Technically Hillary Clinton could still be elected President.

osmiumartist · 11-11-2016 10:52PM

Rainman16 wrote: »

As well as Democratic electors there are also Republican "Never Trumpers" ( Like the Bush family) who apparently left their voting ballots blank. I wonder just how many republicans are as disgusted seeing what Trump has done to their political party.

My feeling is nowhere near as many as are disgusted by what Clinton has done to theirs. Winning goes a long way to forgvieness too you'll find.

11-11-2016 10:54PM

There's no way this will happen. And even if it did, it would cause uproar and make America even more viciously divided than it is now.

The Electoral College system is far from perfect; based on our idea of democracy it does seem very wrong that the candidate who won the popular vote did not win the election. But Trump won according to the rules of the system. Regardless of what one thinks about him (and I am not a fan, moreson for his backwards views on climate change than anything else), he is the democratically chosen President-elect. You don't have to respect his views, or even him as a person, to accept that. There is no point in trying to overturn the result at this stage.

As regards the protests, I think they're rather pointless and counter-productive but the vast majority of those engaging who do so peacefully are really not doing anything out of the way. Anyone involved in vandalism/violence/looting, on either side, is clearly in the wrong, and should face the consequences for such, but it is far too simplistic and ignorant to generalise all those engaging with the protest movement as a "special fascist libtard safe-spacer snowflake" or whatever meaningless combination of words some (emphasis: some) on the right like to lazily spew out.

osmiumartist · 11-11-2016 10:56PM

alastair wrote: »

I think the people advocating faithless voters' change are well aware of that. They're making their case on behalf of Clinton though, so will hardly be lobbying voters already committed to Clinton. That's nothing to do with 'bubbles' of any kind.

Why not? If people want to lobby for electors to ignore their state's wishes then Trump supporters sure as hell can do the same thing. Wouldn't surprise me if a few states would be disgusted enough to change to Trump if other states decide to ignore their own democratic process.
So yeah, it is a leftie bubble to think this can only work in favour of Clinton.

BoJack Horseman · 11-11-2016 10:58PM

martingriff wrote: »

Sweet Jesus I would wish these phrases never came in to been and it make the person who says the sound like quiet a d1ck.

Thanks.... I have a similar opinion of you too, but I didn't want to say anything until you did first!

The phrases are very apt.
The 'safe space' concept is very very real & is not a term of abuse.
Snowflake is obviously, but then "emotional fortitude of a toddler" doesn't roll off the tongue as nicely.

I mean, read the first paragraph of this journalism, or this slice of teeney-angst from Lena Dunham.

I can't think of a better word for the sheer scale emotional fragility of our generation when something doesn't go our way.

alastair · 11-11-2016 11:03PM

osmiumartist wrote: »

Why not? If people want to lobby for electors to ignore their state's wishes then Trump supporters sure as hell can do the same thing. Wouldn't surprise me if a few states would be disgusted enough to change to Trump if other states decide to ignore their own democratic process.
So yeah, it is a leftie bubble to think this can only work in favour of Clinton.

It's really not. Where has anyone claimed any such thing?

It's a deluded effort, but a counter lobby would be equally deluded.

martingriff · 11-11-2016 11:09PM

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

Thanks.... I have a similar opinion of you too, but I didn't want to say anything until you did first!

The phrases are very apt.
The 'safe space' concept is very very real & is not a term of abuse.
Snowflake is obviously, but then "emotional fortitude of a toddler" doesn't roll off the tongue as nicely.

I mean, read the first paragraph of this journalism, or this slice of teeney-angst from Lena Dunham.

I can't think of a better word for the sheer scale emotional fragility of our generation when something doesn't go our way.

I never said some of those people are idiots and only say something is right unless it happens to someone else. It is just the phrases themselves and the people who say them tto make them sound superior

11-11-2016 11:24PM

BoJack Horseman wrote: »

The 'safe space' concept is very very real & is not a term of abuse.

It is a real concept for a reason, though. In certain situations it has a usefulness. I've been a member of university LGBT societies that were billed as "safe spaces" and I actually found that quite reassuring, as I'm sure many others did too.

Now obviously not every real-life situation is going to be a safe-space, and those who expect everyone and everything to treat the whole world as a safe space are naive at best, dangerously deluded at worst. But it's abuse and overuse of the concept that's the problem, not the concept itself.

Snowflake is obviously, but then "emotional fortitude of a toddler" doesn't roll off the tongue as nicely.

It's become such an overused trope at this stage though, along with SJW (which I must admit to having used myself in the past) and libtard.
Anyone who disagrees with anything vaguely right-wing? "Oh you special snowflake". :rolleyes: Where it once might have had some relevance, it's quickly become a really meaningless and cliched soundbite, often used by those to shut down people whose arguments they find too difficult to rebut.

And yes, I do recognise that this is not a one way street and those who disagree with anything vaguely left-wing are sometimes lazily shouted down as "literally fascists". But to me it seems like there are very few of these "regressive left" types outside of the confines of Twitter, Tumblr or a handful of painfully middle-class universities. Whereas increasingly right-wing rhetoric has become a lot more visible and powerful across Europe and the US, and it's not unreasonable for people to be concerned about that.

I mean, read the first paragraph of this journalism, or this slice of teeney-angst from Lena Dunham.

Ugh, trust me, there are many of us out there who would otherwise be written off as "safe-space libtard snowflakes" who can't stand Lena Dunham.

nhunter100 · 11-11-2016 11:28PM

Rainman16 wrote:

Apparently only 16% of the 18 - 29 year old demographic actually voted.

Similar to the remoaners in the UK.

11-11-2016 11:42PM

nhunter100 wrote: »

Similar to the remoaners in the UK.

"Remoaners" :rolleyes: There's another meaningless bullshít term that should be consigned to the dustbin of history.

The Brexit vote was very different to the American election in that it was consultative only and not legally-binding. So "remoaners" (by which I assume you mean voters who don't want Britain to commit economic suicide, or who weren't taken in by the lies of the Leave campaign) are perfectly entitled to keep fighting against Brexit, especially as it becomes increasingly obvious that those who advocated a Leave vote now have no idea how the hell to implement it.

feargale · 12-11-2016 12:22AM

Rainman16 wrote: »

On December 19, The Electors of the Electoral College will meet and cast their ballots for the next President of the United States.

If they all vote the way their states voted, Donald Trump will win.
However, they have the right to vote anyway they want, for Hillary Clinton if they choose.

The Electors can ignore their states' votes and cast their own ballots for Hillary Clinton.

Hillary won the popular vote. The only reason Trump "won" is because of the Electoral College.

It has never been done before, It is unprecedented. But so is the outcome of this election

Wrong:
Rutherford Hayes 1876
Benjamin Harrison 1888
George W. Bush 2000

Rainman16 wrote: »

There is currently a petition on Change.org with close to 3 million signatures of people urging the members of the Electoral College to do the right thing. On December 19th, they can save Americans from themselves.

The only way HRC is going to win is if the Portland Putsch spreads nationwide.
If people want to change the rules they should do so when in power. It's a bit late now to be trying to move the goalposts.

P.S. I detest Trump but I love democracy. Being a democrat means you take your beating like a man. The losers do have one other option, to emigrate.

Manach · 12-11-2016 12:41AM

feargale wrote: »

The losers do have one other option, to emigrate.

Well - there is alway bringing their state with them
"Silicon Valley investors call for California to secede from the US after Trump win"
- Link.

feargale · 12-11-2016 12:55AM

Manach wrote: »

Well - there is alway bringing their state with them
"Silicon Valley investors call for California to secede from the US after Trump win"
- Link.

Yes, I forgot about that. But if I were you, Manach, I wouldn't be rushing to the bookies

alastair · 12-11-2016 01:42AM

feargale wrote: »

Wrong:
Rutherford Hayes 1876
Benjamin Harrison 1888
George W. Bush 2000

The only way HRC is going to win is if the Portland Putsch spreads nationwide.
If people want to change the rules they should do so when in power. It's a bit late now to be trying to move the goalposts.

P.S. I detest Trump but I love democracy. Being a democrat means you take your beating like a man. The losers do have one other option, to emigrate.

As is so often pointed out, the USA is a federal republic, not a democracy. The rules allow for what they're lobbying for, and if they succeeded it wouldn't have moved any goalposts. It obviously isn't going to happen, but they're quite entitled to advocate for it.

RobertKK · 12-11-2016 02:42AM

The electoral college exists because it is the United States, as in separate states who have their own separate laws and taxes apart from federal laws and taxes.
The electoral college gives each state a weighted vote, the EU has a similar voting system as in states have different weighted vote among the 28 members, but this is due to change in 2017.

The electoral college votes is all that matters, not the popular vote.
Blame the 6 million people who didn't vote for Democrats this election compared to the near 2 million less who voted for the Republicans or the 55% turn out.

Elections are decided by the agreed system which all candidates know before a vote is cast.
Elections are not decided by protests, riots or petitions.
There is no evidence of any major voter fraud that would make the election illegal.

It is fine to argue and disagree before an election, but when the election is deemed fair and once you haven't elected in people associated with terrorism, then people should accept the result and whoever you support, just hope the people in power do a good job for their country and on the international stage.

FISMA. · 12-11-2016 02:46AM

Rainman16 wrote: »

The only reason Trump "won" is because of the Electoral College.

The only reason Trump won is because WE are a Republic, not a Democracy.

Lesson over.

ligerdub · 12-11-2016 08:37AM

Rainman16 wrote:

Hillary won the popular vote. The only reason Trump "won" is because of the Electoral College.

Rainman16 wrote:

It has never been done before, It is unprecedented. But so is the outcome of this election

Give it up! You can take the little quote marks out there too for that matter. It's far from the first time that's happened, but it would be by the smallest margin.

The only thing unprecedented is the amount of idiots crying into the ether and being against democracy.

ligerdub · 12-11-2016 08:40AM

johnnyskeleton wrote:

As far as i know, there have been turned or a "faithless elector", but these are rare occurences and with over 70 electors in the difference this wold require a significant loss of faith. Not exactly democratic!

Yeah that has happened before, but it was done by mistake.

I'm only aware of one other such issue, where a voter abstained back in the Gore Bush election (not Florida, and it was a state Gore had won).

ligerdub · 12-11-2016 08:52AM

RobertKK wrote:

The electoral college votes is all that matters, not the popular vote. Blame the 6 million people who didn't vote for Democrats this election compared to the near 2 million less who voted for the Republicans or the 55% turn out.

Woah! Those 6 million voted for their preference. There is nothing to say they were default Democrats. Republicans lost votes from that pile too.

Stealthfins · 12-11-2016 08:56AM

Technically the world's a safer place.
Technically there will be no confrontation with mother Russia.
Thecnically made in American could be possible again.
Technically the liberals are off the wall.

RobertKK · 12-11-2016 11:43AM

ligerdub wrote: »

Woah! Those 6 million voted for their preference. There is nothing to say they were default Democrats. Republicans lost votes from that pile too.

CNN compared the results to 2012.
6 million less Democrat votes.
Near 2 million less Republican votes.

ligerdub · 12-11-2016 12:04PM

I don't doubt the figures, but I don't think they can say "this happened, therefore that's why". They did a survey on 3rd party voters, and although more would have favoured Clinton, it wasn't by much, and biggest share by far stated they wouldn't have voted for another candidate it they had no other choice. I suspect both the main parties suffered as a result of this.

The Republican figures were only about 1.2 million lower by the way (a healthy enough amount right enough). Hillary got pretty much the same amount of votes as John Kerry did in 2004. Obama's figures are massive outliers, so it's an unfair comparison.

Hillary got 60 million votes in 2016.
Kerry 04: 59
Gore 00: 51
Clinton 96: 47
Clinton 92: 45

Obama got 70 million and 66 million in his campaigns. His were massive outliers, even taking into consideration the rise in population.

Rightwing · 12-11-2016 12:07PM

More like Clinton could still end up in jail.

Has Trump the courage to do what he said he would?, that's the question.

FatherTed · 12-11-2016 12:21PM

RobertKK wrote: »

The electoral college exists because it is the United States, as in separate states who have their own separate laws and taxes apart from federal laws and taxes.
The electoral college gives each state a weighted vote, the EU has a similar voting system as in states have different weighted vote among the 28 members, but this is due to change in 2017.

The electoral college votes is all that matters, not the popular vote.
Blame the 6 million people who didn't vote for Democrats this election compared to the near 2 million less who voted for the Republicans or the 55% turn out.

Elections are decided by the agreed system which all candidates know before a vote is cast.
Elections are not decided by protests, riots or petitions.
There is no evidence of any major voter fraud that would make the election illegal.

It is fine to argue and disagree before an election, but when the election is deemed fair and once you haven't elected in people associated with terrorism, then people should accept the result and whoever you support, just hope the people in power do a good job for their country and on the international stage.

However the Weighted Votes for each state are not evenly distributed per population.

RobertKK · 12-11-2016 12:41PM

Rightwing wrote: »

More like Clinton could still end up in jail.

Has Trump the courage to do what he said he would?, that's the question.

I don't believe he will.

I am of the opinion, he threw everything including the kitchen sink at her. She lost, and that is all that mattered.
Now he has far bigger things to concern himself about, given Hillary had been disposed of.

martingriff · 12-11-2016 02:47PM

osmiumartist wrote: »

So just to be clear here, actually smashing stuff up is OK as long as you are protesting against possible violence?

Sorry only saw your message peaceful protesting is acceptable looting and violence is not

ZeitgeistGlee · 12-11-2016 04:46PM

Rainman16 wrote: »

Hillary won the popular vote.

Irrelevant because:

1) It's not, obviously, how the system works or is intended to work. It's actually intended not to be directly democratic because of how the US was originally envisioned. (i.e. anti-Mob Rule)

2) The EC system tends to disincline people voting against their state's leaning i.e. Reps in California or Dems in Texas because it seems/is pointless. This is why Swing States are so vital.

Rainman16 wrote: »

The only reason Trump "won" is because of the Electoral College.

Which, again, is how the system is supposed to work (so no need for air-quotes) and what everyone signed up to going into it and when they cast their votes.

Amazingly despite Al Gore being in the same position 8 years previously I don't recall raucous demands from people to have President Obama fix the system when he was swept into office in 2008 despite the Dems controlling both the Executive and Legislative branches of government at the time. I guess winning a "broken" system is enough?

Rainman16 wrote: »

But so is the outcome of this election

It happened 16 years ago. :rolleyes: Then again I expect most of the college-age kids rioting over this not to remember something that happened when they were infants/young children.

Rainman16 wrote: »

There is currently a petition on Change.org with close to 3 million signatures of people urging the members of the Electoral College to do the right thing.

To subvert a legal and fair election to the whim of a faction who couldn't even mobilise their own supporters to vote in the same numbers they did 4 years previously? Sounds very democratic to me.

Rainman16 wrote: »

On December 19th, they can save Americans from themselves.

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
- C.S. Lewis

Maybe they could introduce a monarchy to save themselves from the whole business of governing themselves. The Bushs and Clintons seem up for the job, tho maybe the the Kennedys are still interested.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 12-11-2016 04:48PM

Rainman16 wrote: »

Hillary won the popular vote. The only reason Trump "won" is because of the Electoral College.

It has never been done before, It is unprecedented. But so is the outcome of this election.

Al Gore begs to differ.

Inquitus · 12-11-2016 05:00PM

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Al Gore begs to differ.

Aye its happened 4 times, twice in the 19th Century and twice in the last 5 elections, Gore being the most recent example prior to 2016.

LordAwesome · 12-11-2016 05:01PM

Rainman16 wrote: »

The electoral collage is such a ridiculous system, The fact that the people aren't actually voting for the president directly, but voting for "electors" to make the actual vote for them, and that it's actually possible that these electors can turn around and vote for whoever they want is so bizarre.

Would it be the right thing to do? That's up for debate.

But the fact that its even a possibility is strange, The reason it is, must be as a fail-safe measure to protect Americans from themselves.

The EC is there to prevent the big states from trampling over the small ones. If a president could get elected from the popular vote then the candidates would just pander to the three or four biggest states in the US and cruise to victory. With the EC, in theory, every state has a voice.

osmiumartist · 12-11-2016 05:01PM

Rainman16 wrote: »

Hillary won the popular vote. The only reason Trump "won" is because of the Electoral College.

It's worth noting that this is the "only" reason any president has ever been elected. But it's awful, simply awful, now that the wrong guy won. Right?

Technically Hillary Clinton could still be elected President.

Comments