member
Tue Jul 10 16:19:11
Then why was it brought up?

It is brought up any time someone doesn't have a legitimate argument and Tumbleweed first brought up the notion of the popular vote mattering in this thread.

Again if it mattered at all in the presidential election then all candidates would have campaigned differently.

Yes taking peoples opinions is a poll. Of course it is.
That poll doesn't decide who becomes president and that is in the context I posted my remark. You know full well our election process for picking president isn't based on the popular vote as does Tumbleweed but somehow the idea that is does somehow matter always makes it into the conversation.

Seems you and Tumbleweed have adopted the Cathy Newman method of discussion.

At least we both agree that the popular vote means nothing in deciding who is president. Convince Tumbleweed and maybe next time we talk about the election of the president the popular vote won't worm its way into the conversation.
hood
Member
Tue Jul 10 16:32:53
"It is brought up any time someone doesn't have a legitimate argument and Tumbleweed first brought up the notion of the popular vote mattering in this thread."

Yes, in context of a rematch. As in: "Hillary already got more votes the first time, the second time she'd only have to get them in the right places (in an election decided by ~70k votes in 3 states)."

Are you trying to replace garyd or something? You're "lacking punctuation" away from being a spitting image of that doddering old fool.
kargen
Member
Tue Jul 10 19:00:43
Context of a rematch? Popular vote still wouldn't matter. And Tumbleweed had no context leaning anywhere near the idea of a rematch.

"the second time she'd only have to get them in the right places"

That is the rub. She ignored the states that could have won the election for her and instead played in California with celebrities at fund. raisers. If she or anybody else in her campaign had taken the election seriously instead of assuming they were a lock she may well have won the first time. But they didn't.

I'm guessing she will be hard pressed to make it through primaries for the next one. If she does she better pay attention to swing states or she will lose again even if California does put her over in the popular vote again.
hood
Member
Tue Jul 10 19:39:57
"Tumbleweed had no context leaning anywhere near the idea of a rematch."

??????? That's the entire fucking point of the OP - Hillary is supposedly moving for a rematch in 2020. Are you sebbing right now?
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Jul 10 22:12:22
i don't really know what you people are talking about any more... i said many posts back the electoral college picks the winner, as is obvious

popular vote is still relevant, including after the election, i don't care if you think otherwise :p

and there's no reason to believe Trump could've won it had he focused on it, as he had massively more media coverage spreading his dementia (& obviously Hillary would've campaigned different too)

anyway... this is our president & how he speaks:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vcor6_CRPZQ
be ashamed
kargen
Member
Wed Jul 11 03:10:22
there is also no reason to think couldn't win.

A lot of the coverage was negative and that could be offset by visits to the large population states followed by aggressive campaign ads.

You also have to take into account in some of the states that are decidedly republican or democrat there is a lethargy in the opposite party that might not be there if the popular vote mattered. Could also be some lethargy in the controlling party with people thinking no need for me to vote my guy is already in.

To many variables to make anything more than just a wild assed guess.

By the way the voter lethargy thing might be the only good argument for switching to a popular vote. The negatives far outweigh that one positive though.
show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message:
Bookmark and Share