The Electoral College
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 1 Votes - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
19-12-2016, 09:04 PM
RE: The Electoral College
(19-12-2016 06:16 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(19-12-2016 05:53 PM)Banjo Wrote:  Name one, and how he will carry said idea out.

Id like to hear too.

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies/

"Evil will always triumph over good, because good is dumb." - Lord Dark Helmet
[Image: 25397spaceballs.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Lord Dark Helmet's post
19-12-2016, 09:28 PM
RE: The Electoral College
(19-12-2016 09:04 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  
(19-12-2016 06:16 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Id like to hear too.

https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies/

Health Care :

Quote:"Repeal and replace Obamacare with Health Savings Accounts (HSAs)."

They're (HSA's) NEVER going to cover the costs of health care. Then what ? A total bullshit non-answer.

Quote:"Work with Congress to create a patient-centered health care system that promotes choice, quality, and affordability."

No answer AT ALL. It that were possible, it would have happened.

Quote:"Work with states to establish high-risk pools to ensure access to coverage for individuals who have not maintained continuous coverage."

That means RAISE state taxes. A non-answer to anything. There is no free lunch.

Quote:"Allow people to purchase insurance across state lines, in all 50 states, creating a dynamic market."

We can all do that now. Nothing new there.

Quote:"Maximize flexibility for states via block grants so that local leaders can design innovative Medicaid programs that will better serve their low-income citizens."

Another bullshit non-answer. In other words, he has NO IDEAS at all.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
19-12-2016, 09:34 PM (This post was last modified: 19-12-2016 09:38 PM by Thumpalumpacus.)
RE: The Electoral College
(19-12-2016 11:16 AM)BryanS Wrote:  
(19-12-2016 10:54 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  Apparently you're unable to understand the difference between legal and illegal means of challenging election results.

Well, then, Mr smarty pants. Please do tell me what illegal means of challenging the results of an election were employed by or proposed by Trump?

I'm guessing you missed all the posturing with guns, all the threats of said action by Trump's supporters?

Surely a rocket surgeon such as yourself has mastered Google-fu ... but if you need my help, all you have to do is ask nicely. I'll provide you with the links to fill in what seems to be an intentional void in your thinking.

(19-12-2016 11:16 AM)BryanS Wrote:  You can't, because Trump never actually proposed anything specific that he would do--only that he may not accept and may decide to challenge the results of the election. For that, he was called unpatriotic, and you are calling him criminal. Are you a criminal for not accepting the results of the election then? Or is it only a crime for Trump to contemplate taking that stance. Please elucidate your legal view of when thought crimes should apply to candidates for the president of the US.

Do us both a favor, and link to the post where I called him "criminal" -- or redact that charge. It's the intellectually honest thing to do. If you reread my post which you quoted, I said the means would have been illegal had the Trumpeteers taken to the streets with guns to overturn the results (as compared to simply asking for recounts).

We'll see how you fare on this. I must admit, I'm not very optimistic.

(19-12-2016 11:16 AM)BryanS Wrote:  You can argue that Trump shouldn't be president, and you can even advocate that the electoral college take your point of view into account when they cast their electoral college votes. However you cannot dispel my charge of rank hypocrisy among the left who called Trump unpatriotic for suggesting he may challenge the outcome of the election and then turn around and do the same thing.

Actually, I can dispel that charge, because while Trump was alleging that the system was rigged before the votes were cast, and without evidence at all, the Dems not only waited to let the votes be counted, but, ahem, provided evidence that a foreign power attempted to manipulate the outcome ... which would seem to call into question the process we have in place for elections.

This ain't smarty-pants stuff here. It's simple facts. Trump's followers made plain their willingness to object to an unfavorable outcome by force of arms. The Greens are challenging the results by using our legal system, which is entirely acceptable.

What, exactly, do you have against the rule of law? Be specific.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Thumpalumpacus's post
19-12-2016, 09:53 PM
RE: The Electoral College
(19-12-2016 11:39 AM)BryanS Wrote:  Finally, this will go on for however long Trump is president, but then only on the left.

Where were you when Obama's legitimacy was being questioned due to birthers ... stoked by Trump?

Were you just as vocal then?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Thumpalumpacus's post
19-12-2016, 09:56 PM
RE: The Electoral College
(19-12-2016 11:16 AM)BryanS Wrote:  You can argue that Trump shouldn't be president, and you can even advocate that the electoral college take your point of view into account when they cast their electoral college votes. However you cannot dispel my charge of rank hypocrisy among the left who called Trump unpatriotic for suggesting he may challenge the outcome of the election and then turn around and do the same thing.

They are TOTALLY different. Trump had no evidence and said he might not accept the result before it happened. Questioning the outcome when there is evidence, and interference is not "turning around and doing the same thing". They're vastly different.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
19-12-2016, 10:00 PM
RE: The Electoral College
(19-12-2016 09:56 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(19-12-2016 11:16 AM)BryanS Wrote:  You can argue that Trump shouldn't be president, and you can even advocate that the electoral college take your point of view into account when they cast their electoral college votes. However you cannot dispel my charge of rank hypocrisy among the left who called Trump unpatriotic for suggesting he may challenge the outcome of the election and then turn around and do the same thing.

They are TOTALLY different. Trump had no evidence and said he might not accept the result before it happened. Questioning the outcome when there is evidence, and interference is not "turning around and doing the same thing". They're vastly different.

There is no evidence that the election was rigged. Someone made public the contents of ones emails. That persons emails were hacked. Whether the person that did the hacking was a russian official or not; there is no evidence of, either. Stop regurgitating fake news™
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Gilgamesh's post
19-12-2016, 10:33 PM
RE: The Electoral College
(19-12-2016 09:34 PM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  
(19-12-2016 11:16 AM)BryanS Wrote:  Well, then, Mr smarty pants. Please do tell me what illegal means of challenging the results of an election were employed by or proposed by Trump?

I'm guessing you missed all the posturing with guns, all the threats of said action by Trump's supporters?

Surely a rocket surgeon such as yourself has mastered Google-fu ... but if you need my help, all you have to do is ask nicely. I'll provide you with the links to fill in what seems to be an intentional void in your thinking.

You've cited no crimes so far. What illegal activity are you alleging Trump engaged in? You did make that charge, or did you mis-speak when you said "Apparently you're unable to understand the difference between legal and illegal means of challenging election results."

Quote:
(19-12-2016 11:16 AM)BryanS Wrote:  You can't, because Trump never actually proposed anything specific that he would do--only that he may not accept and may decide to challenge the results of the election. For that, he was called unpatriotic, and you are calling him criminal. Are you a criminal for not accepting the results of the election then? Or is it only a crime for Trump to contemplate taking that stance. Please elucidate your legal view of when thought crimes should apply to candidates for the president of the US.

Do us both a favor, and link to the post where I called him "criminal" -- or redact that charge. It's the intellectually honest thing to do. If you reread my post which you quoted, I said the means would have been illegal had the Trumpeteers taken to the streets with guns to overturn the results (as compared to simply asking for recounts).

We'll see how you fare on this. I must admit, I'm not very optimistic.

Here you go (I quoted the sentence above as well):
http://www.thethinkingatheist.com/forum/...pid1106576

If you are going to claim that calling someone's behavior illegal is not the same thing as calling them a criminal, then you are arguing a distinction without a difference.


Quote:
(19-12-2016 11:16 AM)BryanS Wrote:  You can argue that Trump shouldn't be president, and you can even advocate that the electoral college take your point of view into account when they cast their electoral college votes. However you cannot dispel my charge of rank hypocrisy among the left who called Trump unpatriotic for suggesting he may challenge the outcome of the election and then turn around and do the same thing.

Actually, I can dispel that charge, because while Trump was alleging that the system was rigged before the votes were cast, and without evidence at all, the Dems not only waited to let the votes be counted, but, ahem, provided evidence that a foreign power attempted to manipulate the outcome ... which would seem to call into question the process we have in place for elections.

This ain't smarty-pants stuff here. It's simple facts. Trump's followers made plain their willingness to object to an unfavorable outcome by force of arms. The Greens are challenging the results by using our legal system, which is entirely acceptable.

What, exactly, do you have against the rule of law? Be specific.



There you go again. You are alleging Trump is responsible for alleged criminal activity by third parties (whose threats do not actually amount to criminal activity as they are entirely hypothetical/imaginary acts). Is Hillary Clinton responsible for one of her advocates staging confrontations at Trump rallies for the purpose of creating conflicts designed to portray Trump rallies as violent?

The only suspicious activity discovered by the Green's demands for recounts, by the way, was that 2/3 of all precincts in Detroit reported more votes than were actually cast by actual voters. Curious that this happened in a city that voted 95% for Clinton. That in and of itself is no evidence of a crime, but to date there is no evidence of any actual illegal activity by Trump in relation to this campaign. It is you who should retract the charge you clearly made that Trump engaged in illegal activity.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-12-2016, 10:38 PM
RE: The Electoral College
(19-12-2016 04:51 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  
(19-12-2016 04:45 PM)dancefortwo Wrote:  You still don't seem to get it do you, LDH? You're as childish as trump. Him winning the election or electoral college or anything else for that matter, doesn't mean it's a good thing for this country or this planet.

I disagree. He has some great ideas.

He's a motherfucking douchebag, you dumb fuck.

Atheism is NOT a Religion. It's A Personal Relationship With Reality!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Minimalist's post
19-12-2016, 10:39 PM
RE: The Electoral College
(19-12-2016 09:56 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(19-12-2016 11:16 AM)BryanS Wrote:  You can argue that Trump shouldn't be president, and you can even advocate that the electoral college take your point of view into account when they cast their electoral college votes. However you cannot dispel my charge of rank hypocrisy among the left who called Trump unpatriotic for suggesting he may challenge the outcome of the election and then turn around and do the same thing.

They are TOTALLY different. Trump had no evidence and said he might not accept the result before it happened. Questioning the outcome when there is evidence, and interference is not "turning around and doing the same thing". They're vastly different.

What evidence are you claiming exists to call in question the legitimacy of the vote? The Green party's claims of hacking voting machines was laughable. As I pointed out, the only "evidence" of voting irregularity that has been discovered to date is a curious over-counting of Clinton votes in 2/3 of Detroit's precincts--and that isn't even evidence of election rigging, though certainly worthy of additional investigation and more evidence than the Greens had of any compromise of the votes.

There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever of election fraud of any kind by either side. The opposition to Trump via the Dem's attempts to influence the electoral college vote could only be seen as political in nature, not any serious attempt to correct a wrong vote result.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like BryanS's post
19-12-2016, 11:04 PM
RE: The Electoral College
(19-12-2016 10:38 PM)Minimalist Wrote:  
(19-12-2016 04:51 PM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  I disagree. He has some great ideas.

He's a motherfucking douchebag, you dumb fuck.

Calm down there, fucktard.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: