Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

El Presidente Trump

1…6061636566…276

Comments

  • #1862
    Butters1979
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,164 ✭✭✭Butters1979


    kunst nugget wrote: »
    He never made that distinction in his original post.

    Sovereign countries have the right to restrict immigration into said country, especially if that immigration negatively impacts the people of that country. You do not have some undeniable right to go wherever has the best benefits system.

    The irony of you worried about been unemployed yet condoning free immigration of cheap labour into the country is confusing.

    Anyway, this is going off topic.


  • #1863
    conorhal
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,059 ✭✭✭conorhal


    humanji wrote: »
    Most of that is even debatable, but assuming it's true (sure who'd put it past her?), that's still nothing compared to the republicans. They actually rigged the election. They colluded with the FBI. Jesus, they tried to pretend Clinton was a baby eating devil-worshipper. What the dems did was nothing compared to all that.

    For somone casually dismissing well documented accusations of dirty tricks by the Clinton campaign, that's some impressive amount of hysterical hyperbole right there.


  • #1864
    Jelle1880
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,839 ✭✭✭Jelle1880


    Quite a lot of 'woe unto us poor white people' in this thread.


  • #1865
    Nift
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,075 ✭✭✭Nift


    Hank Scorpio wrote: »
    This wonderful lady has it spot on about the "protesters" Laura rocks :)


    No she's a f**king idiot


  • #1866
    wes
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,749 ✭✭✭✭wes


    Widdershins wrote: »
    Someone said of the 'protests' against the election result: We are raising a generation of emotional hemophiliacs.
    I have to agree.

    Its pretty funny, that for people who are saying you shouldn't sneer at people, then turn around and do exactly that. If the idea that such sneering will back fire, then once the generation you denigrate so much are eventually in charge, then your in for a hell of a time :D.


  • Advertisement
  • #1867
    midlandsmissus
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,838 ✭✭✭midlandsmissus


    How is the Electoral College vote fair really.

    If more people in the largely populated areas, e.g. New York and California voted for Hillary, and more people overall voted for Hilary. But the E.C.V wanted to make sure the sparser states were represented.

    But hasn't the E.C.V introduced bias in one way - that what the overall majority want, is not reflected?

    My male American friend posted on line that Trump won due receiving huge votes from the group, 'un college educated white men'. When another poster asked him why it was relevant pointing out their level of education, he said that we learn more about diversity in education, and I agree.

    Trump is now representing one section of the country that voted for him, and a large number of votes for Hilary have been disregarded. Isn't this what the E.C system was meant to prevent? Lack of representation of certain States of America.

    There is also the issue of winner takes all, where if a candidate wins by a tiny margin in one state, all of the votes for the other candidate are disregarded.

    What do people think of the E.C.V system?


  • #1868
    jimgoose
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,201 ✭✭✭✭jimgoose


    midlandsmissus wrote: »
    How is the Electoral College vote fair really...

    Oh, I'd say it would be perfectly fair if Mrs. C. had won, somehow! :pac:


  • #1869
    Akrasia
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,214 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia


    Jelle1880 wrote: »
    Quite a lot of 'woe unto us poor white people' in this thread.

    quite ironic considering that they keep calling others 'snowflakes'

    Chomsky(2017) on the Republican party

    "Has there ever been an organisation in human history that is dedicated, with such commitment, to the destruction of organised human life on Earth?"



  • #1870
    Jelle1880
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,839 ✭✭✭Jelle1880


    jimgoose wrote: »
    Oh, I'd say it would be perfectly fair if Mrs. C. had won, somehow! :pac:

    If she would have also won the popular vote then it would have been absolutely fair. ;)

    I don't know her stance on it but Trump has been critical of the system for a while now.


  • #1871
    _Jamie_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 603 ✭✭✭_Jamie_


    Gael23 wrote: »
    At age70, is it reasonable to expect him to be a one term president?
    Lt Dan wrote: »
    That is the only saving grace had either being elected.

    Reagan served two terms beginning at age 70 (well, just shy of it). So if he remains in good health, two terms is a possibility.


  • Advertisement
  • #1872
    kunst nugget
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,375 ✭✭✭✭kunst nugget


    Akrasia wrote: »
    quite ironic considering that they keep calling others 'snowflakes'

    You're only a snowflake if what you're upset about isn't the same as what they're upset about.


  • #1873
    jimgoose
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,201 ✭✭✭✭jimgoose


    Jelle1880 wrote: »
    If she would have also won the popular vote then it would have been absolutely fair. ;)

    I don't know her stance on it but Trump has been critical of the system for a while now.

    It can happen, that's the setup over there and most everyone understands it. John Quincy Adams, Rutherford Hayes, Ben Harrison and George W. Bush were also elected president despite losing the popular vote.


  • #1874
    VinLieger
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,933 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    Okay but do you honestly think that if hillary had won the hardline republican trump supporters wouldnt be protesting just as much?

    One of the main things that you can take away from the election results and the entire campaign is trumps supporters were far more passionate and dedicated than the vast majority of people who voted for hillary. So if people who voted for hilary are this energised about the result theres no way it wouldnt have happened similarly if trump hadnt won.

    Protests were gonna happen either way due to how polarising and divisive this election was. Trying to single out the liberals and lefties as the problem is just scapegoating the real problem of populist politics and fear mongering used by BOTH sides.


  • #1875
    midlandsmissus
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,838 ✭✭✭midlandsmissus


    Jelle1880 wrote: »
    If she would have also won the popular vote then it would have been absolutely fair. ;)

    I don't know her stance on it but Trump has been critical of the system for a while now.

    They are the only 1st world country that doesnt have a popular vote.

    I'm not arguing that Trump won, I've just been reading up the system out of my own interest over the last few days. And I was wondering what other people thought of it. It's vast and complicated, and has been criticised for influencing a 2 party system.


  • #1876
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,019 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • #1877
    jimgoose
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,201 ✭✭✭✭jimgoose


    VinLieger wrote: »
    Okay but do you honestly think that if hillary had won the hardline republican trump supporters wouldnt be protesting just as much?...

    Of course, I wouldn't suggest otherwise for a nanosecond - some of those people are nuts! :pac:


  • #1878
    Jelle1880
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,839 ✭✭✭Jelle1880


    midlandsmissus wrote: »
    They are the only 1st world country that doesnt have a popular vote.

    I'm not arguing that Trump won, I've just been reading up the system out of my own interest over the last few days. And I was wondering what other people thought of it. It's vast and complicated, and has been criticised for influencing a 2 party system.

    What I meant with that is that when it comes down to sheer numbers more people voted for her. There's plenty of other 1st world countries that don't have a genuine popular vote system where you get elected simply based on the amount of people that vote you in.


  • #1879
    Butters1979
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,164 ✭✭✭Butters1979


    midlandsmissus wrote: »
    How is the Electoral College vote fair really.

    If more people in the largely populated areas, e.g. New York and California voted for Hillary, and more people overall voted for Hilary. But the E.C.V wanted to make sure the sparser states were represented.

    But hasn't the E.C.V introduced bias in one way - that what the overall majority want, is not reflected?

    My male American friend posted on line that Trump won due receiving huge votes from the group, 'un college educated white men'. When another poster asked him why it was relevant pointing out their level of education, he said that we learn more about diversity in education, and I agree.

    Trump is now representing one section of the country that voted for him, and a large number of votes for Hilary have been disregarded. Isn't this what the E.C system was meant to prevent? Lack of representation of certain States of America.

    There is also the issue of winner takes all, where if a candidate wins by a tiny margin in one state, all of the votes for the other candidate are disregarded.

    What do people think of the E.C.V system?

    The ECS was supposed to discourage smaller states from feeling under represented and looking to leave the union. It's not necessarily supposed to be fair at a national level. It was because when the US was first founded it was a much loser union which they were worried could fall apart quite easily, especially with European influence. The legislative branch is also weighted towards the lower populated states.

    I agree it's unfair, it's archaic.

    Not only does it allow for a president to be elected by getting less votes, it also can allow for situations where the presidential race will be decided by a few 'swing states' and most of the countries votes don't matter. For example, if you are a democrat in Texas or a Republican in California, there's no point getting out of bed on election day. This is the responsible for the low voter turn out in those states and over focus and pandering by both parties to certain states like Florida and Ohio.

    It's a system with lots of flaws.


  • #1880
    jacksie66
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,988 ✭✭✭jacksie66


    This post has been deleted.


  • #1881
    ColdTurkey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 144 ✭✭ColdTurkey


    Just dawned on me they have just elected Donald and Mickey


  • Advertisement
  • #1882
    Jelle1880
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,839 ✭✭✭Jelle1880


    It's weird how such a polarised election apparently got less people to the voting booth than previous ones.

    Clinton had 6 million fewer voters than Obama in 2012, Trump won with less votes than Romney or McCain.


  • #1883
    Jelle1880
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,839 ✭✭✭Jelle1880


    It's weird how such a polarised election apparently got less people to the voting booth than previous ones.

    Clinton had 6 million fewer voters than Obama in 2012, Trump won with less votes than Romney or McCain.


  • #1884
    jacksie66
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,988 ✭✭✭jacksie66


    This post has been deleted.


  • #1885
    Lamentabli sane
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40 ✭Lamentabli sane


    Republican president, republican Congress and Senate. Hopefully some Republican appointments to the Supreme Court in the near future.

    Its time to DRAIN THE SWAMP.


  • #1886
    Lamentabli sane
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40 ✭Lamentabli sane


    Republican president, republican Congress and Senate. Hopefully some Republican appointments to the Supreme Court in the near future.

    Its time to DRAIN THE SWAMP.


  • #1887
    Lamentabli sane
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40 ✭Lamentabli sane



    :D:D:D:D


  • #1888
    Jelle1880
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,839 ✭✭✭Jelle1880


    Lamentabli sane wrote: »
    Republican president, republican Congress and Senate. Hopefully some Republican appointments to the Supreme Court in the near future.

    Its time to DRAIN THE SWAMP.

    You actually believe that :D


  • #1889
    osarusan
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,816 ✭✭✭✭osarusan


    I think the Electoral college system could do with reform alright, but there's no point blaming it for the result.

    Both sides knew the system and played the system.


  • #1890
    Butters1979
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,164 ✭✭✭Butters1979


    Jelle1880 wrote: »
    It's weird how such a polarised election apparently got less people to the voting booth than previous ones.

    Clinton had 6 million fewer voters than Obama in 2012, Trump won with less votes than Romney or McCain.

    I think at least some of that is due to the system they have. Unless you're in a swing state your vote doesn't feel as important.


  • Advertisement
  • #1891
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,140 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    Lamentabli sane wrote: »
    Republican president, republican Congress and Senate. Hopefully some Republican appointments to the Supreme Court in the near future.

    Its time to DRAIN THE SWAMP.

    You'll be deeply disappointed.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement