What do these anti-Trump protesters want?

[Harry Bosch]

I'm with you Harry, I am for getting rid of the electoral college. Not just for the democratic fairness, but that it would make candidates campaign to the whole country, not just to states that happen to have an evenly divided electorate. And it would motivate people to vote in all states.

Yes, scrapping it would increase local turnout in "safe" states. I know many people who didn't vote in Oregon because this state is solid blue.

 

[TSwizzle]

It's outrageous. Wyoming has three electoral votes with a population of $586,000. That's one vote per 195,000 people. California gets 55 electoral votes. Their population is 39.1 million. So each electoral vote is worth 711,000 Californians. Yea, it's fucking rigged!

I agree something has to change about the electoral college. It's a strange way of picking a president.

 

[Harry Bosch]

It's outrageous. Wyoming has three electoral votes with a population of $586,000. That's one vote per 195,000 people. California gets 55 electoral votes. Their population is 39.1 million. So each electoral vote is worth 711,000 Californians. Yea, it's fucking rigged!

I agree something has to change about the electoral college. It's a strange way of picking a president.

It made a lot of sense before the advent of the telephone!

 

[blastula]

Sheriff David Clarke is a candidate for DHS head. He tweeted couple of days ago,

David A. Clarke, Jr. ‏@SheriffClarke Nov 9 These temper tantrums from these radical anarchists must be quelled. There is no legitimate reason to protest the will of the people.

Somehow, I doubt he has read the Constitution.


He gives everyone a great reason to protest.

 

[LordKiran]

Sheriff David Clarke is a candidate for DHS head. He tweeted couple of days ago,

David A. Clarke, Jr. ‏@SheriffClarke Nov 9 These temper tantrums from these radical anarchists must be quelled. There is no legitimate reason to protest the will of the people.

Somehow, I doubt he has read the Constitution.


He gives everyone a great reason to protest.

Tsk, they just don't get it. Even though Trump just blasted them in the face with a humble cream pie they still don't get it.

 

[Deepak]

David A. Clarke, Jr. ‏@SheriffClarke Nov 9 These temper tantrums from these radical anarchists must be quelled. There is no legitimate reason to protest the will of the people.

 

[whichphilosophy]

She became a resident of the USA in 2001 and a citizen of the USA in 2006, hence a citizen for about 10 years.
The issue with Trump is illegal migration instead of applying legally. This is reasonable and is how governments view migration.
Europeans will also have to go through a citizenship process no matter who is in power

She worked here for 7 weeks before being granted a work visa, that made her an illegal immigrant for 7 weeks. Also, in order to get that work visa, she would have had to have lied about her worker status, meaning that she obtained the work visa under false pretenses, making it null and void. Any amount of time she worked under her fraudulent work visa was also time spent as an illegal immigrant. She did not leave the US, and go to the back of the line before becoming a legal resident in 2001, so her becoming a legal resident was also fraudulent. She got married to a US citizen in 2005, so her becoming a US citizen in 2006 was above board, but she lived here as an illegal immigrant for nearly 10 years before becoming a citizen for the last 10 years. Trump, and many of his supporters, do not want a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants unless they leave the country and go to the back of the line, this makes them hypocritical when it comes to not caring about Melania's illegal status for 10 years. Unless they only care about that when it comes to Hispanics, which would make them racist. I suppose we can let each of those people choose whether they fall into the hypocritical camp, or the racist one.

You’re referring to a report in the Associated Press (AP) which stated she may have worked illegally in the USA. In other words AP staff didn't know.
Further Melanie Trump’s counsel replied saying AP relied on documentation which did not reflect the records they have including entry and exit dates on the passport
From 1996 to 2001 she returned each year to Slovenia as citizens of that country were not permitted to stay for more than one year. So she did leave the USA several times.
She was given the Green Card in 2001 then after 5 years she obtained citizenship.
There is nothing to suggest she broke any US immigration laws.

Marriage to a US persons does not automatically guarantee citizenship. They would wait several months for a Green Card, then five years to obtain citizenship. She was married to Trump 22 January 2005. Her Green Card in 2001, not the marriage enabled here to obtain US Citizenship.



Why should the US give a pathway to illegal immigrants who have jumped the queue? Controlling one's borders does not fall under the definition of racism.

 

[bilby]

Please don't discuss 'democratic fairness' as if it was a thing.

Democracy is a good thing, in its place. But when it is elevated above all else it becomes dangerous.

http://talkfreethought.org/showthread.php?9761-Limits-of-democracy&p=351599#post351599

Merely being 'the democratic will of the people' doesn't turn a bad idea into a good one.

And the American voters didn't make a choice. They made it very clear that their answer to the question 'Trump or Hillary?' is 'We have no fucking idea'. Less than 50% of voters selected either candidate; and the margin between them was minuscule - in the order of a few tenths of a percentage point.

You might as well have flipped a coin.

 

[skepticalbip]

Please don't discuss 'democratic fairness' as if it was a thing.

Democracy is a good thing, in its place. But when it is elevated above all else it becomes dangerous.
.

Yes. A pure democracy is mob rule. A group of six wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner is a democratic decision but not very pretty. Just as vigilante lynchings are democratic decisions.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Please don't discuss 'democratic fairness' as if it was a thing.

Democracy is a good thing, in its place. But when it is elevated above all else it becomes dangerous.
.

Yes. A pure democracy is mob rule. A group of six wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner is a democratic decision but not very pretty. Just as vigilante lynchings are democratic decisions.

When there is no Lamb, and if the wolves are hungry, they may even decide to eat one of their own in extreme circumstances. Since they are quite smart they will pick the weakest of the pack. Then after that there is less food to go around showing that politics exists in the animal kingdom.

 

[Malintent]

She became a resident of the USA in 2001 and a citizen of the USA in 2006, hence a citizen for about 10 years.
The issue with Trump is illegal migration instead of applying legally. This is reasonable and is how governments view migration.
Europeans will also have to go through a citizenship process no matter who is in power

She worked here for 7 weeks before being granted a work visa, that made her an illegal immigrant for 7 weeks. Also, in order to get that work visa, she would have had to have lied about her worker status, meaning that she obtained the work visa under false pretenses, making it null and void. Any amount of time she worked under her fraudulent work visa was also time spent as an illegal immigrant. She did not leave the US, and go to the back of the line before becoming a legal resident in 2001, so her becoming a legal resident was also fraudulent. She got married to a US citizen in 2005, so her becoming a US citizen in 2006 was above board, but she lived here as an illegal immigrant for nearly 10 years before becoming a citizen for the last 10 years. Trump, and many of his supporters, do not want a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants unless they leave the country and go to the back of the line, this makes them hypocritical when it comes to not caring about Melania's illegal status for 10 years. Unless they only care about that when it comes to Hispanics, which would make them racist. I suppose we can let each of those people choose whether they fall into the hypocritical camp, or the racist one.

Emotionally, I want to agree with you. Rationally, I cannot, because it is not what Trump is calling for. His "line in the sand" is with the CURRRENT status of individuals. CURRENT citizens (regardless of how they became citizens, illegally for a time or not) are "allowed" to remain. CURRENT illegals are the ones he wants to "round up and deport".

 

[untermensche]

So his first act is to form a gestapo and begin rounding people up.

Where have I seen that before?

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

So his first act is to form a gestapo and begin rounding people up.

Where have I seen that before?

 

[RavenSky]

Wow. I just saw on CBS that a Clinton group is petitioning the electoral collage to ignore the popular vote of each state and elect her as president. Is this real or a CBS fuck-up? Could the anti-Trump protests be coordinated with this effort?

I can't even imagine the crisis such a move by the electoral collage would create... think revolution.

Trump didn't win the popular vote, so why would Clinto be asking the presidential electors to ignore the popular vote?

 

[skepticalbip]

Wow. I just saw on CBS that a Clinton group is petitioning the electoral collage to ignore the popular vote of each state and elect her as president. Is this real or a CBS fuck-up? Could the anti-Trump protests be coordinated with this effort?

I can't even imagine the crisis such a move by the electoral collage would create... think revolution.

Trump didn't win the popular vote, so why would Clinto be asking the presidential electors to ignore the popular vote?

Because the electoral college pays absolutely no attention to the national popular vote. The electoral college pays attention to the popular vote of whichever particular State those particular electors represent. The petition is asking the different State's electors to ignore their State's popular vote and to violate the trust given them by their State's citizens.

How happy with your electors would you be if Clinton had carried Florida but your electors voted for Trump. (assuming he got a plurality of the national popular vote)?

 

[RavenSky]

Trump supporter "I’m fine with Europeans coming here."

She became a resident of the USA in 2001 and a citizen of the USA in 2006, hence a citizen for about 10 years.
The issue with Trump is illegal migration instead of applying legally. This is reasonable and is how governments view migration.
Europeans will also have to go through a citizenship process no matter who is in power

She entered the country on false pretenses, worked illegally, and then lied about it. Whatever anyone else thinks about it, that makes Trump a hypocrite right along with anyone else who wants to deport "Mexicans" (even when they are U.S. citizens) but has no problem with how Melania became a citizen.

 

[RavenSky]

Honestly? They want Superman to come and run the clock back a few days .....

That would be nice.

 

[RavenSky]

Trump didn't win the popular vote, so why would Clinto be asking the presidential electors to ignore the popular vote?

Because the electoral college pays absolutely no attention to the national popular vote. The electoral college pays attention to the popular vote of whichever particular State those particular electors represent. The petition is asking the different State's electors to ignore their State's popular vote and to violate the trust given them by their State's citizens.

How happy with your electors would you be if Clinton had carried Florida but your electors voted for Trump assuming he got a plurality of the national popular vote?

Except that is not what anyone is suggesting

 

[Shadowy Man]

This seems backwards. .I think you might have heard wrong.

Hillary won the election, but the electoral college decided to appoint Trump instead... that is what happened.
Now, people are protesting and want the electoral college to respect the will of the popular vote of the people.

Shouldn't the Wisconsin electors respect the vote of the people in Wisconsin? Why should voters in California get to chose Wisconsin electors?

Why should one state get more electors per capita than other states? Maybe the number of electors should be proportional to the population.

 

[skepticalbip]

Because the electoral college pays absolutely no attention to the national popular vote. The electoral college pays attention to the popular vote of whichever particular State those particular electors represent. The petition is asking the different State's electors to ignore their State's popular vote and to violate the trust given them by their State's citizens.

How happy with your electors would you be if Clinton had carried Florida but your electors voted for Trump assuming he got a plurality of the national popular vote?

Except that is not what anyone is suggesting

That is exactly what the petition is asking... other than my "what if" about Florida.

What do you think the petition is about?