Trump: Our New President

[Josiah]

I am giving the votes cast by the people. If the votes of the people are not relevant then the system is wickedly corrupt and needs to be overturned.

Show us the election of the UK - Australia - Canada - New Zealand where the majority of the popular vote of all of them was to select Elizabeth as your Queen.

Show us the national election of Australia where the majority of the popular vote was to select Malcolm Tunbull as your PM.

Maybe Australia's system is wickedly corrupt and needs to be overturned - according to your reasoning.

A bit of hypocrisy?

Perhaps Jesus' log/speck point applies?

Maybe your contant, perpetual rant against the USA has nothing to do with anything - it's just America bashing?



And your constant demand for we Americans here at CH to impeach Trump is beyond annoying and displaying your persistent ignorance.... it's becoming rude. NONE OF US here at CH can impeach the president - so your constant, perpetual, spamming demand that we do so is ..... beyond annoying and proving your ignorance. And again, it's not possible for ANYONE in the USA to remove someone from an office they are not in. You have been told - repeatedly - Trump holds NO political office AT ALL, it is impossible to be removed from an office one is not in (I'm not sure why that is not understood by you).




.

 

[Lamb]

I am giving the votes cast by the people. If the votes of the people are not relevant then the system is wickedly corrupt and needs to be overturned.

Impeach crooked Donald Trump.

It's been explained to you the system of voting procedure that the US uses. We have state sovereignty. It's not done by popular vote.

 

[MoreCoffee]

It's been explained to you the system of voting procedure that the US uses. We have state sovereignty. It's not done by popular vote.

It is a corrupt anti-democratic system rigged by the republican governors and party officials. The people are oppressed by wicked men. May they be rebuked by God for their wickedness.

Impeach crooked Donald Trump.

:smirk:

 

[Rens]

It is a corrupt anti-democratic system rigged by the republican governors and party officials. The people are oppressed by wicked men. May they be rebuked by God for their wickedness.

Impeach crooked Donald Trump.

:smirk:

That isn't even remotely funny. Go worry about Erdogan or Kim what's his name.

 

[MoreCoffee]

That isn't even remotely funny. Go worry about Erdogan or Kim what's his name.

Corruptly selecting Donald Trump as president though non-democratic means is not funny.

 

[Rens]

Corruptly selecting Donald Trump as president though non-democratic means is not funny.

What use is it to complain about the system afterwards. He complained about it himself. Then they should have protested much earlier and not afterwards complain.

 

[MoreCoffee]

What use is it to complain about the system afterwards. He complained about it himself. Then they should have protested much earlier and not afterwards complain.

It was complained about before. It is rightly complained about now. It ought to be changed to be democratic. Crooked [alleged] billionaires ought to be arrested and jailed not appointed as president.

 

[Josiah]

It ought to be changed to be democratic.

As an Australian, maybe you should work to change how the Queen is selected.... how the PM is selected.... because NEITHER received the majority vote of all Australians in national elections (in fact, either even ran in national elections). At least Trump got SOME votes - Elizabeth got NONE. Not a single Australian voted for her specifically to be the Queen.

 

[MoreCoffee]

As an Australian, maybe you should work to change how the Queen is selected.... how the PM is selected.... because NEITHER received the majority vote of all Australians in national elections (in fact, either even ran in national elections). At least Trump got SOME votes - Elizabeth got NONE. Not a single Australian voted for her specifically to be the Queen.

Splendid. Let's get rid of the queen. I'll sign up for that.

Impeach crooked Donald Trump!

 

[Rens]

Splendid. Let's get rid of the queen. I'll sign up for that.

Impeach crooked Donald Trump!

 

[Rens]

 

[Rens]

From Arco on a Dutch forum:

It is also true that you're a bad loser, in this case the Clinton supporters, if they don't already suggest before the actual election that the popular vote should determine the outcome. Trump has called each time that the system is flawed, but since he was elected president thanks to that system, you do not hear him. Both camps are thus kicking against the system, but they probably will not change the system.

 

[MarkFL]

I agree that it's too late to change the rules for this most recent election. Also, since this system works in favor of roughly half the nation and they certainly aren't going to be motivated to remove a policy that skews the elections in their favor, it's going to be real tough to get it changed.

 

[Josiah]

I agree that it's too late to change the rules for this most recent election. Also, since this system works in favor of roughly half the nation and they certainly aren't going to be motivated to remove a policy that skews the elections in their favor, it's going to be real tough to get it changed.

I think it IS too late for the recent election - the rules should not be changed retroactively, especially since there is NO WAY to know who would have won under different rules. It's not acceptable IMO for a baseball team to shout AFTER THE GAME IS OVER that baseball should have only 8 innings because they lost the game in the 9th.

There have been 5 elections (out of 60) in American history were the one with the most national popular vote did not win the electoral vote, although again, there is NO WAY to know who would have won the popular vote had that been the "game" both played and agreed to play. But there was NO serious movement AT ALL after the 4 previous ones to change things - not by the more populous states, not by the candidate who lost the electoral college. Clinton is not calling for the rules to be changed retroactively.... she's not calling for elections IN THE FUTURE to be by popular national vote.



.

 

[psalms 91]

I think it IS too late for the recent election - the rules should not be changed retroactively, especially since there is NO WAY to know who would have won under different rules. It's not acceptable IMO for a baseball team to shout AFTER THE GAME IS OVER that baseball should have only 8 innings because they lost the game in the 9th.

There have been 5 elections (out of 60) in American history were the one with the most national popular vote did not win the electoral vote, although again, there is NO WAY to know who would have won the popular vote had that been the "game" both played and agreed to play. But there was NO serious movement AT ALL after the 4 previous ones to change things - not by the more populous states, not by the candidate who lost the electoral college. Clinton is not calling for the rules to be changed retroactively.... she's not calling for elections IN THE FUTURE to be by popular national vote.



.

This same debate came up when Gore lost to Bush and nothing ever happened

 

[Josiah]

This same debate came up when Gore lost to Bush and nothing ever happened

Correct.

Five times (out of 60) the popular vote and the electoral vote did not jibe. Of course, there is NO WAY ON EARTH to know what the popular vote would have been in the past 60 elections of US History if the rules had been different - and thus the campaign.

And yes, in 240 years, there has never been a serious attempt to change how we select our president. NONE of those candidates who lost the electoral vote but won the popular vote called for a change and certainly did NOTHING to bring about a change - retroactively or otherwise. NO political party has ever called for this or promoted it. NO state has ever done so - including the ones that would benefit from a change (California, Texas, New York for example). In 2000 and again this year, there's a bit of ruffle, some display that they skipped class in Civics when they were taught about the electoral college, but nothing becomes of it. Our outgoing Senator from California has introduced a bill to amend the Constitution in this regard but she publicly stated she KNOWS nothing will come of it because there's no desire to change the system.

IMO, Australians can complain when they change how the king or queen is chosen and how the PM is chosen - in both cases, it's NOT by popular national vote (in the case of the Queen, it's not by a vote AT ALL). Until then, I think it's pretty hypocritical. Maybe they should work to change their own system. Maybe Jesus' "log/speck" point applies to them.



.

 

[MarkFL]

When someone from another nation points out the flaw with our presidential election process, I see that as constructive criticism. Monarchs are there via inheritance for the most part (Malaysia is one exception I can think of). Why are we trying to silence anyone who has a criticism of something, even if it is about a nation of which they may not be a citizen? I just don't see the problem here. :dunno:

 

[ImaginaryDay2]

Our outgoing Senator from California has introduced a bill to amend the Constitution in this regard but she publicly stated she KNOWS nothing will come of it because there's no desire to change the system.

God bless Barbara Boxer. A liberal's liberal, and credit to the label 'career politician'!
:;;D:

 

[Josiah]

God bless Barbara Boxer. A liberal's liberal, and credit to the label 'career politician'!
:;;D:

SADLY, she's being replaced by someone who seems to be just as bad. God bless the People's Republic of California. I LOVE this state --- except for the wacko libs who politically run it. It's a huge testimony to Californians that we thrive in spite of the people that we keep electing....


Back to the issue at hand: Whether we Americans at CH can impeach one from an office they do not hold.... and whether Australians should if we can't.



- Josiah

 

[Rens]

Correct.

Five times (out of 60) the popular vote and the electoral vote did not jibe. Of course, there is NO WAY ON EARTH to know what the popular vote would have been in the past 60 elections of US History if the rules had been different - and thus the campaign.

And yes, in 240 years, there has never been a serious attempt to change how we select our president. NONE of those candidates who lost the electoral vote but won the popular vote called for a change and certainly did NOTHING to bring about a change - retroactively or otherwise. NO political party has ever called for this or promoted it. NO state has ever done so - including the ones that would benefit from a change (California, Texas, New York for example). In 2000 and again this year, there's a bit of ruffle, some display that they skipped class in Civics when they were taught about the electoral college, but nothing becomes of it. Our outgoing Senator from California has introduced a bill to amend the Constitution in this regard but she publicly stated she KNOWS nothing will come of it because there's no desire to change the system.

IMO, Australians can complain when they change how the king or queen is chosen and how the PM is chosen - in both cases, it's NOT by popular national vote (in the case of the Queen, it's not by a vote AT ALL). Until then, I think it's pretty hypocritical. Maybe they should work to change their own system. Maybe Jesus' "log/speck" point applies to them.



.

Their queen has nothing to say. She's just there to show off her newest hat. It's just how others think it's normal and fair, because they do it like that in our countries. I wouldn't go tell the Americans though to do it just like us Dutch LOL because we're a tiny bit tinier and have nothing to say in this world. Then you should compare it to Europe, well America does it far better than Europe. That's one big mess noone here agrees with. It only costs us money and you get free restrictions and they tell you what to do.