More than half of the electorate voted against Trump and for Clinton.

He got the electoral college, not the popular mandate.

(February 19, 2017 at 3:05 pm)Moros Synackaon Wrote: More than half of the electorate voted against Trump and for Clinton.

You might want to revise that. More than half of the people who could be bothered to even move their asses to the voting booths.

(February 18, 2017 at 6:00 pm)DarkerEnergy Wrote:

(February 18, 2017 at 5:49 pm)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: The only thing that gets on my nerves in the written medium is coming across the occasional dumbfuck who doesn't know how to write what he means, and then gets butthurt upon learning that others aren't psychic. In words short enough for you to understand, I'm not offended, I'm pointing out mental slop.  

But even then, it's a minor thing, somewhere between New Country and toejam.

Don't get your hopes up about my blocking you. I don't ignore people ... I answer them. Don't like it? Tough shit. You'll live, Cupcake.

I don't give a shit whether a stupid cocksucker like you responds to me or not.

Butthurt indeed.

P.S. You don't give a shit? I've got a fantastic GIF for that:



And here's a fantastic rant on "could care less"





You're welcome, butthurt dude.

(February 19, 2017 at 3:18 pm)abaris Wrote:

(February 19, 2017 at 3:05 pm)Moros Synackaon Wrote: More than half of the electorate voted against Trump and for Clinton.

You might want to revise that. More than half of the people who could be bothered to even move their asses to the voting booths.

Apparently the popular vote doesn't mean what the populace voted for.

Strange.

(February 19, 2017 at 3:29 pm)Moros Synackaon Wrote: Apparently the popular vote doesn't mean what the populace voted for.

Strange.

Only in America, mate.

It is not skeptical to assume that the popular vote is not the popular vote. Yes, the rules of the electoral college mean that there exists a defined combination of states that allow one to rule without popular mandate.

It does not change the fact that Trump does not have a popular mandate by the governed. In fact, it illustrates the conflict between the electoral college and the popular desires.

It also illustrates that if one group can exploit it, so can another. Eventually that will be its destruction - when the more powerful political parties realize their opposition will use the sam tricks, they often disable and destroy that which will be foisted against them.

(February 19, 2017 at 3:43 pm)Moros Synackaon Wrote: It does not change the fact that Trump does not have a popular mandate by the governed. In fact, it illustrates the conflict between the electoral college and the popular desires.

Yes, it does. And it illustrates the conflict between a system that had been installed in the late 18th century and todays necessities. It was understandable to handle it that way when people couldn't travel for hundreds or thousands of miles, but in this day and age, it no longer serves it's purpose.

I do not understand - are you disputing my point of popular mandate (which is bizarre due to how the definitions operate) or agreeing with me?

(February 19, 2017 at 3:57 pm)Moros Synackaon Wrote: I do not understand - are you disputing my point of popular mandate (which is bizarre due to how the definitions operate) or agreeing with me?

I'm not disputing it at all. I'm only pointing out my amazement at the popular vote not taking precedence, due to an aged system.

(February 19, 2017 at 3:18 pm)abaris Wrote:

(February 19, 2017 at 3:05 pm)Moros Synackaon Wrote: More than half of the electorate voted against Trump and for Clinton.

You might want to revise that. More than half of the people who could be bothered to even move their asses to the voting booths.

In some states, anybody can submit an absentee ballot. Mine is one of them. The optimistic part of me says that if the entire country was like that, a lot more people would vote. The rest of me says probably not.