It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

KiNgBrAdLeY7: (funded by Sorros; Hilary's campaign had been funded by George Sorros, before...)
Hillary's daughter was married with George Sorros's nephew.
Kings and Queens, like in good old time. :^)
One interesting thing is that one didn't necessarily need to be a citizen to vote. At this point, every state requires U.S. citizenship, but once upon a time, some states used voting rights as a reason to come to their state when they were seeking statehood which required a minimum population. As it stands, if a state like California wanted to allow those in the process of gaining citizenship to vote, the voters of California can elect to do so. And since the state still only grants so many EC votes, no other state really has the right to complain about it. The people of each state can make rules to govern themselves and can decide how to distribute these votes. Just like Maine and Nebraska have decided to split their votes. 2 votes goes to the state winner and there are 2 districts in Maine and 3 in Nebraska which assign an EC vote to winner of each Congressional District.
low rated
zeogold: .
Kleetus: You two guys back together again?

This is worse than a soap opera, one week you're banning him, the next crawling up his backside.

BTW, he told me he wants to get back with you.
Sickening and just to get back on blownutt's forum.
CARRiON.FLOWERS: BTW, here's the crazy libtard women I was referring to.

Also, Richard Spencer getting punched in the face by a cowardly lib sent my sides into orbit.

This shit is fucking hilarious. It's going to be a funny 4 years.
First video is funny indeed. :D Psycho-woman. It seems it is normal nowadays to buy fake protesters (btw, if someone interested, Soros is paying 2500$ a month; training and NDA required), but buying mentally ill people to protest is not right. :/

Second video - not funny at all. :(
RetroPopz: While I've gone back and forth on this subject myself, I generally feel that the Founding Fathers came up with the Electoral College as a solution to a difficult issue that still works today. But after centuries of the peaceful transfer of power here, I think it's disgusting that people are choosing to riot because they don't like the person who was lawfully elected. There were certainly a lot of people who weren't happy with the election of Obama, but they didn't riot in the streets. These butthurt babies need to either protest peacefully or else be shut down by any means necessary.
These are fake protesters. They were paid and signed NDA to keep theirs mouth shut.
But it won't work without huge mass media support. Both fake street protesters and mass media (owned by same people, who buy fake protesters) shape public opinion.
CARRiON.FLOWERS: BTW, here's the crazy libtard women I was referring to.
Heavy Metal version XD
BKGaming: If you lived in a rural state, and have nothing in common with CA... would you want CA to decide your President every single election knowing your vote isn't really going to matter in the grand scheme of things? Or a select few large populated states like CA, TX, NY.
Pheace: Would I want it? Probably not. What does that have to do with anything though? Why should what I want be more valid than what more people want in the entire country, just because less people decided to live in my state?

You still gave no reason whatsoever why states are somehow more important than voters.
Pheace.... Seriously.....

You live right besides Belgium and you ask those kind of things to people living across the ocean while you have your answers a few kilometers down in the south.... :o)

Replace California by Flanders and Alabama(or another state won by Trump) by Wallonia => In our current system, Flemish are seen to have the political upperhand in every federal institutions as they always have the most voters and thus are seen to take decisions which advantages them (like the management of the railroad) at the detriment of Walloons. Flanders and Wallonia are two different regions with their own specific needs and a "majority rules" politic doesn't work. I like the US system where the different states/regions are more equal. Obviously, if you want USA to end up like a big mess like Belgium... ;)
Post edited January 21, 2017 by catpower1980
vsr: Trump said he sees mostly Mercedes Benz on 5th Avenue. And no American cars. Ding-ding, Germany.

To be honest, i don't understand why you're annoyed. You don't like that workplaces will return to USA? Or you're a pissed of gay? He is not going to put you to prison or to psychiatric ward for being gay. Calm down.
My good friend, you are wasting your fine words and finer logic, on people who are walking memes of "living contradiction". They "hate capitalism" (and its nasty effects), but they bash someone who promises economic protection and benefit to home. They think "free market" is only good for "everyone", because the media and their political herders yell and yap so (while in reality, masses work cheaply in tax-paradise-lands like mexico and bosses sell expensively to those back home, razed by unemployment and poverty).

They 've been fed with "Trump hates", "Trump is racist", "Trump hates gays", where and when, in fact, his business models both support and cater to different people. Heck, they even believed "Russian Hackerz" and "Hired Prostitutes golden shower in Obama suite", just because their favorite fake news channel and departing president said so, without ANY sort of proof and official, declassified info presented! You are referring to the very same people who actually believe Aliens exist and Hillary would introduce them to us, or that Madonna would do them free oral, had they voted for H.!

Don't stoop so low all the way to their level, man (like i regularly do)! Talking at a wall of bricks would have more of an effect or an impact, rather tan talking to a herd of liberals, with downvote button at the ready, coupled with closed ears and humming tunes... Don't worry, though, your words are not wasted. Thankfully, there is another minority, both here and anywhere else; those of FREE and THINKING people!
Post edited January 21, 2017 by KiNgBrAdLeY7
Pheace: ...a historic event happen live ...
Hmm, one should maybe define historic event before.

To me it feels like watching a car crash in slow motion. On the other hand I hope and I'm quite optimistic Trump won't do too much damage and will be gone soon and hopefully no one will remember him much in due time. Doesn't really count for a historic event, or does it?
Shadowstalker16: More salt is not very historic.
tinyE: That reminds me, have you noticed that SlimJims have way upped their amount of Tabasco in the past ten years?
That's like steam having more games every year. You'd expect a tobacco store to carry more tobacco right?
Eh. Major stuff government does is not going to be affected by whoever is in charge.

what is huge bother is climate change issues are probably going to sidelined. and seeing how the issue has been tackled in past 20 years by old pricks in governments who don't give a fuck about anyone then trump administration will do even less to mitigate the dangers climate change presents to our society.

he made his views clear on that matter and few of his people also are ant-climate change. so really shitty scenario so far is being presented.
Pheace: Maybe it's me but this is really confusing to me. Why is it exactly that it's important that states, or even land mass coverage is somehow more important than an actual voters vote? Why should someone's vote count less because he lives in an urban area rather than in the middle of nowhere? Surely not because "urban is more likely to be liberal"?

What exactly is being protected here? State's rights or something?
In a way it would make more sense that each person's vote has the same weight, but maybe it is not so black and white considering US size and history.

Comparing it directly to European countries doesn't work because we (Netherlands, Finland etc.) are much smaller in size than the whole of US. I personally already now feel miffed that EU commission and parliament is constantly producing proposals and agreements that feel quite unfair towards e.g. Finland (e.g. regarding the "EU climate agreement", how the Finnish forests are taken (or not taken) into account in it etc.), and it feels we are quite powerless to change them either because rest of the EU thinks differently as you idiots have already destroyed your own forests hundreds of years ago.

To understand the size problem, maybe one example would be if we really had some kind of global world government. Would I feel comfortable with e.g. billions of Chinese having so high weight in elections, decisions etc. that directly affect also "us", and in practice the World Leader would usually be from China (or thereabouts), due to the number of people there?

In a way that would still be fair in a sense (hey, there are more Chinese than Finns (or even Europeans), so of course they have more say in world things), but to me as a member of a smaller nation it would feel more like dictatorship of the majority.

The bigger the scale, the less powerful a single voter feels. Near democracy is preferred. Maybe one solution to US presidential dilemma would be that the US president would have less power than nowadays, and would be more like a head figure rather than the ultimate decision maker with ultimate power. Then the states themselves would have more power, and California etc. wouldn't mind as much Trump becoming a president.
Post edited January 21, 2017 by timppu
tinyE: snip... but is it me or is every troll in here siding with the Don? :P

... how is it all of the trolls are also to a man happy? :P

... snip
So you're not trolling anymore? You used to be #1 IMHO... and your political leanings were obvious even before you stopped kinda keeping them in the closet...

Or wait... was that actually a brilliant self deprecating joke?
Pheace: ...a historic event happen live ...
Trilarion: Hmm, one should maybe define historic event before.

To me it feels like watching a car crash in slow motion. On the other hand I hope and I'm quite optimistic Trump won't do too much damage and will be gone soon and hopefully no one will remember him much in due time. Doesn't really count for a historic event, or does it?
This echoes my thoughts. I don't like Trumps opinions, ideals and policies. Using 144 characters to confront issues where 144 words would be inadequate fills me with dread, but I dislike social media. That said, those committing violent protest against him are far worse.

I agree that most of his campaign plans will fall far short, just as Obama's did. Most outside the USA thought Obama might bring in a Universal Healthcare service akin to the rest of the developed world and finally confront the nations archaic gun laws. But his plans fell short, constantly cut down and neutered by concessions.
RWarehall: Let me put this bluntly...
When people are talking about the popular vote in conjunction with calling this past election illegitimate because of it, the idea they are "sore losers" becomes quite obvious. When they talk of changing these rules using this election as the example, I'm not sure how else one can fairly characterize it. When it comes to the numbers, I think I just explained why just adding all states together doesn't give reasonably accurate results. The campaigns would have campaigned differently. Voters in solid blue and red states probably would have voted in greater numbers. No idea who would have really won a popular vote but adding each state together doesn't prove a thing.
You're painting people with a pretty large brush. Because there's some people who want to change the outcome of the election you're going to dismiss any discussion of the Electoral College? Of course no election should be retroactively invalidated, he already won, that is over and done with, and if Bush is any indication just because he lost the popular his first time around doesn't mean he can't win it on reelection.

But this time the EC did disagree with the popular vote, again, and the candidate who fewer amount of voters supported won. Maybe under a different type of election the votes would be split differently, but you shouldn't ignore the issue that does exist now and the evidence we do have for it based on what might have happened.

BKGaming: snip
RWarehall: snip
The way you describe the voting process sounds insane to me. Remember, most places on Earth don't have the same issues with recounting that you do, so there must be a solution for it. More than one I'll bet, each country must have found a different one.

The way we personally do it over here is with electronic voting machines. We've been using them since the mid-90s. They're not connected to the internet, if they are to be tampered with it must be done in person the same way as with a non-electronic machine. After the election is complete you can just check the machine to get all the results instantly. The machine provides a receipt after a person votes, so you can check immediately that your vote has been tallied. You hand the receipt before leaving and it is kept secure so that a manual recount can be done if necessary, though I never heard of that happening. Every person is registered to a specific table at a specific polling station and they must show photo ID and provide either a signature or a fingerprint scan to vote, so no one can vote in someone else's place.
Post edited January 21, 2017 by DaCostaBR