Post Reply Best Trump Protester Sign Ever
6895 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M / Temple of Yaoiism
Offline
Posted 12/16/16 , edited 12/16/16
Even though I'm happy Trump won, this sign is still pretty funny.

21712 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / F
Offline
Posted 12/16/16 , edited 12/16/16
401 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 12/16/16 , edited 12/16/16
It was quite audacious of him to say something like that. After all, that "Disaster for a democracy" is what got him elected to begin with. It's really funny though.
62357 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M
Offline
Posted 12/16/16 , edited 12/16/16

Ununoctium wrote:

It was quite audacious of him to say something like that. After all, that "Disaster for a democracy" is what got him elected to begin with. It's really funny though.


To be fair, he said it four years ago. Also, the electoral college hasn't voted yet. The fact that we have little doubt that he has won the election based on electoral college votes before they've even voted really kind of underscores the entire problem with it. There is so little doubt that electors would actually vote against their pledge that it casts doubt on the entire purpose of the system. And the times when the electoral college has voted against the popular vote, there hasn't been any justification for it. These cases were merely incidental, brought about because of the way the system works.
39738 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Georgia, USA
Offline
Posted 12/16/16 , edited 12/16/16
At least he hasn't deleted it like so many other spineless people.
I think he's allowed to change his opinion on things.
Oh and this is why the electoral college is so important:

http://www.investors.com/politics/commentary/its-official-clintons-popular-vote-win-came-entirely-from-california/
62357 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M
Offline
Posted 12/16/16 , edited 12/16/16

Amyas_Leigh wrote:

At least he hasn't deleted it like so many other spineless people.
I think he's allowed to change his opinion on things.
Oh and this is why the electoral college is so important:

http://www.investors.com/politics/commentary/its-official-clintons-popular-vote-win-came-entirely-from-california/


Hah. In California, Hillary had 62.28% of voters, and that was her largest margin of victory. Trump had 68.63% of West Virginia, 67.4% of Wyoming, 63.55% of Nebraska, 65.32% of Oklahoma, 62.96% of North Dakota, and 62.52% of Kentucky. And that's not to mention that fact that Hillary's numbers in most of those states look pitiful in comparison to Trump's numbers in California. So if you take California out of the running for being too largely Democrat, you must take all six of Trump's largest states out for being too largely Republican. He's leading those states by about 1.8 million votes which, perhaps, doesn't quite hold a candle to Hillary's 4 million California votes, but would still allow Hillary to win the popular vote. That's quite the double-edged sword you're wielding.

EDIT: I think it's also worth noting that Trump got more votes in California than he did in these six states combined.
852 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / UK
Offline
Posted 12/16/16 , edited 12/16/16
Ha!
39738 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Georgia, USA
Offline
Posted 12/16/16 , edited 12/16/16

staphen wrote:
So if you take California out of the running for being too largely Democrat, you must take all six of Trump's largest states out for being too largely Republican.


But that's not how the electoral college works
62357 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M
Offline
Posted 12/16/16 , edited 12/16/16

Amyas_Leigh wrote:


staphen wrote:
So if you take California out of the running for being too largely Democrat, you must take all six of Trump's largest states out for being too largely Republican.


But that's not how the electoral college works


I was responding to your link which attempts to justify the opinion that California is too largely democrat, then follows up by removing it from the popular vote tally in order to show that Trump would have won if not for California. Obviously, that's not how the electoral college works or else Hillary would have won.
22258 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Oppai Hell
Online
Posted 12/16/16 , edited 12/16/16
I'm not sure what is entirely wrong with this picture in all honesty. If anything, displaying a certain amount of counterbias or lack of it seems to be a good thing in my opinion. I am not sure of my reasoning though.
62357 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M
Offline
Posted 12/16/16 , edited 12/16/16

PeripheralVisionary wrote:

I'm not sure what is entirely wrong with this picture in all honesty. If anything, displaying a certain amount of counterbias or lack of it seems to be a good thing in my opinion. I am not sure of my reasoning though.


At the very least, it's amusing because he's winning the presidency only thanks to the institution that he criticized as being a disaster for democracy. But taken in a more negative way, this could be a sign that he is not unwilling to take a helping hand from a system he considers to be a disaster. Taken another way, he is actually in support of the electoral college, and this statement could be a sign that he doesn't believe the United States should be a democracy. And in yet another way, he could have simply changed his mind about the electoral college, potentially indicating that he easily forms strong opinions on things about which he is not well informed. Or perhaps he never really cared about the electoral college, but he wanted to drum up attention in 2012 by saying something fairly sensational.

Bottom line, it could be taken a lot of ways, and nearly all of them would be appropriate as a protest to his capacity as president.
401 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 12/16/16

staphen wrote:


Ununoctium wrote:

It was quite audacious of him to say something like that. After all, that "Disaster for a democracy" is what got him elected to begin with. It's really funny though.


To be fair, he said it four years ago. Also, the electoral college hasn't voted yet. The fact that we have little doubt that he has won the election based on electoral college votes before they've even voted really kind of underscores the entire problem with it. There is so little doubt that electors would actually vote against their pledge that it casts doubt on the entire purpose of the system. And the times when the electoral college has voted against the popular vote, there hasn't been any justification for it. These cases were merely incidental, brought about because of the way the system works.

Regardless, Donald Trump took advantage of the system he found himself in. The popular vote is irrelevant, really. Hillary won the popular vote by quite a large margin, but it was pointless because she failed to reign supreme in the electoral college. Besides, the electors don't have to vote in accordance with their state's wishes, and as such can vote against their state's preference. There needs to be an alteration in our voting system.
42349 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
suffering
Offline
Posted 12/16/16
Pretty much the definition of "eating your own fucking words".
62357 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M
Offline
Posted 12/16/16

Ununoctium wrote:


staphen wrote:


Ununoctium wrote:

It was quite audacious of him to say something like that. After all, that "Disaster for a democracy" is what got him elected to begin with. It's really funny though.


To be fair, he said it four years ago. Also, the electoral college hasn't voted yet. The fact that we have little doubt that he has won the election based on electoral college votes before they've even voted really kind of underscores the entire problem with it. There is so little doubt that electors would actually vote against their pledge that it casts doubt on the entire purpose of the system. And the times when the electoral college has voted against the popular vote, there hasn't been any justification for it. These cases were merely incidental, brought about because of the way the system works.

Regardless, Donald Trump took advantage of the system he found himself in. The popular vote is irrelevant, really. Hillary won the popular vote by quite a large margin, but it was pointless because she failed to reign supreme in the electoral college. Besides, the electors don't have to vote in accordance with their state's wishes, and as such can vote against their state's preference. There needs to be an alteration in our voting system.


I think that is kind of the point. The only problem is, it so rarely happens that there is literally no precedent for upsets in the electoral college. You can predict with 100% accuracy which presidential candidate will win the election based solely on the votes of the nation's citizens and the rules of how electors are selected. Our representatives are so disinclined to vote against their pledge that we might as well ignore the fact that we have representatives at all and cast their votes for them.
21543 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 12/16/16 , edited 12/16/16


You do understand in the picture on the left "rigged" means electoral fraud and in the picture on the right "rigged" means systematic bias. Yes?

Maybe you should pay more attention in English class.
You must be logged in to post.