Hillary Clinton Derail From Religion Of Libertarianism

[angelo]

The fact remains that Obama lost 60 seats in his mid term while the Trumpet lost 26.

Due almost exclusively to a combination of racism (Tea Party); gerrymandering; a long drawn out unprecedented healthcare debacle; and one of the worst recessions in our history. What’s Trump’s excuse?

When in recent history of American politics has the party who's
in the Oval office held all it's seats in congress in a midterm? By the way, the GOP picked up an extra 4 seats in the senate. That must surely grate the enemedia! Plus.... KAVANAUGH EFFECT? RED-STATE DEMS WHO OPPOSED KAVANAUGH ALL OUSTED IN MIDTERMS.

 

[angelo]

The fact remains that Obama lost 60 seats in his mid term while the Trumpet lost 26.

Due almost exclusively to a combination of racism (Tea Party); gerrymandering; a long drawn out unprecedented healthcare debacle; and one of the worst recessions in our history. What’s Trump’s excuse?

"Worst recession in our history?" What, worse than the 30's?

 

[Max Rockatansky]

The fact remains that Obama lost 60 seats in his mid term while the Trumpet lost 26.

Due almost exclusively to a combination of racism (Tea Party); gerrymandering; a long drawn out unprecedented healthcare debacle; and one of the worst recessions in our history. What’s Trump’s excuse?

"Worst recession in our history?" What, worse than the 30's?

That was a depression, not a recession.

 

[Max Rockatansky]

The fact remains that Obama lost 60 seats in his mid term while the Trumpet lost 26.

Due almost exclusively to a combination of racism (Tea Party); gerrymandering; a long drawn out unprecedented healthcare debacle; and one of the worst recessions in our history. What’s Trump’s excuse?

When in recent history of American politics has the party who's
in the Oval office held all it's seats in congress in a midterm? By the way, the GOP picked up an extra 4 seats in the senate. That must surely grate the enemedia! Plus.... KAVANAUGH EFFECT? RED-STATE DEMS WHO OPPOSED KAVANAUGH ALL OUSTED IN MIDTERMS.

I give up, when? Yes, the RNC (they aren't the GOP anymore) picked up 4 Senate seats and lost their ass in the House. 2019 should be a fun year!

Why do you say "enemedia"? Are you advocating violence against anyone?.....or just engaging in ITG bluster and bravado like the Liar-in-Chief?

 

[Harry Bosch]

The fact remains that Obama lost 60 seats in his mid term while the Trumpet lost 26.

Due almost exclusively to a combination of racism (Tea Party); gerrymandering; a long drawn out unprecedented healthcare debacle; and one of the worst recessions in our history. What’s Trump’s excuse?

When in recent history of American politics has the party who's
in the Oval office held all it's seats in congress in a midterm? By the way, the GOP picked up an extra 4 seats in the senate. That must surely grate the enemedia! Plus.... KAVANAUGH EFFECT? RED-STATE DEMS WHO OPPOSED KAVANAUGH ALL OUSTED IN MIDTERMS.

Dude: tap the breaks a little. It had very little to do with Kavanaugh. We have a terrible system. It's the system that did it. Just like in 2016, the dems won the election. We won the popular vote by 7%! 12 million more democrats voted than republicans.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

The fact remains that Obama lost 60 seats in his mid term while the Trumpet lost 26.

Due almost exclusively to a combination of racism (Tea Party); gerrymandering; a long drawn out unprecedented healthcare debacle; and one of the worst recessions in our history. What’s Trump’s excuse?

When in recent history of American politics has the party who's in the Oval office held all it's seats in congress in a midterm?

Avoidance. Answer the question.

- - - Updated - - -

The fact remains that Obama lost 60 seats in his mid term while the Trumpet lost 26.

Due almost exclusively to a combination of racism (Tea Party); gerrymandering; a long drawn out unprecedented healthcare debacle; and one of the worst recessions in our history. What’s Trump’s excuse?

"Worst recession in our history?" What, worse than the 30's?

 

[angelo]

When in recent history of American politics has the party who's
in the Oval office held all it's seats in congress in a midterm? By the way, the GOP picked up an extra 4 seats in the senate. That must surely grate the enemedia! Plus.... KAVANAUGH EFFECT? RED-STATE DEMS WHO OPPOSED KAVANAUGH ALL OUSTED IN MIDTERMS.

I give up, when? Yes, the RNC (they aren't the GOP anymore) picked up 4 Senate seats and lost their ass in the House. 2019 should be a fun year!

Why do you say "enemedia"? Are you advocating violence against anyone?.....or just engaging in ITG bluster and bravado like the Liar-in-Chief?

What's wrong with American politics? It's gone from having an Appeaser In Chief to having a Liar In Chief! Surely out of more than 330 million people they could come up with better candidates than Killery and a Trumpet, or a crazy socialist like Sanders.
But then again I have a funny suspicion that some (especially here )would prefer a dictatorship, or a one party rule as long as it's a Democratic Party and no one else.

 

[angelo]

When in recent history of American politics has the party who's
in the Oval office held all it's seats in congress in a midterm? By the way, the GOP picked up an extra 4 seats in the senate. That must surely grate the enemedia! Plus.... KAVANAUGH EFFECT? RED-STATE DEMS WHO OPPOSED KAVANAUGH ALL OUSTED IN MIDTERMS.

Dude: tap the breaks a little. It had very little to do with Kavanaugh. We have a terrible system. It's the system that did it. Just like in 2016, the dems won the election. We won the popular vote by 7%! 12 million more democrats voted than republicans.

It makes little difference if record numbers voted Killery in States like California. There's a " college vote" system in place to prevent such large States to dominate and run over smaller States.
By looking at the college votes, the Trumpet trounced Killery in the States that counted. Actually it's called democracy, and may I remind you that the Trumpets approval ratings are similar to what Obama's were midway through his first term.

 

[ZiprHead]

When in recent history of American politics has the party who's
in the Oval office held all it's seats in congress in a midterm? By the way, the GOP picked up an extra 4 seats in the senate. That must surely grate the enemedia! Plus.... KAVANAUGH EFFECT? RED-STATE DEMS WHO OPPOSED KAVANAUGH ALL OUSTED IN MIDTERMS.

Dude: tap the breaks a little. It had very little to do with Kavanaugh. We have a terrible system. It's the system that did it. Just like in 2016, the dems won the election. We won the popular vote by 7%! 12 million more democrats voted than republicans.

It makes little difference if record numbers voted Killery in States like California. There's a " college vote" system in place to prevent such large States to dominate and run over smaller States.
By looking at the college votes, the Trumpet trounced Killery in the States that counted. Actually it's called democracy, and may I remind you that the Trumpets approval ratings are similar to what Obama's were midway through his first term.

How in the world can you call it democracy when the person that gets less votes gets to be the winner. Did you get your dictionary from Mad Magazine?

 

[Max Rockatansky]

When in recent history of American politics has the party who's
in the Oval office held all it's seats in congress in a midterm? By the way, the GOP picked up an extra 4 seats in the senate. That must surely grate the enemedia! Plus.... KAVANAUGH EFFECT? RED-STATE DEMS WHO OPPOSED KAVANAUGH ALL OUSTED IN MIDTERMS.

I give up, when? Yes, the RNC (they aren't the GOP anymore) picked up 4 Senate seats and lost their ass in the House. 2019 should be a fun year!

Why do you say "enemedia"? Are you advocating violence against anyone?.....or just engaging in ITG bluster and bravado like the Liar-in-Chief?

What's wrong with American politics? It's gone from having an Appeaser In Chief to having a Liar In Chief! Surely out of more than 330 million people they could come up with better candidates than Killery and a Trumpet, or a crazy socialist like Sanders.
But then again I have a funny suspicion that some (especially here )would prefer a dictatorship, or a one party rule as long as it's a Democratic Party and no one else.

Interesting perspective, but I am not as emotionally excited about it as you.

Here's one solution:

 

[angelo]

It makes little difference if record numbers voted Killery in States like California. There's a " college vote" system in place to prevent such large States to dominate and run over smaller States.
By looking at the college votes, the Trumpet trounced Killery in the States that counted. Actually it's called democracy, and may I remind you that the Trumpets approval ratings are similar to what Obama's were midway through his first term.

How in the world can you call it democracy when the person that gets less votes gets to be the winner. Did you get your dictionary from Mad Magazine?

Perhaps The Founding Fathers thought that to preserve the relevance of ALL 50 States was the way to go. Which in hindsight was the correct thing to do. Otherwise, States like California with it's 40 million inhabitants would walk all over the much smaller states and make their votes irrelevant.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-...lainer/7787472

 

[angelo]

deleted.

 

[Harry Bosch]

It makes little difference if record numbers voted Killery in States like California. There's a " college vote" system in place to prevent such large States to dominate and run over smaller States.
By looking at the college votes, the Trumpet trounced Killery in the States that counted. Actually it's called democracy, and may I remind you that the Trumpets approval ratings are similar to what Obama's were midway through his first term.

How in the world can you call it democracy when the person that gets less votes gets to be the winner. Did you get your dictionary from Mad Magazine?

Perhaps The Founding Fathers thought that to preserve the relevance of ALL 50 States was the way to go. Which in hindsight was the correct thing to do. Otherwise, States like California with it's 40 million inhabitants would walk all over the much smaller states and make their votes irrelevant.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-...lainer/7787472

I favor change. I see no valid reason why Farmer's should have more power than people living in cities.

 

[ZiprHead]

It makes little difference if record numbers voted Killery in States like California. There's a " college vote" system in place to prevent such large States to dominate and run over smaller States.
By looking at the college votes, the Trumpet trounced Killery in the States that counted. Actually it's called democracy, and may I remind you that the Trumpets approval ratings are similar to what Obama's were midway through his first term.

How in the world can you call it democracy when the person that gets less votes gets to be the winner. Did you get your dictionary from Mad Magazine?

Perhaps The Founding Fathers thought that to preserve the relevance of ALL 50 States was the way to go. Which in hindsight was the correct thing to do. Otherwise, States like California with it's 40 million inhabitants would walk all over the much smaller states and make their votes irrelevant.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-...lainer/7787472

States don't vote. People do. Why should where a person lives make a difference.

Oh, and nice dodge of your definition of democracy.

 

[Max Rockatansky]

It makes little difference if record numbers voted Killery in States like California. There's a " college vote" system in place to prevent such large States to dominate and run over smaller States.
By looking at the college votes, the Trumpet trounced Killery in the States that counted. Actually it's called democracy, and may I remind you that the Trumpets approval ratings are similar to what Obama's were midway through his first term.

How in the world can you call it democracy when the person that gets less votes gets to be the winner. Did you get your dictionary from Mad Magazine?

Perhaps The Founding Fathers thought that to preserve the relevance of ALL 50 States was the way to go. Which in hindsight was the correct thing to do. Otherwise, States like California with it's 40 million inhabitants would walk all over the much smaller states and make their votes irrelevant.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-...lainer/7787472

Although it was only 13 states at the time, you are correct. Rhode Island didn’t want New York walking all over them hence why we have both Senators and Representatives and an Electoral College system. Also, the only means of long distance communication was by horse or boat. Still, in a republic, the EC system is part of the way to avoid tyranny of the majority AKA a pure democracy. In this case, to prevent one or two large states from dictating to all other states.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

States are not sovereign. Even before the Civil War the notion of State sovereignty was long settled, but certainly after the war the issue was dead.

Regardless, as I have pointed out so many times I no longer know in which threads, the EC's mandate has long been circumvented by the States such that it no longer exists (and it had little to nothing to do with State sovereignty to begin with and everything to do with protecting slavery). The majority of the States have castrated the notion of "faithless" electors, requiring instead that their electors act as rubber stamps for the popular vote winner.

Iow, the popular vote is the only vote that exists. There is no other vote other than as a meaningless theatre.

So we are left with a vestigial arm long since cut off that serves absolutely no purpose, other than to unjustifiably weight my vote to equal 10,000 of your vote, just because you live five feet away from me. In effect.

It is a national office and it should be decided by a national vote. Period. Just flip it and consider the outrage if State elections were all determined by a national vote. The outrage would never end.

No state has magical powers that transform its inhabitants into different classes of American votes, yet that is precisely what the EC does, only without merit. It doesn't matter what anyone wishes to argue in favor of the EC, it is objectively, conclusively and irrefutably non-existent in all substantive forms and serves no justifiable purpose.

The only reasons it still exists are (1) it takes too much effort to get rid of it and (2) it allows for election fraud, which is all Republicans have left to them, since they cannot win on merit.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Ya, you have the legislative branch divvied up to do state by state representation already. For a national office, why not go by whomever the nation wants?

 

[Max Rockatansky]

States are not sovereign. Even before the Civil War the notion of State sovereignty was long settled, but certainly after the war the issue was dead.

Regardless, as I have pointed out so many times I no longer know in which threads, the EC's mandate has long been circumvented by the States such that it no longer exists (and it had little to nothing to do with State sovereignty to begin with and everything to do with protecting slavery). The majority of the States have castrated the notion of "faithless" electors, requiring instead that their electors act as rubber stamps for the popular vote winner.

Iow, the popular vote is the only vote that exists. There is no other vote other than as a meaningless theatre.

So we are left with a vestigial arm long since cut off that serves absolutely no purpose, other than to unjustifiably weight my vote to equal 10,000 of your vote, just because you live five feet away from me. In effect.

It is a national office and it should be decided by a national vote. Period. Just flip it and consider the outrage if State elections were all determined by a national vote. The outrage would never end.

No state has magical powers that transform its inhabitants into different classes of American votes, yet that is precisely what the EC does, only without merit. It doesn't matter what anyone wishes to argue in favor of the EC, it is objectively, conclusively and irrefutably non-existent in all substantive forms and serves no justifiable purpose.

The only reasons it still exists are (1) it takes too much effort to get rid of it and (2) it allows for election fraud, which is all Republicans have left to them, since they cannot win on merit.

Awesome. So how long before the Constitutional Amendment will be passed correcting the EC problem?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Awesome. So how long before the Constitutional Amendment will be passed correcting the EC problem?

I totally read that wrong and thought that you said the ED problem. It seemed like you wanted a constitutional amendment to guarantee access to Viagra or something.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

States are not sovereign. Even before the Civil War the notion of State sovereignty was long settled, but certainly after the war the issue was dead.

Regardless, as I have pointed out so many times I no longer know in which threads, the EC's mandate has long been circumvented by the States such that it no longer exists (and it had little to nothing to do with State sovereignty to begin with and everything to do with protecting slavery). The majority of the States have castrated the notion of "faithless" electors, requiring instead that their electors act as rubber stamps for the popular vote winner.

Iow, the popular vote is the only vote that exists. There is no other vote other than as a meaningless theatre.

So we are left with a vestigial arm long since cut off that serves absolutely no purpose, other than to unjustifiably weight my vote to equal 10,000 of your vote, just because you live five feet away from me. In effect.

It is a national office and it should be decided by a national vote. Period. Just flip it and consider the outrage if State elections were all determined by a national vote. The outrage would never end.

No state has magical powers that transform its inhabitants into different classes of American votes, yet that is precisely what the EC does, only without merit. It doesn't matter what anyone wishes to argue in favor of the EC, it is objectively, conclusively and irrefutably non-existent in all substantive forms and serves no justifiable purpose.

The only reasons it still exists are (1) it takes too much effort to get rid of it and (2) it allows for election fraud, which is all Republicans have left to them, since they cannot win on merit.

Awesome. So how long before the Constitutional Amendment will be passed correcting the EC problem?

Likely never, so long as Republicans exist and can block it. Why do you ask? I hope it's not because of some asinine point about how candidates need to factor the EC into their strategies because every candidat always does that.