Alright folks. Its well established that DJT won the electoral college. However, Hillary is now up in the popular vote by close to 2 millions votes. The electoral college was partly established to serve a safeguard against a tainted election and perhaps an unfit candidate. I think there is more than a valid case for ELECTORAL COUPE DE ETAT. Get the ESP out of here!!!!!!!
In what way, shape or form is there a valid case for an electoral coup d'état? An "unfit president" is too subjective a term to be used as grounds for throwing out the Democratic Election Rulebook unless a behaviour is proven to be blatantly unlawful or blatantly unconstitutional, and even then I couldn't tell you the process of having a citizen disqualified for sitting in the Oval Office.
vaggar99, I'd still appreciate an answer to my question. On what grounds would you call for an electoral coup d'état, and how would you justify a change of process applying retroactively?
Edit: You state that the Electoral College was partly established to safeguard against a tainted election, but it was also partially established so that skeptical individual states would not have to fear having their voices lost in the shuffle of the federal republic. The Electoral College aspires to alleviate that issue by putting a floor and ceiling on how much power one state can possess if the population densities became unequally distributed in the vast land mass of the USA (as they are today). To remove the Electoral College would be to go back on a bond made with each individual state which was necessary to actually unify the States and allow a federal governing body.
Now you're making me do research. I'll get back to you soon
Your explicit statement was that "there is more than a valid case for ELECTORAL COUPE DE ETAT". The only question I asked was what that valid case was, to validate your conclusion. If you need to do research, it means you hadn't even thought about whether there's a logical argument to be made to reach the conclusion that you clearly want agreement on. That's no way to debate.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
There is no guarantee that if from the beginning of the campaigns popular vote was used, Hillary would have won the popular vote. Both would have campaigned differently, some Johnson or Stein voters may have voted differently.
Trump & Hillary campaigned with the rules being the electoral college. He won. Popular vote is irrelevant in our system.
Entitlement, as in Social Security benefits? Congrats, it's already in shambles.
Entitlement of those who think that because they are great fans of a band they insult others. Entitlement of celebrities to molest women. I prefer to keep it under 140 characters
You're well aware that you throw insults around, right? Like calling people who simply believe in the democratic process "white supremacists". You're aware you do that, right?
If you look through my posts, I avoid direct insults. I do believe there is white supremacist take over if the us occurring right now. I don't have a problem with theses groups. They have a right to a voice like anyone. But allowing a full on takeover? Not good. Unless maybe you are on that side. I am not. I have no firearms. That's scary.
cause blanket insults are so much better than direct ones.
You can choose to look at it that way. If you are offended by the phrase white supremacist, I'd find that odd. Because, I just consider a politically correct way to describe this group. That's all. That said I have posted some angry posts regarding theses groups. expressing my frsustration and fear. I can tell you the fear level is only growing.
There is nothing wrong with expressing anger about white supremacists/white nationalists/alt-right.
I should say 'I don't have a problem with existence of these groups so long as they operate within the law'
You don't??? I sure do. You know, you're not obligated to show tolerance for intolerance, no matter what intolerant people try to tell you.
Trust me. I do not like them. They make my skin crawl with their beautiful and perfect features. But they are allowed to exist.
Alright folks. Its well established that DJT won the electoral college. However, Hillary is now up in the popular vote by close to 2 millions votes. The electoral college was partly established to serve a safeguard against a tainted election and perhaps an unfit candidate. I think there is more than a valid case for ELECTORAL COUPE DE ETAT. Get the ESP out of here!!!!!!!
In what way, shape or form is there a valid case for an electoral coup d'état? An "unfit president" is too subjective a term to be used as grounds for throwing out the Democratic Election Rulebook unless a behaviour is proven to be blatantly unlawful or blatantly unconstitutional, and even then I couldn't tell you the process of having a citizen disqualified for sitting in the Oval Office.
vaggar99, I'd still appreciate an answer to my question. On what grounds would you call for an electoral coup d'état, and how would you justify a change of process applying retroactively?
Edit: You state that the Electoral College was partly established to safeguard against a tainted election, but it was also partially established so that skeptical individual states would not have to fear having their voices lost in the shuffle of the federal republic. The Electoral College aspires to alleviate that issue by putting a floor and ceiling on how much power one state can possess if the population densities became unequally distributed in the vast land mass of the USA (as they are today). To remove the Electoral College would be to go back on a bond made with each individual state which was necessary to actually unify the States and allow a federal governing body.
Now you're making me do research. I'll get back to you soon
Your explicit statement was that "there is more than a valid case for ELECTORAL COUPE DE ETAT". The only question I asked was what that valid case was, to validate your conclusion. If you need to do research, it means you hadn't even thought about whether there's a logical argument to be made to reach the conclusion that you clearly want agreement on. That's no way to debate.
I posted an article about election fraud earlier. It's a start. At work right now can do too much fact finding
Entitlement, as in Social Security benefits? Congrats, it's already in shambles.
Entitlement of those who think that because they are great fans of a band they insult others. Entitlement of celebrities to molest women. I prefer to keep it under 140 characters
You're well aware that you throw insults around, right? Like calling people who simply believe in the democratic process "white supremacists". You're aware you do that, right?
If you look through my posts, I avoid direct insults. I do believe there is white supremacist take over if the us occurring right now. I don't have a problem with theses groups. They have a right to a voice like anyone. But allowing a full on takeover? Not good. Unless maybe you are on that side. I am not. I have no firearms. That's scary.
cause blanket insults are so much better than direct ones.
You can choose to look at it that way. If you are offended by the phrase white supremacist, I'd find that odd. Because, I just consider a politically correct way to describe this group. That's all. That said I have posted some angry posts regarding theses groups. expressing my frsustration and fear. I can tell you the fear level is only growing.
There is nothing wrong with expressing anger about white supremacists/white nationalists/alt-right.
I should say 'I don't have a problem with existence of these groups so long as they operate within the law'
You don't??? I sure do. You know, you're not obligated to show tolerance for intolerance, no matter what intolerant people try to tell you.
Trust me. I do not like them. They make my skin crawl with their beautiful and perfect features. But they are allowed to exist.
Yeah, but that doesn't mean you should feel obligated to say that you don't have a problem with their existence. We have just as much a right to oppose the existence of such groups as they have of existing (at least... I mean honestly, does right and wrong really not have ANY impact? I think it does. So does criminal activity, and it's not like white supremacist groups are on the up and up. They commit crimes regularly, usually violent ones. If you research crimes associated with white nationalist groups, you will get a shit load of results. Plus, whatever happened to the illegality of inciting hate?? Aren't there any laws that prevent the propagation of hate speech?? I thought there were... I guess not!).
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Entitlement, as in Social Security benefits? Congrats, it's already in shambles.
Entitlement of those who think that because they are great fans of a band they insult others. Entitlement of celebrities to molest women. I prefer to keep it under 140 characters
You're well aware that you throw insults around, right? Like calling people who simply believe in the democratic process "white supremacists". You're aware you do that, right?
If you look through my posts, I avoid direct insults. I do believe there is white supremacist take over if the us occurring right now. I don't have a problem with theses groups. They have a right to a voice like anyone. But allowing a full on takeover? Not good. Unless maybe you are on that side. I am not. I have no firearms. That's scary.
cause blanket insults are so much better than direct ones.
You can choose to look at it that way. If you are offended by the phrase white supremacist, I'd find that odd. Because, I just consider a politically correct way to describe this group. That's all. That said I have posted some angry posts regarding theses groups. expressing my frsustration and fear. I can tell you the fear level is only growing.
There is nothing wrong with expressing anger about white supremacists/white nationalists/alt-right.
I should say 'I don't have a problem with existence of these groups so long as they operate within the law'
You don't??? I sure do. You know, you're not obligated to show tolerance for intolerance, no matter what intolerant people try to tell you.
Trust me. I do not like them. They make my skin crawl with their beautiful and perfect features. But they are allowed to exist.
Yeah, but that doesn't mean you should feel obligated to say that you don't have a problem with their existence. We have just as much a right to oppose the existence of such groups as they have of existing (at least... I mean honestly, does right and wrong really not have ANY impact? I think it does. So does criminal activity, and it's not like white supremacist groups are on the up and up. They commit crimes regularly, usually violent ones. If you research crimes associated with white nationalist groups, you will get a shit load of results. Plus, whatever happened to the illegality of inciting hate?? Aren't there any laws that prevent the propagation of hate speech?? I thought there were... I guess not!).
I say that to acknowledge them as a voting group that has a right to voice their opinion and perhaps even push for a seat at the table as they clearly have done in this election. Its now up to us to push this utter disgusting filth out.
At this point I wanna see how much he will screw the country up I'd rather see him fail then to be stopped at this juncture...
man but when people said they wanted Obama to fail they were racist...weird
some of them were. not all of them. but you have to acknowledge that a very sizable portion hated obama simply for the colour of his skin. not unlike donald.
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
At this point I wanna see how much he will screw the country up I'd rather see him fail then to be stopped at this juncture...
man but when people said they wanted Obama to fail they were racist...weird
some of them were. not all of them. but you have to acknowledge that a very sizable portion hated obama simply for the colour of his skin. not unlike donald.
Let's not forget how this got started: The Birther Movement. Perhaps some of the most racist shit I've seen in my entire life. Actually, it is the most racist shit I've lived through.
At this point I wanna see how much he will screw the country up I'd rather see him fail then to be stopped at this juncture...
man but when people said they wanted Obama to fail they were racist...weird
some of them were. not all of them. but you have to acknowledge that a very sizable portion hated obama simply for the colour of his skin. not unlike donald.
Let's not forget how this got started: The Birther Movement. Perhaps some of the most racist shit I've seen in my entire life. Actually, it is the most racist shit I've lived through.
And Trump was one of that movement's most vocal supporters. That was when I really started thinking that Trump was losing his mind. Obviously I was right. (but FWIW, I don't at all think it's the most racist shit you've lived through. If you think so, you are blissfully unaware of a lot of stuff going on in America).
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
At this point I wanna see how much he will screw the country up I'd rather see him fail then to be stopped at this juncture...
I want to see him succeed. I don't like the guy and I didn't vote for him. But to wish failure upon him means that the country ends up worse off than it is. I don't want to see that. He was elected fair and square. My only hope now is that, instead of creating more divide, WE THE PEOPLE work together to make sure he succeeds and does indeed (and I hate to sound cliche) make our country great again. The great thing about this nation is we have the freedom and the power to unfuck fucked up things. We need to stop bickering at each other and work together to make sure we don't get fucked up more than we are.
At this point I wanna see how much he will screw the country up I'd rather see him fail then to be stopped at this juncture...
I want to see him succeed. I don't like the guy and I didn't vote for him. But to wish failure upon him means that the country ends up worse off than it is. I don't want to see that. He was elected fair and square. My only hope now is that, instead of creating more divide, WE THE PEOPLE work together to make sure he succeeds and does indeed (and I hate to sound cliche) make our country great again. The great thing about this nation is we have the freedom and the power to unfuck fucked up things. We need to stop bickering at each other and work together to make sure we don't get fucked up more than we are.
I don't WANT to see him fail any more that I want him to be the horrible, awful, disgusting person that he is. Buuuut....... I really don't see how Trump can actually succeed, given all the information available. Succeed by my own definition, that is. Some other people might think he does succeed, depending on what they expect from the POTUS and government in general. That said, when people are as divided as they are, I don`t actually see how working together is possible. Who the fuck is supposed to bend or compromise in this particular situation? Normally I would agree with you completely, but this isn't a normal situation at all. I think a lot of the issues that people are divided on are based in basic morality. I definitely don't think that people should be comprising their basic morals in order to stop arguing, nor to make things "nice" for a horrible new president who people honestly view as a threat to their freedoms and rights. I personally think that people should fight against Trump's bullshit tooth and nail, not try to make things easy for him. I wouldn't normally say this about a POTUS - no way - but again, this is not a normal situation. People should never forget that. And as long as people are fighting Trump's disgusting shit and that of his cabiner's, while others are fans of that pig and his pals, there is no way for people to come together (of course, I think it's pretty obvious which side of those two groups are on the right side of history). When the issues are racism, homophobia, bigotry, xenophobia, misogyny, and sexual abuse.... there isn't much room for compromise, is there? Nor should there be. I see it as good vs evil when those are the issues on the table.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
i think everyone's time would be better spent focusing on mid term elections and getting out the vote. which, i may be wrong but traditionally democrats dont usually do very well in.we are going to have to just wait and see and make our voices heard. and people that do have a voice are going to have to speak up for those who dont, which the op eluded to in a different thread.
At this point I wanna see how much he will screw the country up I'd rather see him fail then to be stopped at this juncture...
I want to see him succeed. I don't like the guy and I didn't vote for him. But to wish failure upon him means that the country ends up worse off than it is. I don't want to see that. He was elected fair and square. My only hope now is that, instead of creating more divide, WE THE PEOPLE work together to make sure he succeeds and does indeed (and I hate to sound cliche) make our country great again. The great thing about this nation is we have the freedom and the power to unfuck fucked up things. We need to stop bickering at each other and work together to make sure we don't get fucked up more than we are.
I think you are wrong. He is trying to change everything, if he fails things they stay the same and we live decent lives. If he is successful, that's the danger facing America.
So you've only wasted $2,500 tonight on shit that won't come to be. You could have donated that to a worthwhile charity and really impacted someone's life.
So you've only wasted $2,500 tonight on shit that won't come to be. You could have donated that to a worthwhile charity and really impacted someone's life.
also prepared to spend more. much more if i start seeing potential and ROI. Let's just say that orange faced pervert isn't the only one with a little cash.
Nothing is "starting", and stories like this only highlight people's utter lack of understanding when it comes to the electoral college. When a candidate wins a state, he gets his parties electoral votes for that state. To put it simply...if a Republican wins a state, then Republican electorates vote. Democrat wins, Democrat electorates vote. It's not some random group of people that are being forced to vote based on populous desires...they are in fact, strongly tied to their respective parties.
So in this story they are highlighting electorates from Washington state and Colorado, who are vowing to not vote for Trump. Well no shit...Clinton won those two states, who else are they going to vote for?? It's not like she won't get electoral votes from the states she won, she just won't have enough to win the Presidency. If people on either side think the electorates are going to vote against their party, they are out of their fucking minds.
The fact is, he won, and when it comes down to electoral votes...which is how our elections are determined...he won handily. Consider no Republican has won Pennsylvania and Michigan since 1988. Nor have they won Wisconsin since 1984. This is why the polls and the pundits gave Clinton a near 100% chance of winning. I'm not on the Trump train like some, but I am hoping beyond hope that he does a good job for the country.
Nothing is "starting", and stories like this only highlight people's utter lack of understanding when it comes to the electoral college. When a a candidate wins a state, he gets his parties electoral votes for that state. To put it simply...if a Republican wins a state, then Republican electorates vote. Democrat wins, Democrat electorates vote. It's not some random group of people that are being forced to vote based on populous desires...they are in fact, strongly tied to their respective parties.
So in this story they are highlighting electorates from Washington state and Colorado, who are vowing to not vote for Trump. Well no shit...Clinton won those two states, who else are they going to vote for?? It's not like she won't get electoral votes from the states she won, she just won't have enough to win the Presidency. If people on either side think the electorates are going to vote against their party, they are out of their fucking minds.
The fact is, he won, and when it comes down to electoral votes...which is how are elections are determined...he won handily. Consider no Republican has won Pennsylvania and Michigan since 1988. Nor have they won Wisconsin since 1984. This is why the polls and the pundits gave Clinton a near 100% chance of winning. I'm not on the Trump train like some, but I am hoping beyond hope that he does a good job for the country.
I believe there are a few republican electorates that have said they won't be voting trump. But it was such a small number it won't make a difference, and who knows when it comes down to it, if they will actually vote that way.
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
Comments
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Trump & Hillary campaigned with the rules being the electoral college. He won. Popular vote is irrelevant in our system.
man but when people said they wanted Obama to fail they were racist...weird
-EV 8/14/93
https://change.org/p/electoral-college-electors-electoral-college-make-hillary-clinton-president-on-december-19?recruiter=641346620&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=autopublish&utm_term=des-lg-share_petition-reason_msg
https://yahoo.com/news/6-electoral-college-members-sign-120825282.html
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
That said, when people are as divided as they are, I don`t actually see how working together is possible. Who the fuck is supposed to bend or compromise in this particular situation? Normally I would agree with you completely, but this isn't a normal situation at all. I think a lot of the issues that people are divided on are based in basic morality. I definitely don't think that people should be comprising their basic morals in order to stop arguing, nor to make things "nice" for a horrible new president who people honestly view as a threat to their freedoms and rights. I personally think that people should fight against Trump's bullshit tooth and nail, not try to make things easy for him. I wouldn't normally say this about a POTUS - no way - but again, this is not a normal situation. People should never forget that. And as long as people are fighting Trump's disgusting shit and that of his cabiner's, while others are fans of that pig and his pals, there is no way for people to come together (of course, I think it's pretty obvious which side of those two groups are on the right side of history). When the issues are racism, homophobia, bigotry, xenophobia, misogyny, and sexual abuse.... there isn't much room for compromise, is there? Nor should there be. I see it as good vs evil when those are the issues on the table.
i think everyone's time would be better spent focusing on mid term elections and getting out the vote. which, i may be wrong but traditionally democrats dont usually do very well in.we are going to have to just wait and see and make our voices heard. and people that do have a voice are going to have to speak up for those who dont, which the op eluded to in a different thread.
If he is successful, that's the danger facing America.
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
Are you trying to buy votes?
https://youtu.be/zUlY6rh5BBQ
So in this story they are highlighting electorates from Washington state and Colorado, who are vowing to not vote for Trump. Well no shit...Clinton won those two states, who else are they going to vote for?? It's not like she won't get electoral votes from the states she won, she just won't have enough to win the Presidency. If people on either side think the electorates are going to vote against their party, they are out of their fucking minds.
The fact is, he won, and when it comes down to electoral votes...which is how our elections are determined...he won handily. Consider no Republican has won Pennsylvania and Michigan since 1988. Nor have they won Wisconsin since 1984. This is why the polls and the pundits gave Clinton a near 100% chance of winning. I'm not on the Trump train like some, but I am hoping beyond hope that he does a good job for the country.
-EV 8/14/93
asktheelectors.org/