-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Trump NY co-chair hopes Michelle Obama is "let loose in the outback of Zimbabwe"
- Thread starter theignoramus
- Start date
- Status
/sarcasm?
I still can't wrap my head around how you could beat someone by nearly 3 million votes and still lose. And then have people say that you lost because you were "unpopular".
You aren't wrong, but the alternative is also scary. In a straight popular vote (aka a referendum,) areas with greater concentrations of people (big cities) would have a FAR greater say in elections. This might seem like fair representation on paper, but it would literally neglect many entire regions of Americans in regard to the voting process. In this election, we are seeing the unfortunate results of this process, but the fault lies not with the process, but by how much the DNC has failed to care about those people that this process protects.
The electoral process is fairer. That said, I hate the results of this election and wish that the electoral college could save us from it.
Why should people who own more land get more of a vote? And no, the electoral college does not achieve what you claim it does at all. It benefits swing states, not rural vs city populations.
The Electoral College's original purpose was to indeed protect the U.S. from getting a person like Donald Trump from ever becoming President of the U.S., clearly that failed.
IrishNinja
Member
but don't call him a racist, some of GAF thinks we lost because we can't use that word
...wait, what now
...wait, what now
Agreed. I wish they would grow a spine and make the hard choice right about now.
DasPenguin
Member
This. If each individual has one vote, then the system is democratic and fair. Each person voting has as much of a say so as the next person. Saying that "well big cities have more people so it would be unfair" is easily the dumbest thing I have heard this year. There is nothing democratic about that system, and you can spin it all you want.
If you somehow win a vote in such a system by 3 million votes and lose, then your system is laugh out loud terrible. Basically you are giving more power to certain groups of people, which slaps democracy right in the face.
Here's a Google Spreadsheet of the fully certified voting results from all 50 states and Washington D.C. and shows that Hillary Clinton was the clear winner over Donald Trump: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...73R68EZx4SfCnP4IGQf8/htmlview?sle=true#gid=19
If the majority of those people live in a concentrated area and share ideals defined by living in that area, then in a popular vote, they render folks living in entirely different areas powerless in regard to their choice of President, though. Honestly, I share your frustration with this process, but doing away with it would be worse. Literally only the major cities of the US would determine Presidential elections. It would be even more skewed toward the more privileged. In the United States, every state should have say. No one should be meaningless in a just system.
And that sort of frames the folly of the dems this election cycle: they rallied around elitist hubs while ignoring the people that needed them dearly.
wonderful103
Member
No they didn't. They spoke to them and told them they'll make new, green jobs that will define everyone's future that need new training and all that.
What people in Ohio wanted to hear was "keep fucking the earth with coal" and "keep ____ race out" .
DasPenguin
Member
Every single country in the world is balanced like that to a certain degree. Including mine. Similar voting system here would be terrible for everyone involved. But I guess we aren't democratic then. And not all people in big cities are privileged. Not even close. Again, it's not democratic because it's not the people voting for it. You are giving too much power to some areas for no reason whatsoever.
That's entirely fair, and certainly not all people living in cities are privileged. Quite the contrary. The system is far from perfect. I guess is just feel like pure democracy is not a perfect solution to the problem we are facing.
KO Traveling Hobo
Member
Using a thread about a disgusting display of hatred from a schoolboard member and official of the president-elect to take potshots at a banned poster who can't respond. C'mon now.
Which is precisely why he shouldn't have ran for president.
He made people racist by being black.
Don't forget somehow blaming PoC for this like he did with Clinton's loss.
You can still have similar splits in voting systems used in countries like Canada but it's extremely rare.The most recent example of this is the 1979 federal election in Canada. The liberals who were lead by Pierre Trudeau at the time won the popular vote by crushing the other parties in Quebec and kinda stayed close to the Progressive Conservatives in a few provinces like Ontario. The Liberals won the popular vote by a bit over 4% in that election and like 448K votes.There's less of a regional split now in Canada compared to the past so it's kinda hard to repeat that infamous 1979 election even though the west still leans conservative.The last example of something similar in the UK was the February 1974 election were the conservatives won by like 0.7% and lost by 4 seats.
Lightning_Roller
Banned
Hold on, that motherfucker did what now?! Oh hell no, that dingbat better not say a thing about racism or anything involving it ever.
Trump knows that a significant portion of people that support him have similar views. He would never go on Twitter to state that those views are wrong.
SkeptiMism
Member
You can't really say that for sure. The electoral college was part of the election and that was very much known to the participants. As such, it obviously had an effect to how the participants campaigned.
If there had been no electoral college, the campaigns would've been different too.
What a productive post.
/s
No really, such a silly post that only serves to derail.
Maybe you shouldn't believe everything you read in the Internet.
GuessMyUserName
Member
It's bizarre how spambot posts are so prevalent on Trump's twitter feed. Every single post he makes you'll always have the exact same I JUST BOUGHT THIS LIBERAL TEARS MUG, GET YOURS HERE [website url]
Like it's the most basic and easily identifiable form of spam bot posting and Twitter can't even handle that? Like it's not even just one post per tweet, it's the entire reply log of every post, big walls of the same ad
It's very telling that the conservatives have managed to make 'progressive' one of their boogeyman words. Even if you don't like the liberals' methods toward progress, the connotations of the word are wildly positive and clearly preferable to the alternative.this shitheel said:
Dude won't condemn anyone that's on his side unless he's really forced on the spot about it, and even then he'll try to feign ignorance. See his tepid responses to David Duke's endorsement or the alt-right Nazi rally footage.
Meanwhile, someone raises their concerns with his vice president in the most even-handed dialogue possible, he can't shut up about how terrible and disrespectful they are.
supermarioworldE
Banned
Fuck this corpsey piece of shit.
Gotdatmoney
Member
Lolololol Lawd. I needed a good laugh.
Yep.
Before the vote earlier this month, I had little faith that the system would work as intended but still had faith nonetheless.
Now, the EC has failed in its purpose. I wasn't in favor of removing it from the process before, but now that it has failed in its 1 significant purpose I am all for its removal. We clearly are not in need of it.
No.
Feel bad for minorities.
Feel bad for black people.
Feel bad for Michelle Obama, who's only guilty of giving a shit about this country while being a gorgeous, intelligent black woman married to the President.
Feel bad for black women in particular, who are assaulted by this specific form of racism every day.
I'm done with the "progressive" label. It doesn't actually mean anything.
Ah yes, surely we can all remember that racially harmonious golden age back in the 30s, 40s, and 50s. Hoo-boy, I mean, didn't everyone have it great back then?
Also, that URL threw me for a second. I was like, "Why is Ralph Nader talking to Playstation Magazine?"
Agreed. As a liberal white guy, sure, it sucks that the policies I want to see defended and introduced are fucked for the next 2-4 years, but it's a drop in the bucket compared to what visible minorities and women are going to have to suffer through, which is itself just a multiplier of what they already have to suffer. I'm depressed, but chances are, I'll be all right. They're the ones who need our help and support.
Agreed.
Michelle Obama has been nothing but the highest of class, both of the Obamas have been. It's enraging that they and anyone would have to wake up to read this being said about themselves.
Testify....
"Progressive", "Establishment", "Ally" and so much other shit has lost all meaning.
- Status