Hillary Clinton: What happened

CM189191

cincybearcat said:

benjs said:

brianlux said:

Kat said:

I think she did beat him and strongly. He only got in through a technicality. Cue founding fathers rolling in their graves. 

True- the Electoral College.  Time to dump that  one.  Nevertheless, I find it hard to believe the Dems couldn't some up with a candidate that would beat a clown like Trump by a record breaking landslide.  Or maybe the American voting public really has gotten that lame in which case- good luck to us. 

I don't think the Electoral College is a bad thing at all, but I do think the 'winner takes all' within a State's voting population makes little sense. Why not do proportional representation within a State? D gets 48%, R gets 52%, a State has 7 seats - 7*.48 = 3.36 = 3 seats for D, 7*.52 = 3.64 = 4 seats for R. This way you can optimize the normalizing of congressional and Electoral College seats (as the method of equal proportions does quite well), while moving forward from committing a State's number of seats based on a binary decision (win or lose).

I think it's a very interesting issue.  If you just go popular vote, the edges of a very large country is all that matters.  If you go electoral the way it is, people in a few states matter much more than they should.  

I honestly do not know the answer.  But I believe either system is "fair" as long as the candidates know the rules going in.  Blaming your loss on the system is only blaming the loss on your ability to understand and plan for the system.  Weak sauce.

Elections are fair as long as everyone understands and plays by the rules ?

The Supreme Court Finds North Carolina's Racial Gerrymandering Unconstitutional

Major win: Supreme Court reverses ruling that protected Virginia GOP's legislative gerrymander

District Court Just Ruled That Texas Gerrymandering Violated the Voting Rights Act

Wisconsin judge orders state GOP to redraw gerrymandered legislative districts

Dems to challenge ‘partisan gerrymander’ in Michigan
Gerrymandering in Michigan is among the nation’s worst

Pennsylvania Lawsuit Says House Redistricting Is Partisan Gerrymander

Analysis: Partisan gerrymandering has benefited Republicans more than Democrats

Funny how the GOP keeps getting their hand slapped for not following the rules.

JC29856

CM189191 said:

cincybearcat said:

benjs said:

brianlux said:

Kat said:

I think she did beat him and strongly. He only got in through a technicality. Cue founding fathers rolling in their graves. 

True- the Electoral College.  Time to dump that  one.  Nevertheless, I find it hard to believe the Dems couldn't some up with a candidate that would beat a clown like Trump by a record breaking landslide.  Or maybe the American voting public really has gotten that lame in which case- good luck to us. 

I don't think the Electoral College is a bad thing at all, but I do think the 'winner takes all' within a State's voting population makes little sense. Why not do proportional representation within a State? D gets 48%, R gets 52%, a State has 7 seats - 7*.48 = 3.36 = 3 seats for D, 7*.52 = 3.64 = 4 seats for R. This way you can optimize the normalizing of congressional and Electoral College seats (as the method of equal proportions does quite well), while moving forward from committing a State's number of seats based on a binary decision (win or lose).

I think it's a very interesting issue.  If you just go popular vote, the edges of a very large country is all that matters.  If you go electoral the way it is, people in a few states matter much more than they should.  

I honestly do not know the answer.  But I believe either system is "fair" as long as the candidates know the rules going in.  Blaming your loss on the system is only blaming the loss on your ability to understand and plan for the system.  Weak sauce.

Elections are fair as long as everyone understands and plays by the rules ?

The Supreme Court Finds North Carolina's Racial Gerrymandering Unconstitutional

Major win: Supreme Court reverses ruling that protected Virginia GOP's legislative gerrymander

District Court Just Ruled That Texas Gerrymandering Violated the Voting Rights Act

Wisconsin judge orders state GOP to redraw gerrymandered legislative districts

Dems to challenge ‘partisan gerrymander’ in Michigan
Gerrymandering in Michigan is among the nation’s worst

Pennsylvania Lawsuit Says House Redistricting Is Partisan Gerrymander

Analysis: Partisan gerrymandering has benefited Republicans more than Democrats

Funny how the GOP keeps getting their hand slapped for not following the rules.

gerrymandering and dark money are easily the two biggest obstacles to true democracy. 

benjs

JC29856 said:

CM189191 said:

cincybearcat said:

benjs said:

brianlux said:

Kat said:

I think she did beat him and strongly. He only got in through a technicality. Cue founding fathers rolling in their graves. 

True- the Electoral College.  Time to dump that  one.  Nevertheless, I find it hard to believe the Dems couldn't some up with a candidate that would beat a clown like Trump by a record breaking landslide.  Or maybe the American voting public really has gotten that lame in which case- good luck to us. 

I don't think the Electoral College is a bad thing at all, but I do think the 'winner takes all' within a State's voting population makes little sense. Why not do proportional representation within a State? D gets 48%, R gets 52%, a State has 7 seats - 7*.48 = 3.36 = 3 seats for D, 7*.52 = 3.64 = 4 seats for R. This way you can optimize the normalizing of congressional and Electoral College seats (as the method of equal proportions does quite well), while moving forward from committing a State's number of seats based on a binary decision (win or lose).

I think it's a very interesting issue.  If you just go popular vote, the edges of a very large country is all that matters.  If you go electoral the way it is, people in a few states matter much more than they should.  

I honestly do not know the answer.  But I believe either system is "fair" as long as the candidates know the rules going in.  Blaming your loss on the system is only blaming the loss on your ability to understand and plan for the system.  Weak sauce.

Elections are fair as long as everyone understands and plays by the rules ?

The Supreme Court Finds North Carolina's Racial Gerrymandering Unconstitutional

Major win: Supreme Court reverses ruling that protected Virginia GOP's legislative gerrymander

District Court Just Ruled That Texas Gerrymandering Violated the Voting Rights Act

Wisconsin judge orders state GOP to redraw gerrymandered legislative districts

Dems to challenge ‘partisan gerrymander’ in Michigan
Gerrymandering in Michigan is among the nation’s worst

Pennsylvania Lawsuit Says House Redistricting Is Partisan Gerrymander

Analysis: Partisan gerrymandering has benefited Republicans more than Democrats

Funny how the GOP keeps getting their hand slapped for not following the rules.

gerrymandering and dark money are easily the two biggest obstacles to true democracy. 

What about ignorance, confirmation bias and stupidity?

oftenreading

cincybearcat said:

benjs said:

brianlux said:

Kat said:

I think she did beat him and strongly. He only got in through a technicality. Cue founding fathers rolling in their graves. 

True- the Electoral College.  Time to dump that  one.  Nevertheless, I find it hard to believe the Dems couldn't some up with a candidate that would beat a clown like Trump by a record breaking landslide.  Or maybe the American voting public really has gotten that lame in which case- good luck to us. 

I don't think the Electoral College is a bad thing at all, but I do think the 'winner takes all' within a State's voting population makes little sense. Why not do proportional representation within a State? D gets 48%, R gets 52%, a State has 7 seats - 7*.48 = 3.36 = 3 seats for D, 7*.52 = 3.64 = 4 seats for R. This way you can optimize the normalizing of congressional and Electoral College seats (as the method of equal proportions does quite well), while moving forward from committing a State's number of seats based on a binary decision (win or lose).

I think it's a very interesting issue.  If you just go popular vote, the edges of a very large country is all that matters.  If you go electoral the way it is, people in a few states matter much more than they should.  

I honestly do not know the answer.  But I believe either system is "fair" as long as the candidates know the rules going in.  Blaming your loss on the system is only blaming the loss on your ability to understand and plan for the system.  Weak sauce.

cincybearcat said:

benjs said:

brianlux said:

Kat said:

I think she did beat him and strongly. He only got in through a technicality. Cue founding fathers rolling in their graves. 

True- the Electoral College.  Time to dump that  one.  Nevertheless, I find it hard to believe the Dems couldn't some up with a candidate that would beat a clown like Trump by a record breaking landslide.  Or maybe the American voting public really has gotten that lame in which case- good luck to us. 

I don't think the Electoral College is a bad thing at all, but I do think the 'winner takes all' within a State's voting population makes little sense. Why not do proportional representation within a State? D gets 48%, R gets 52%, a State has 7 seats - 7*.48 = 3.36 = 3 seats for D, 7*.52 = 3.64 = 4 seats for R. This way you can optimize the normalizing of congressional and Electoral College seats (as the method of equal proportions does quite well), while moving forward from committing a State's number of seats based on a binary decision (win or lose).

I think it's a very interesting issue.  If you just go popular vote, the edges of a very large country is all that matters.  If you go electoral the way it is, people in a few states matter much more than they should.  

I honestly do not know the answer.  But I believe either system is "fair" as long as the candidates know the rules going in.  Blaming your loss on the system is only blaming the loss on your ability to understand and plan for the system.  Weak sauce.

I don't think "predictable" is equivalent to "fair", particularly if we're looking at "fair" to the voters, not the candidates.

JC29856

benjs said:

JC29856 said:

CM189191 said:

cincybearcat said:

benjs said:

brianlux said:

Kat said:

I think she did beat him and strongly. He only got in through a technicality. Cue founding fathers rolling in their graves. 

True- the Electoral College.  Time to dump that  one.  Nevertheless, I find it hard to believe the Dems couldn't some up with a candidate that would beat a clown like Trump by a record breaking landslide.  Or maybe the American voting public really has gotten that lame in which case- good luck to us. 

I don't think the Electoral College is a bad thing at all, but I do think the 'winner takes all' within a State's voting population makes little sense. Why not do proportional representation within a State? D gets 48%, R gets 52%, a State has 7 seats - 7*.48 = 3.36 = 3 seats for D, 7*.52 = 3.64 = 4 seats for R. This way you can optimize the normalizing of congressional and Electoral College seats (as the method of equal proportions does quite well), while moving forward from committing a State's number of seats based on a binary decision (win or lose).

I think it's a very interesting issue.  If you just go popular vote, the edges of a very large country is all that matters.  If you go electoral the way it is, people in a few states matter much more than they should.  

I honestly do not know the answer.  But I believe either system is "fair" as long as the candidates know the rules going in.  Blaming your loss on the system is only blaming the loss on your ability to understand and plan for the system.  Weak sauce.

Elections are fair as long as everyone understands and plays by the rules ?

The Supreme Court Finds North Carolina's Racial Gerrymandering Unconstitutional

Major win: Supreme Court reverses ruling that protected Virginia GOP's legislative gerrymander

District Court Just Ruled That Texas Gerrymandering Violated the Voting Rights Act

Wisconsin judge orders state GOP to redraw gerrymandered legislative districts

Dems to challenge ‘partisan gerrymander’ in Michigan
Gerrymandering in Michigan is among the nation’s worst

Pennsylvania Lawsuit Says House Redistricting Is Partisan Gerrymander

Analysis: Partisan gerrymandering has benefited Republicans more than Democrats

Funny how the GOP keeps getting their hand slapped for not following the rules.

gerrymandering and dark money are easily the two biggest obstacles to true democracy. 

What about ignorance, confirmation bias and stupidity?

those are difficult to quantify. those are better for message board discussions. we can easily leave districting to computer algorithms and eliminate dark money by legislation.

JC29856

Hillary in her book wonders where were all the women marchers solidarity passion and outrage during the election, I wondered the same.

cincybearcat

Gerrymandering doesn't have that big of an effect (if any) on a presidential election does it?

Kat

It sure does or they wouldn't do it. It's the very definition....

ger·ry·man·der

ˈjerēˌmandər/

verb

gerund or present participle: gerrymandering

1. manipulate the boundaries of (an electoral constituency) so as to favor one party or class.

   • achieve (a result) by manipulating the boundaries of an electoral constituency.

     "a total freedom to gerrymander the results they want"

ledvedderman

I'm with Cincy on this one. Gerrymandering has almost no impact on a presidential race because it all falls on state border lines and you can't draw lines for another state. On the last redraw of my state, I literally helped draw the lines with staff from our general assembly. The process is so mundane. You wouldn't believe the requests we had from members of the GA or Congress about what they wanted in their boundaries. 
But that's where gerrymandering has the biggest impact- state general assembly and federal Congress. Then it's, "I want this side of that rode until it gets to the next block- then I want both". 

cincybearcat

ledvedderman said:

I'm with Cincy on this one. Gerrymandering has almost no impact on a presidential race because it all falls on state border lines and you can't draw lines for another state. On the last redraw of my state, I literally helped draw the lines with staff from our general assembly. The process is so mundane. You wouldn't believe the requests we had from members of the GA or Congress about what they wanted in their boundaries. 
But that's where gerrymandering has the biggest impact- state general assembly and federal Congress. Then it's, "I want this side of that rode until it gets to the next block- then I want both". 

Exactly. It affects the House of Reps races.

elvistheking44

JC29856 said:

Hillary in her book wonders where were all the women marchers solidarity passion and outrage during the election, I wondered the same.

It was a "technicality" that they showed up late.

JC29856

Hill:
“Off I went into a frenzy of closet cleaning, long walks in the woods, playing with my dogs and, you know, my share of chardonnay,” she said. “It was a very hard transition, and I make no bones about it. I really struggled, and for the longest time, I was just totally drained. I couldn’t feel, I couldn’t think, I was just gobsmacked.”

JC29856

Hill:
I'm done being a candidate

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/349990-clinton-i-am-done-with-being-a-candidate

amethgr8

Trump is an absolute master salesman, good for him, unfortunate when he cannot deliver the goods he advertised.  He was very precise at the end of campaign and deciding where to do it towards the end, to give him the necessary votes for the EC.  I think he sold the people in control of those final votes, he told them anything and everything they wanted to hear as long as they signed on the dotted line.  That is the ultimate goal of the salesman is to close the deal, no matter what. That's what he wrote his book about.  He can sell the name "Trump" even before he was elected and even after he filed bankruptcy a few times.

Hillary is not a salesman.  I feel like we have a smarter than average (and that's a stretch) used car salesman for a president.  I think her book will be a good read!

amy

oftenreading

amethgr8 said:

Trump is an absolute master salesman, good for him, unfortunate when he cannot deliver the goods he advertised.  He was very precise at the end of campaign and deciding where to do it towards the end, to give him the necessary votes for the EC.  I think he sold the people in control of those final votes, he told them anything and everything they wanted to hear as long as they signed on the dotted line.  That is the ultimate goal of the salesman is to close the deal, no matter what. That's what he wrote his book about.  He can sell the name "Trump" even before he was elected and even after he filed bankruptcy a few times.

Hillary is not a salesman.  I feel like we have a smarter than average (and that's a stretch) used car salesman for a president.  I think her book will be a good read!

amy

One small correction - that's what his ghost writer wrote his book about. He didn't write a word of it. But yes to the used car salesman analogy. 

HughFreakingDillon

if anyone thought Trump had a chance at winning, people would have come out in droves to vote for HC. when the media reports that trump had an 8% chance of winning, people think "oh well, then I don't need to bother". 

JC29856

HughFreakingDillon said:

if anyone thought Trump had a chance at winning, people would have come out in droves to vote for HC. when the media reports that trump had an 8% chance of winning, people think "oh well, then I don't need to bother". 

I agree, probably happened on both sides.
If you look at the vote totals compared to previous elections, trump received about the same as Mccain and Romney, Hilliarys total dropped compared to Obama, especially 2008.

CM189191

HughFreakingDillon said:

if anyone thought Trump had a chance at winning, people would have come out in droves to vote for HC. when the media reports that trump had an 8% chance of winning, people think "oh well, then I don't need to bother". 

why bother voting when:
1) you're district has been gerrymandered to shiat
2) your vote is actively being suppressed through ID legislation
3) polling places are understaffed and have long lines
4) early voting rules have been changed to make voting less convenient
5) my registration was cancelled because I moved or didn't vote in the last 2 years
6) the gotdam kkk might be hanging out

JC29856

what a shit/piss election! 
on one side you have a celebrity game show host and a "dossier" about urine
on the other side you have corruption stumbling and "conspiracies" about feces

I'll buy the book only if Hilliary talks about wtf was going on 1 year ago today.

https://youtu.be/3sfaOhA5Mss

The Juggler

^
Pretty sure there's a TON of corruption on the other side too